Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

frash.exe

A little clarification on the DW situation, cut designations, and how it affects the cap

70 posts in this topic

You're assuming Rivera is making the right decisions.

The record on the field says otherwise.

Anyway, John Fox once sat DWill in favor of Deshaun Foster with bad knees.

The best option at a given position doesn't always see the field.

No one will argue DWill and Stewart are overpaid given their current situations.

The arguement I think is how best to maximize the situation our resident idiot Hurney put us in the next year or two.

Rivera's decisions are more important than mine or your opinion. If he is the coach, it helps of your GM gives him what he needs/wants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rivera's decisions are more important than mine or your opinion. If he is the coach, it helps of your GM gives him what he needs/wants.

They certainly are, especially when they are wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They certainly are, especially when they are wrong.

Rivera has made many calls that were correct that didn't work.....didn't work bc his GM have him backups to start at many positions bc of investing in areas that essentially get wasted.

Marty overpaid and overstocked RBs....forced Rivera to look to start guys like Nakamura, 5th round rookie CBs etc.....and we lose games like Atl, Chi, Tampa, etc. Rivera didn't make bad calls....those are games your team generally wins for you pending you aren't starting backups (and not due to injury but that is simply the best you can field).

He demoted Williams in 2011 and many have claimed that healthy Stewart season generated one of the Greatest rush attacks in HISTORY and best overall in Panther history. He just needs the right bodies....he has been handicapped by injury and Hurney

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rivera has made many calls that were correct that didn't work.....didn't work bc his GM have him backups to start at many positions bc of investing in areas that essentially get wasted.

Obviously, Hurney sucks

Some would also argue hiring Rivera was a call that didn't work as well.

Sadly all of Panther land is still dealing with the fall out, and will be for another season or two.

Hopefully Gettleman can get the financial woes straightened out so in a year or two the Panthers can field a roster that can compete with the best in the NFL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the cap facts, interesting.

This of course in nonsense and purely opinion:

It's a stone cold fact brother

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question is absolutely why you would let all that dead cap money go for no production.

Because the money you save is enough to get more production overall on your team

Sure we can all look at Alfred Morris who was a 6th rounder who played much better than expected and say that those guys are everywhere but how is it that we never seem to find that guy.

Because we haven't even tried

Exactly how many guys have we drafted outside of the first round who have become big rushing stars for us.

Again, haven't tried

Sure there is always the exception to the rule but you don't expect to find them all the time.

you'd be surprised to find that in the last two drafts there's a distinct proportion of guys from rounds 4-6 that have proven they could get half of what DeAngelo's churned

Using that logic we should have passed on Newton and went with a 6th round guy because Brady was a 6th rounder that did well and we could always hit a home run like New England did.

No, you don't use that logic on the QB position because it is the most important and influential position on the field today. In contrast, this logic applies well to RB, which is today arguably one of the least valuable and disposable positions on the field.

At this point we haven't shown that we have a back who can run for 16 games with no problem and have had to resort to a 2 back system.

Um, that sort of stuff happens to backs on every other team as well. But if the Patriots or the Giants don't feel the need to pay more than 10 million to their running back core, why the hell should we?

I would have hated to watch us struggle last year with no Stewart or Williams.

Your perception of their value on this team is way too high.

There is no reason we have to do the same thing this year. Sure if you were making this decision with no dead cap space going forward you likely would do what the OP is suggesting which is look for a cheaper option with Stewart already restructured.

It's not very often teams cut players with no consequence. Just recently, the Giants racked up 6.6 million in dead money for 2013 alone after cutting several veterans.

But that isn't the situation at all. It is dump him and eat 9.6 million through much of the free agency period even if you designate him a June 1st cut, keep him and have 1.4 million less of a cap hit until June 1st and then decide what to do, or restructure him and save cap space now which allows you to use him this year for a reduced cap hit and face no more in dead cap space next year. You would have dead cap space in 2015 but given the dead cap space goes down by 3.4 million each year we keep him, the effect on the cap wouldn't be worse than dumping him now but you have him to use.

