Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Espn insider:do not cut deangelo williams


  • Please log in to reply
71 replies to this topic

#31 GotSwag?

GotSwag?

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 788 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 09:10 AM

I wouldnt cut DeAngelo either unless we really had to. Seems like we can get rid of Gamble and Gross and will be under the cap. It all depends on how the draft goes and who Gettleman targets in free agency.

I love DeAngelo, but I wouldnt be opposed to releasing him if it means signing a safety or a #2 WR. Stewart and Tolbert could handle the backfield, but if this happens..Id pick up a scat back to go along with these 2.

#32 stirs

stirs

    I Reckon So

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,322 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 09:19 AM

I am no cap genius by a long stretch of the imagination, but Stew's contract offers more value in that he is only guaranteed 23 mil over 5 years, with another 6 mil or so in bonuses depending on his production (all-purpose yards). Cutting Stew now would create a little more dead cap money (that must be paid) than D-Will's contract. Stew is the younger, stronger and faster back whose time is now, and when it comes time to resign him in five years, we can sign him to a reasonable contract in fitting with that time, or we let him go.

Someone who knows this stuff better, feel free to chime in.


I was not speaking of him retiring or being cut. Just looking at him from a trade standpoint.

What specifically would happen if someone wanted him in a trade?

#33 carpanfan96

carpanfan96

    play hard, hit harder

  • ALL-PRO
  • 11,622 posts
  • LocationConcord, NC

Posted 11 February 2013 - 09:32 AM

I was not speaking of him retiring or being cut. Just looking at him from a trade standpoint.

What specifically would happen if someone wanted him in a trade?


Same thing as him being cut, all guaranteed money would hit the cap. So it's really bad and his contract is horrible. It's such a bad contract it's funny.

#34 Stroupe-a-loop

Stroupe-a-loop

    SeƱor Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,651 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 09:36 AM

Same thing as him being cut, all guaranteed money would hit the cap. So it's really bad and his contract is horrible. It's such a bad contract it's funny.


It's not that bad, you just can't straight up trade him or cut him a year after he signs. It's like if you had a reasonable monthly loan payment and you decided "fug it" and tried to pay the whole thing off at once with credit cards. Which is pretty stupid.

#35 top dawg

top dawg

    The Creative Cat

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,575 posts
  • LocationWITHIN MY MIND'S EYE

Posted 11 February 2013 - 09:49 AM

I was not speaking of him retiring or being cut. Just looking at him from a trade standpoint.

What specifically would happen if someone wanted him in a trade?


Well, I suppose in theory they could take over the responsibility if all sides agreed, but then we'd have no Stew and an aging D-Will. It's a gamble, but could work.

Same thing as him being cut, all guaranteed money would hit the cap. So it's really bad and his contract is horrible. It's such a bad contract it's funny.


I don't know how Stew for 5-6 mil a year is such a horrible contract. There are backs of his caliber getting much more.

#36 Cape Fear Cat

Cape Fear Cat

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 825 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 09:54 AM

Before this season he missed two games in his entire career

Then he had both a high ankle and regular ankle sprain on the same play that essentially finished his season due to our record, I'm sure he would have been able to play had we been in the playoff hunt.


Don't get me wrong, I love Stewart. But the fact remains he has never had a season with us where there was not some nagging injury that he was dealing with. I just hate the thought of losing Deangelo. He has been an exemplary player and team mate, and having him in the queue with Stewart and Tolbert gives us a flexibility at the position that makes it easy to adjust to the injuries that seem to inevitably pop up.

#37 hepcat

hepcat

    Skandalouz

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,747 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 09:57 AM

I don't think anyone would argue with keeping him if it was at the right price. But the sad truth is, he can probably get paid at least close to the salary he is getting now on a RB desperate team. Darkhorse team I see taking a run at him should he be cut....Atlanta.

#38 carpanfan96

carpanfan96

    play hard, hit harder

  • ALL-PRO
  • 11,622 posts
  • LocationConcord, NC

Posted 11 February 2013 - 10:07 AM

It's not the amount, it's how the contract is set up. Option bonus, guranteed salary in late years of the deal. With his injury issues adding guranteed money in latter parts of the deal is stupid.

