Peon Awesome

I'm still not understanding why so many people are jumping at the chance to cut Teddy this second and lose an extra $10 million in cap space. In a world where Sam Bradford fetched a 1st round pick with a $20 million salary after a starter got injured, how is everyone so sure we can't get a late round pick, especially if we convert some of his guaranteed salary into a signing bonus? If we made $5 million into a signing bonus, the trading team gets Teddy for $12 million, we save $5 million extra on our cap (so $13 million post June 1st) and get a nominal draft pick in 2022. I mean hell, we could convert all $10 million into bonus money, leave him with a $7 million contract for the trading team, have the exact same cap hit we have now and at least get a draft pick, while the trading team gets him at a backup salary with zero guaranteed money, so they could cut him scot free. I realize you all aren't GMs but this is a bad look for some of you.

What part of keeping him until final cuts did you skip over? Why cut him now when there's months before the season starts and plenty of time for someone to get injured? We're not paying his 2021 salary before week 1.

It would be moronic if we rush into cutting Teddy. For one, there's a chance a high profile starting qb for a competitive team will get injured sometime before the start of the season leaving Teddy as one of the few available qbs that could keep them afloat. Envision a team like Seattle losing Russell Wilson or Tom Brady's body finally breaking down in Tampa. You think those teams wouldn't throw a late round 2022 pick, especially if we restructure Teddy's contract to take some of the hit off them? Why eat $10 million extra and forfeit the chance at any pick at all unless you absolutely have to? Hell, I'd wait at the very least until the final cuts for the 53 before considering it.

Definitely premature to be hailing praises over the Darnold trade. We could look back at the whole thing as a disaster, particularly if, say, Fields is there at 8 and he becomes a pro bowl caliber qb. Meanwhile Darnold statistically has been worse than Bridgewater. I know we all hope better weapons and coaching will make him look more competent but let's say he turns into at best, a comp for Teddy. We pick up his 5th year option to pay him nearly $20 million in 2022 and are in the same position we're in this year with Teddy: stuck with an overpaid qb that won't take us anywhere with a contract that is tough to move, and meanwhile we give up what could be a high 2nd round pick if he really does flame out. Listen, I'm not saying that's going to happen and god willing I desperately hope it doesn't. But at minimum I'm acknowleging it's very much possible. And thus it's way too soon for this kind of thread.

Additional point: Let's say Carolina is all in on Darnold and not enthused by the rookie qbs. And the draft plays out so that all but one of the highly regarded qbs has been picked by 8, which seems increasingly likely. Denver looks like a prime candidate to take the final one which ups the value of pick 8 tremendously. Let's say New England wants to move up. We would almost certainly get pick 15 plus next year's first and maybe a later round pick. So we'd more than recoup the value of trading for Darnold with moving back a bit in the 1st.

Shoot, you're right. That was one of the changes in the latest CBA. I feel less strongly about this theory now but still plausible especially for a player like Lance who might benefit from a couple years learning. Anyhow, for the record, I'm not personally hoping we draft a qb. I'm definitely willing to give Darnold a chance and hope he's successful. Just seemed like it could have played a role and thought I'd share the theory especially for those baffled by the decision.

OK, this might sound far fetched, but hear me out. To this point, literally everybody in the world knew the Panthers were 100% all in on getting a new quarterback. We reeked of desperation. And that put us at a severe disadvantage heading into the draft. If one of the top qbs actually did start dropping a bit and looked like they might be available at 8, there would almost certainly be a couple teams aggressively trying to move up ahead of us to take them. It would effectively force us to trade up or lose out. And the price to trade up appears to be exponentially high this year; just think about the 3 1sts San Francisco gave up to get a chance to draft the THIRD qb. Now bring in Darnold. Giving up 3 picks and pre-emptively picking up Darnold's 5th year option suggests a sizable commitment on paper. Teams will drop their guard and assume we've moved on from drafting a qb in 2021. Now let's say Fields or Lance gets past Atlanta (or SF actually drafts Mac Jones). None of the teams ahead of the Panthers seem like threats to draft a qb. Now suddenly there's a realistic chance one of them drops to 8 and the Panthers can still draft one of them, cut Darnold next year (5th year is only injury-guaranteed) and end up spending less in draft capital than they might have had to to move up and draft them in the first place. Granted, you don't make this trade solely for that reason. You're mainly hoping removing the stink of Gase can turn around the career of a once super promising QB prospect. And as Fitterer mentioned as well, it helps cover a gaping need so the Panthers can go BPA and get an elite prospect (Sewell or Pitts?) rather than take a qb out of desperation. But I have to wonder if the idea that it might help one of the top qbs fall into the Panther's laps might have added some additional allure. It would also help explain why the Panthers would make this trade pre-draft rather than wait and see if they actually would luck into one of the top qbs and do the trade afterwards if they struck out.