In the long-term view we have a lot of money strapped already and by that time DeAngelo will be 32. It's not a terrible idea to get rid of bad contracts given to players that don't fit the team's best interests in their future vision. The Colts just did this on a massive scale last year and had a huge amount of dead money, and despite that the players they replaced those overpaid vets with helped the team reach the playoffs after going 2-14 just one year before. What happened with the Colts was they fired their GM from the prior season, hired a new one, and he looked over the roster, assessed the players' individual values and figured out who had a bad contract given their future value to the team. One of those players, Dallas Clark, was a guy who at one point had been a valuable asset to the team (which is why he got the contract he did) but had two underwhelming performances the last two years largely due to injury and whose career seemed to be waning. So they cut him, took a cap hit of over 5 million for 2012 and drafted 2 tight ends that combined for over 800 yards and 5 touchdowns.

Here's another way you could look at cutting Williams and designating him post-June 1st. Let's say the Panthers dump some of their larger contracts and end up clearing to about 12 million under the cap. Then they decide to snip Williams from the roster and designate him a June 1st cut. If they plan to sign about 3 affordable and reliable vets to fill some glaring holes, they can still do that even if they cut Williams and take a 1.5 million hit, and there's an easy explanation for this. ...When you draft your picks at the end of April, they don't immediately go to the front office and sign those guys. None of those picks need to be signed until July. And by that time, the June 1st designation will come into effect and open up the millions needed to sign those draft picks.

It isn't that hard to figure out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because the money you save is enough to get more production overall on your team

Because we haven't even tried

Again, haven't tried

you'd be surprised to find that in the last two drafts there's a distinct proportion of guys from rounds 4-6 that have proven they could get half of what DeAngelo's churned

No, you don't use that logic on the QB position because it is the most important and influential position on the field today. In contrast, this logic applies well to RB, which is today arguably one of the least valuable and disposable positions on the field.

Um, that sort of stuff happens to backs on every other team as well. But if the Patriots or the Giants don't feel the need to pay more than 10 million to their running back core, why the hell should we?

Your perception of their value on this team is way too high.

It's not very often teams cut players with no consequence. Just recently, the Giants racked up 6.6 million in dead money for 2013 alone after cutting several veterans.

In the long-term view we have a lot of money strapped already and by that time DeAngelo will be 32. It's not a terrible idea to get rid of bad contracts given to players that don't fit the team's best interests in their future vision. The Colts just did this on a massive scale last year and had a huge amount of dead money, and despite that the players they replaced those overpaid vets with helped the team reach the playoffs after going 2-14 just one year before. What happened with the Colts was they fired their GM from the prior season, hired a new one, and he looked over the roster, assessed the players' individual values and figured out who had a bad contract given their future value to the team. One of those players, Dallas Clark, was a guy who at one point had been a valuable asset to the team (which is why he got the contract he did) but had two underwhelming performances the last two years largely due to injury and whose career seemed to be waning. So they cut him, took a cap hit of over 5 million for 2012 and drafted 2 tight ends that combined for over 800 yards and 5 touchdowns.

Here's another way you could look at cutting Williams and designating him post-June 1st. Let's say the Panthers dump some of their larger contracts and end up clearing to about 12 million under the cap. Then they decide to snip Williams from the roster and designate him a June 1st cut. If they plan to sign about 3 affordable and reliable vets to fill some glaring holes, they can still do that even if they cut Williams and take a 1.5 million hit, and there's an easy explanation for this. ...When you draft your picks at the end of April, they don't immediately go to the front office and sign those guys. None of those picks need to be signed until July. And by that time, the June 1st designation will come into effect and open up the millions needed to sign those draft picks.

It isn't that hard to figure out.

I hate those posts where you cut and paste a post and reply to every sentence as if you have actually responded to each point. BTW we did the same thing in 2010 that Indy did in 2012 but with different results so no we don't want to go there.

I will respond to the last part which is all that on a cursory look appears worth responding to. You are mixing draft picks and signing those three reliable vets in free agency and the rules for each don't apply the same. The reason you don't cut Williams now and designate it a June 1st cut is because the cap hit rises not goes down. There is no reason you would do that. Secondly if we are already 10 million over the cap which rises to 11.4 over the cap if we cut Williams, then to get to your magical 12 million under the cap would require us to shave 23 million off the cap. Exactly how do you expect us to do that, Einstein??

The only way we even get close to that number is if we restructure several contracts and still having to cut a few more like Gamble and Edwards

And in free agency your top 53 contracts all have to fit under the cap at all times.

