Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Report- KK Short has been cut

trueblade

By trueblade,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Toomers Mentor

Toomers

Posted
Posted
Just now, Icege said:

Big difference between having an extra $5M come available on 6/2 compared to nothing at all.

 It is if the team is a contender and up against the cap. When you are a team that is(or should be) rebuilding, 5M should just be more rollover cap. This is the line of thinking that puts the Panthers in salary cap stress on an annual basis. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Moo Daeng Experienced

Moo Daeng

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Toomers said:

 It was last year as well and still didn’t happen. 

Not really. It's always easier to cut a player in the last year of his contract. Even if he has been a post June 1 cut last year he only would have saved 125,000 in 2020 with the exact dead money for this season as this situation.  There was no benefit to it last year.

 

Edited by Moo Daeng
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Icege Grand Master

Icege

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Toomers said:

 It is if the team is a contender and up against the cap. When you are a team that is(or should be) rebuilding, 5M should just be more rollover cap. This is the line of thinking that puts the Panthers in salary cap stress on an annual basis. 

Considering that all of the teams are now in a cap crunch due to the COVID-influenced reduction, I don't think we can put a whole lot of blame on the front office this season for being over the cap and having to make moves that literally every team is having to do as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Icege Grand Master

Icege

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, stbugs said:

That $5M we save this year after 6/1 adds $5M to 2022 dead cap. As mentioned above, we don’t really save anything. You use post June 1st so that you can spread a released or traded players current dead cap over 2 years instead of eating it all in 1 year. With cap rollover the extra $5M you get June 2nd, basically cancels out the 2022 $5M dead cap that was created by the post June 1st cut.

It is also limited in use because you don’t officially get it until 6/2. I was saying there’s no real difference because we should hopefully have $5M+ to rollover anyway so it’s six of one half dozen of the other, no real net difference.

Much easier to absorb that dead cap hit next season when the cap isn't being reduced due to the COVID pandemic and dips in revenue. I would argue that this season we would want to reduce the dead cap as much as possible since next season only has just under $90M committed to 2022 (with about $170M out of $185M committed to 2021).

Edited by Icege
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Toomers Mentor

Toomers

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Moo Daeng said:

Not really. It's always easier to cut a player in the last year of his contract. Even if he has been a post June 1 cut last year he only would have saved 125,000 in 2020 with the exact dead money for this season as this situation.  There was no benefit to it last year.

 

There the 13M of new money the team gave him last year. And dead money doesn’t change. They just paid a portion of it. The team spent 13M on an aging, injured DT on a team that should have been saving money not spending it. If you don’t understand this most basic concept of the salary cap,, you need to go back and do some more studying. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Toomers Mentor

Toomers

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Icege said:

Considering that all of the teams are now in a cap crunch due to the COVID-influenced reduction, I don't think we can put a whole lot of blame on the front office this season for being over the cap and having to make moves that literally every team is having to do as well.

Who do you blame for spending 80M to make a 2-14 team a 5-11 team? 

  • Pie 1
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Icege Grand Master

Icege

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Toomers said:

Who do you blame for spending 80M to make a 2-14 team a 5-11 team? 

Uh... considering the last time the team was 2-14 was in 2010 before going 6-10 in 2011, Marty Hurney since he was GM then?

Not really sure what point you're trying to make there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, stbugs said:

See above. It’s basically more flexibility to do a post June 1st as he’s our big cap savings. It basically makes the $5M available after June 1st but likely rolled over.

That $5M cannot be used to compensate for Morton’s tag or a trade in March for Watson. Only the pre June 1st cap savings can be. We went through this with Kalil’s post June 1st.

Again, our assumption that it means nothing is based on the hope that we won’t be scraping the salary cap ceiling and won’t need to use the $5M after June 1st. 

Yeah, that is what I am saying. The better long term move for us and the cap is a post June 1st cut, so they definitely are needing this money now. Tagging Moton seems the most likely. 

If we use it to keep Moton, I can live with that. I would have liked have that additional ~$7 mil less in dead cap over the next three years though. That would have been nice. Also taking that $13.3 mil and rolling it over would have been nice.

Oh well. Guess we see what follows now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Toomers Mentor

Toomers

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Icege said:

Uh... considering the last time the team was 2-14 was in 2010 before going 6-10 in 2011, Marty Hurney since he was GM then?

Not really sure what point you're trying to make there.

All the money they spent being “competitive”. You know like.....

Teddy and 34-42M that you have insisted wasn’t a bad deal. 
 

KK-13M

Okung-13M

Weatherly, Roberts, Apple, Whitehead. 
 

How would that chart look with close to 100M beside the Panthers. 

  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Icege Grand Master

Icege

Posted
Posted
Just now, stbugs said:

I think he meant getting to 5-11 cost us $80M a d if we didn’t spend it we’d have been 2-14. We would have been much better off this year has we not spent the money. 

How does this work with the salary cap floor that the NFL has instituted (89% of the salary cap per the last CBA agreement)? The team still would have had to spend at least $173M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • PNW_PantherMan
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • tukafan21
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
    • Dave Gettleman's Shorts
      TIME TO SPECULATE

      By Dave Gettleman's Shorts · Posted

      adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
×
×
  • Create New...