San Francisco has a bit of leverage. Trading him compared to cutting him doesn't save money, so it wouldn't be a cap saving measure. And they see value in keeping him as an ideal bridge for whoever they draft at 3. So while I think there's certainly an element of starting the negotiating price high, I don't think it's a Carson Wentz situation where they're going to trade him no matter what, taking the best offer they can find. I think internally they'd probably take less ,like a 2 or a conditional 3rd, but I think if the best offer is a conditional 4th, which may be, they'd just as well hold onto him.

The other big point that hasn't been mentioned is that Detroit seems to be all-in on a rebuild which makes them a prime candidate to trade back, even to 19 if the package was good. Why do I think that? Well if they actually cared about being competitive at all sooner rather than later, they would've been better off taking our trade package for Stafford rather than trading with the Rams for 2 future 1sts. Passing on the #8 pick plus an extra pick this year so you can get 2 1sts in future years that will likely be in the late 20s? You don't do that unless you've written off this year and are all in for the future. Hell, Detroit is probably cool with being awful in 2021 and eyeing a top pick in 2022 to take a qb and move on from Goff. Trading premium picks for future picks helps accomplish that and make them more poised to take the leap in 2022 and beyond. So with that in mind, if we really have a much higher grade on either Lance or Fields, giving up a 3rd to ensure your choice makes plenty of sense. Obviously this trade implies as much. Otherwise you stay at 8, don't care if Detroit trades out and take whoever is left. But you have to assume Detroit is going to be aggressively trying to sell 7 especially if any of the top qbs are still available. It's almost inevitable.

It's looking more and more likely that we could have our pick of LT at 8. People are expecting a run of qbs and receivers in front of us. 2 months ago, if someone told you we could draft Sewell without trading away a single pick, who wouldn't have happily taken that? I know everyone wants a qb, but we could have an elite offensive line for the next 5 years minimum with Sewell and Moton. Granted, if we like a qb available at 8, yeah take him and opt for someone like Cosmi or Leatherwood in the 2nd. But if the choice is trade a bunch of picks to move up and take Fields or stay at 8 and take Sewell, I'd probably opt for the latter and figure out a plan B at qb.

I've got a Luxe myself (120) and have been happy with it. Of course I have nothing to compare it to but it gets the job done and it's affordable. Thinking about getting a 2nd one for my guest bathroom.

How was that an option? Trade up with Miami, a team 100% in on drafting a qb last year, for them to move back to 7 and miss out on drafting one of the coveted qbs? Realistically, the Giants were the logical trade up partner. Meanwhile we all enjoy this revisionist history where Tua wasn't the clear, consensus #2 over Herbert. If we trade up to 4, we'd probably be trying to leapfrog Miami to draft Tua and ease him slowly with Teddy while he gets up to speed after his injury. Think about that: giving up prime draft capital to take Teddy lite with even less mobility after his hip fracture. I think we scouted Herbert and would have strongly considered him at 7 if the Chargers had passed,but I don't see a scenario where we would have realistically traded up and drafted him. Not only for the reasons I mentioned but how do you invest a bunch of draft capital to trade up for a qb when you're stuck with Teddy for 2 years? Maybe at 7, but 7 and whatever else it would take? No way.

Now it's possible the 49ers really do love Mac Jones and still possible he turns into a great qb, especially on a loaded 49ers team. But it's hard to think SF decided they needed to move up to 3 to get him especially after Miami proceeds to trade that very pick to Philly to move up to 6 where Mac would almost certainly still be available and not have to lose that 2023 1st. Moving up to 3 for Fields or even Lance on paper makes a lot more sense because neither is guaranteed to be there at 6. But teams do strange things all the time. Sounds like them drafting Jones is mostly educated conjecture so I'm not hanging my hat on it either way.

Wait and see for me. I think his free agency hasn't stood out from what we've seen with Hurney the last couple years. Couple good value signings, a couple head scratchers that seem a bit of an overpay while also letting some contributors leave over fairly low salary amounts. But the draft is where you really build a team so I am reserving judgment until we see how that plays out. Really can't accurately grade things for a couple years.

Wasn't there like a dozen posts before the start of free agency from people whining about how the Panthers never have cap room? Somehow we go on a free agent spending spree, tag Moton and still have among the most cap space in the league.

Solid list. Gotta think we can snag someone of this caliber at a relative bargain to address probably our biggest immediate need. And if we can solidify our team a bit better before the draft, would make me less nervous of trading away picks to move up if necessary, within reason.

I think the argument for Pitts is that you could view and use him effectively like an elite WR and from that standpoint, drafting him in the top 10 isn't unreasonable. My issue with taking him is that we've invested enough in our receiving corps. Between DJ, Anderson, CMC, David Moore, Dan Arnold, we should be ok for the next couple years. You can't really say that confidently for CB, LT and QB, 3 positions of at least equal to higher value than receiver. If you can take a position of need and high value with a player worthy of that spot, you do it. And between Lance, Fields, Sewell, Slater, Farley and Surtain, at least a couple will still be available at 8.

So reflecting on it more, my guess is the team felt at minimum he could come in and be one of our starting guards with the versatility to serve as an injury replacement at tackle if needed. Which if you think about it, is effectively what Dennis Daley is when healthy, for under a million dollars. So very likely an overpay, particularly in a year with a depressed cap and fewer teams with ample space, but at least we're talking 5 million and not a Matt Kalil level contract. If he somehow revives himself on the level of Michael Oher in 2015 then it'll be a great signing but nothing in his play to this point suggests he has that in him.

Main thing I would say is that these moves basically reek of our free agency from last year. High end backup/cheap starter level deals on players a bit below that grade. Recall Schofield, Burris, Whitehead, Weatherly. It's super early of course but between that and restructuring a bunch of contracts, if you didn't know Hurney got fired, could you even tell? I'm all for finding bargains in free agency but we're basically paying these guys to show us more than they have so far and to come across as a successful offseason, several of them will have to. I hope they do.

I was going to suggest exactly this. Makes a lot of sense. From what I recall, he was a disappointment for Minnesota. But even if he underperforms, at worst he becomes a slightly expensive backup on a team with significant injury history on the line or just a straight up sunk cost of $6 million spread over 2 years. But the potential upside of getting a 3 year starter on the offensive line for $4.5 million per year makes it a reasonable roll of the dice.

The Saints have 2 problems: a) they have to make massive cuts to get under the cap, even before factoring in Wilson's salary and b) they have to offer a huge enough package to convince the Seahawks to agree to a trade when they're drafting at the end of each round. All reports suggest this isn't a Watson scenario; Wilson isn't demanding to be traded and the Seahawks aren't going to be eager to dump him without a tremendous haul. So the only scenario involving the Saints that might make sense would be a HUGE assortment of picks and players. Seahawks aren't going to want just a couple late 1sts. They've already shown a propensity to miss when drafting in the late 20s. Bottom line, if the Saints actually pull it off, which seems HIGHLY unlikely, between the cuts they have to make to get under the cap and the picks/players they'll have to give up in a trade, they'll barely look like a full team. I'm not even remotely worried one way or the other.

Again you seem to be completely missing my point. If we have to trade up into the 10-20 range, we absolutely 100% should not trade up for Mac Jones. Apparently my 2 posts where I said if he slides into the 20s we can consider it wasn't clear enough. As far as building the whole O line, you can typically find competent guards as cheap free agents or later round picks. I'm not too worried about that. Finding a LT is the challenge. We have an opportunity to do that at 8 and we shouldn't dismiss that.

My suggestion is less about putting all our eggs in the Jones basket and more about exploiting an opportunity. If Jones slides, you offer a modest trade package to move up. This isn't about doing whatever it takes to move back up and get Jones. This is about getting a potential franchise left tackle on a rookie contract and considering buying low on Mac Jones if and only if the value is there. If the Panthers are all in on Mac Jones, which seems like a mistake, then trading back from 8 probably makes the most sense. But the chances of solving our OL problems are a lot dicier after round 1. And that's a lot more important to me than ensuring we walk away with Jones if the other 4 qbs are gone.

Exactly. I never bought the statement that they would bring in Bridgewater as a backup. They'd have 40+ million tied up in two mediocre qbs when they have more pressing needs like trying to resign Trent Williams. I think they view Garoppolo the way we view Bridgewater: not good enough and not worth the price tag but until they get an alternative on the roster it'll be a bit tough to move on right away. They figure they may as well explore buying low on Teddy, seeing if Shanahan can make something out of him and save some money in the process by jettisoning Garoppolo. But until they're fully ready to get rid of Garoppolo, they have to publicly pretend he's still their qb and they're just looking for backup options.

I think one potential pathway for Jones is to take a top tackle at 8, e.g. Slater, and then hope Jones slides in the 1st round and trade up from our 2nd round pick to take him. Obviously this requires him to slide more than predicted which is the biggest gamble but it hasn't been unheard of for a qb to slide towards the end of the 1st when people had them mocked in the top 10, especially one with those question marks. You might jump up to pick 24 or so if he's there, give up our 2nd, 4th and next year's 2nd maybe. Resign Moton, get an interior lineman on day 3 and the line is looking a lot better. Jones probably doesn't last that long but I think if we're counting on him to turn around this franchise, we have to hope he does or the chances of him fulfilling that don't look as good.