So try harder, from what you said it is apparently too hard for you to figure out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate those posts where you cut and paste a post and reply to every sentence as if you have actually responded to each point.

they're better than the constant bullshit manufacturing you churn out on a regular basis, so I'm just going to do my thing. If it annoys you, take it in stride knowing that what you post annoys everybody else.

BTW we did the same thing in 2010 that Indy did in 2012 but with different results so no we don't want to go there.

Nope, Indy's plan was far better tuned. They didn't even have an uncapped year to benefit from dumping player salaries and did a much better job because they knew who they should've cut, they didn't just indiscriminately cut every single veteran on the team, and they didn't follow that up with spending potentially over 200 million dollars in "core" player contract extensions either. They also strategically filled some of those weaknesses instead of not replacing them at all which is exactly what we did at least for the 2010 season.

I will respond to the last part which is all that on a cursory look appears worth responding to. You are mixing draft picks and signing those three reliable vets in free agency and the rules for each don't apply the same.

The reason you don't cut Williams now and designate it a June 1st cut is because the cap hit rises not goes down.

Hey did you see the part where I said the cap eventually increases and gives you a net gain after June 1st if you have the flexibility. I believe I illustrated what a flexible scenario would look like. Alternatively you could keep that contract on the books and do the cutting after June 1st if your cap numbers aren't that favorable.

There is no reason you would do that. Secondly if we are already 10 million over the cap which rises to 11.4 over the cap if we cut Williams, then to get to your magical 12 million under the cap would require us to shave 23 million off the cap. Exactly how do you expect us to do that, Einstein??

It's a number I just threw off the top of my head for a hypothetical scenario, I could've said 6 instead, and went with a smaller number, and would've gotten just as bullshit a response from you because that's all you spew.

The only way we even get close to that number is if we restructure several contracts and still having to cut a few more like Gamble and Edwards

well from reading your posts you don't really have any strong reservations for cutting gamble and Edwards is an aging vet DT that can't stay on the field and in all reality there's a good chance they're both cut before free agency hits so come up with some more debatable cuts bruh

And in free agency your top 53 contracts all have to fit under the cap at all times.

Listen if I hypothetically respond to this with "no poo" are you going to go into a tirade of your take on my intelligence level and start bringing up your background with learning centers again?

So try harder, from what you said it is apparently too hard for you to figure out.

Are these post-concluding one liner intelligence jabs like a requirement for you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they're better than the constant bullshit manufacturing you churn out on a regular basis, so I'm just going to do my thing. If it annoys you, take it in stride knowing that what you post annoys everybody else.

Nope, Indy's plan was far better tuned. They didn't even have an uncapped year to benefit from dumping player salaries and did a much better job because they knew who they should've cut, they didn't just indiscriminately cut every single veteran on the team, and they didn't follow that up with spending potentially over 200 million dollars in "core" player contract extensions either.

Hey did you see the part where I said the cap eventually increases and gives you a net gain after June 1st if you have the flexibility. I believe I illustrated what a flexible scenario would look like. Alternatively you could keep that contract on the books and do the cutting after June 1st if your cap numbers aren't that favorable.

It's a number I just threw off the top of my head for a hypothetical scenario, I could've said 6 instead, and went with a smaller number, and would've gotten just as bullshit a response from you because that's all you spew.

well from reading your posts you don't really have any strong reservations for cutting gamble and Edwards is an aging vet DT that can't stay on the field and in all reality there's a good chance they're both cut before free agency hits so come up with some more debatable cuts bruh

Listen if I hypothetically respond to this with "no poo" are you going to go into a tirade of your take on my intelligence level and start bringing up your background with learning centers again?

Are these post-concluding one liner intelligence jabs like a requirement for you?

I don't mind debating football with you but there is little I can discern that is football conversation in that post. I see speculation, I see quite a bit of off the wall extraneous material which is not germaine to the conversation and I see the usual raging bull personal attacks. But I can't see where you have anything new original or thought provoking so I will move on. As for the one liner intelligence jabs, to use your logic,if it annoys you I guess I will keep it up.

Why not stay tonight at a Holiday Inn Express, then tomorrow when you log in we will bow to your intelligence. Then again, maybe not..............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry you couldn't come up with anything logical to contribute to the thread. would be happy to have you back posting in here once you smarten up and stop complaining about personal attacks when you constantly subversively insult people on here, but in the meantime, can you erase all the garbage you posted so it doesn't pollute my thread any longer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites