Comparison of Panthers WR Spending

[Toundra]

Since Benjamin will be a probowler during his rookie season, this is all good for the Panthers.

[pantherclaw]

Ha, I know. But at least those are pre-Dave numbers (except for Hardy's tag price). If Gettleman can consistently get higher production relative to pay across our positions, we should be a consistent winner.

yes, I'm sure Gettleman will know which players will get hurt after signing their big contracts.

[pantherclaw]

Does that chart include the $3m were paying Smitty to go away?

FIFY.

Baltimore is paying Smith to play for them.

We just paid to get rid of him.

[CarolinaSamurai]

Hopefully we have another good season and next year we can see the fruits of Gettlemens labor in working on these horrible cap issues since he got here.

Sent from my iPhone using CarolinaHuddle

[Mr Mojo Risin]

Holy poo miami and seadderal

[top dawg]

We have been very smart about how we are managing our receivers.  In a few years we will be doing the same thing with running backs.  Unfortunately defensive end will always be a position where you just have to spend premium money unless you can find what you need in the draft.  I expect the situation with Hardy and Johnson to work itself out by next year.  Unfortunately many folks won't be happy when at least one of them won't be on the team next year.

 

Perhaps we have been "smart" managing our receivers for the last couple of years within the fiscal reality that is in part a legacy of Marty Hurney, but I will expect Dave Gettleman to invest more at the receiver position in the future.  If the current relatively low valuation of running backs continues, then I can see a "swapping" of budgetary position (so to speak), but I can't see us spending the least in the NFL on receivers and running backs simultaneously.  

 

As for DE, it is what it is. You can't pay Hardy and Johnson top dollar without skewing the budget.  Even casual football fans should be able to realize that, but most certainly regular Huddlers.

[top dawg]

Looking at this chart, cornerbacks are very expensive. I was having a debate yesterday where I mentioned to a few posters that CBs are valued more than MLBs but they refused to accept it.

 

Charts are overrated in my opinion when it comes to building a successful franchise.  Sure, you can use them as a loose road map to building a franchise with sustainable success, but it's all a big puzzle.  No situation is the same.  Luke Kuechly may not be paid as high as Richard Sherman---may not---but he is certainly going to get paid better than the corners on many teams.

 

GMs must decide who is most important to the success of the team depending upon their individual puzzles.

[FootballMaestro]

Who cares (for the overreacter's, folks that are mad with this)!

 

It's what the Panthers do ON THE FIELD, not in the banking, transaction department. 

 

We'll see??

[top dawg]

If you look at the chart you'd notice MLBs are the lowest paid defensive position. And Kicker and punters are the lowest paid position in football. It's the nature of every profession, the specialty you're in determine your paid scale. A primary physician get paid lower than heart and brain surgeon for the same reason MLBs get paid less than CBs. If the attempt is to defend Kuechly's honor then you'll never get what I'm saying. The position Sherman is the best at is just more valuable than the position Kuechly is best at.

 

MLBs are cushioned between two OLB(who get paid more) the DL(who get paid more) and the Safety(who also get paid more). So their job is not very difficult and their pay reflect it.

 

No, I get what you're saying.  I guess at the end of the day what I am saying is that there is an argument for making Kuechly the top paid MLB in the NFL when that time comes.  To pay him excessively more than the other top players at his position wouldn't necessarily be a smart move, but to try and pay him much less wouldn't necessarily be smart either.  

 

There is some wisdom with the franchise tag, whether we like it or hate it.  Homers just have to get with the reality.

[updownsigma]

Looking at this chart, cornerbacks are very expensive. I was having a debate yesterday where I mentioned to a few posters that CBs are valued more than MLBs but they refused to accept it.

How many CBs do teams keep on a roster? How many MLBs? There's the difference in your positional spending.

Unless you want to argue WRs are more valued than QBs because teams spend a larger percentage of cap space on them.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

[Montsta]

Miami is paying the most and they tore it up and won a championship last year.

[HoFBound59]

It's funny that as the season gets closer, most of the people here FINALLY see the big picture. WR is overrated, we are emphasizing other positions for our team to be successful. We can spend peanuts here and still get near league average production here....at the minimum. Durrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

[t96]

Ha, I know. But at least those are pre-Dave numbers (except for Hardy's tag price). If Gettleman can consistently get higher production relative to pay across our positions, we should be a consistent winner.

I truly don't think that Gettleman wanted to keep Hardy on the tag. I think Rivera convinced him to keep him.

[updownsigma]

Go check out the salary of the top 5 paid CBs and MLBs.

So your claim is elite CBs are more valued than elite MLBs? Because originally you said "the position," rather than the top few players at the position. Regardless, the positional spending breakdown doesn't support your point, and now you're trying to change your claim/data set.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app