#39 carpanfan96

carpanfan96

    play hard, hit harder

  • ALL-PRO
  • 11,622 posts
  • LocationConcord, NC

Posted 11 February 2013 - 10:15 AM

Well, I suppose in theory they could take over the responsibility if all sides agreed, but then we'd have no Stew and an aging D-Will. It's a gamble, but could work.



I don't know how Stew for 5-6 mil a year is such a horrible contract. There are backs of his caliber getting much more.


Other team cant take on the sb's and so forth just base salary.

Also as I said in my other post its how its setup. His deal is high. Paid as a top 10 rb. His deal is pretty bad.

http://m.nfl.com/new...p1000000051054/





#40 iamhubby1

iamhubby1

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,566 posts
  • LocationSpartanburg, SC

Posted 11 February 2013 - 10:21 AM

We need OL no doubt, but we still need every play maker we can keep!

My main problem is that since the contract it take DeAngelo 6 games to get into shape it seems.. He breaks zero tackles, accelerates slowly but then is a different guy toward the end. I just think he is a guy who naturally lays back too much and tou have to get on him early to get him to focus..hopefully(if he is on the roster) he does that from the start in 2013.


If we can keep DWill, I say keep him. He is still a homerun threat. You keep homerun threats. The team with the most/best playmakers usually wins.

And I do believe you are underestimating DWill. That's okay, most folks do. He is fast so folks don't see the power. Not run you over power. The power to run through arm tackles. The power to run away from hand grabs. The power to run up the middle and still break one off.

You need playmakers and DWill is still a playmaker.

And if quality RBs are so easy to find? Why are so many teams needing them? Everyone wants two, but most are lucky to have one.

#41 Growl

Growl

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,197 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 10:26 AM

I thought this was going to be a well thought article explaining the financial difficulty of cutting Deangelo.


Not one reminding me that we give ourselves breathing room with a stupid argument for keeping him.

#42 BigSyke

BigSyke

    I Know you Watching me but I'm watching you too Playa...

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,190 posts
  • LocationFLORIDA

Posted 11 February 2013 - 10:31 AM

fix that oline and find a stud in the later rounds like morris.

rb aint worth that much.....its all about throwing the ball down field on offense and sacking the qb on defense.

#43 panther4life

panther4life

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,654 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 10:53 AM

I am all for keeping Deangelo another year if we can find a way to. Imo he is much more of a homerun threat than Stewart.

Deangelo has been more productive than Stewart since Rivera's arrival as well.

Heres combined rushing stats for both since 2011(Rivera's arriva).

Stewart
915 snaps
235 carries
1111 Yards
4.72 yards per carry
Longest run 32 yards
5 Rushing TD's
635 yards after contact
2 Fumbles

Williams
883 snaps
328 carries
1587 yards
4.83 yards per carry
Longest run 74 yards (he had at least a handful of others that beat Stewart's long of 32 as well)
12 rushing TD'S.
1017 yards after contact

#44 top dawg

top dawg

    The Creative Cat

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,575 posts
  • LocationWITHIN MY MIND'S EYE

Posted 11 February 2013 - 10:53 AM

Other team cant take on the sb's and so forth just base salary.

Also as I said in my other post its how its setup. His deal is high. Paid as a top 10 rb. His deal is pretty bad.

http://m.nfl.com/new...p1000000051054/


Thanks for the link, but even the writer seems to think that the contract is pretty good, all things considered.

Overall, $36.5 million with $23 million guaranteed is a good deal for a running back with just 13 career starts.


I guess it depends upon how you look at it. I believe in Stew, and I wholeheartedly believe that he can be a top 5 back in this league. That being said, he basically is on the lower end of the top 10 money, especially the guaranteed portion of the money with backs that are of his caliber. The fact that we got him at a relative value means that Williams' days are probably numbered (all things considered), unless he is willing to restructure. Moreover, it's time for Stew to start earning his paycheck, which will really prove that he is the beast at a bargain. You can't get a beast at basement prices, but we did about as good as we could, notwithstanding Williams' top 5 contract numbers.

#45 Frizzy350

Frizzy350

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,340 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 10:59 AM

I'd rather have Dlo than stewart. Stewart we could get decent value by trading due to his age and raw measurables. Tolbert could fill in as a makeshift stewart as well.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com