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
 Share

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, Icege said:

Have you been day drinking on a Tuesday?

Are you still trying to use the salary floor as an excuse for last year? Do you actually believe the cap number and the one used for the “floor” are the same? I thought we were past that. They are not. Ones cap space. Ones cash. That’s why your scenario makes no sense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, JawnyBlaze said:

I’d say 3rd, behind Jenkins and Star. Agreed  on well wishes though. He got too much hate for being injured. Seemed like a good dude and good teammate. Hope he doesn’t have to settle for Washington. 

I don't see how anyone that watched the games when Star and Short was here could come away saying Star was better.  I remember Star's last year here and everyone was saying on this board how they were so glad we signed Short and not Star.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, stbugs said:

No need to wonder. The actual date of release doesn’t matter. It’s like IR designated to return. You don’t do that when you put the player on IR, before CV you just had two chances to come back. Similarly for post June 1st, it’s a designation and not a calendar option.  Cut today and you can use one of the two designations and say he’s a post June 1st cut. They added that to a prior CBA so the vet had a chance to join another team right away instead of after all FA and the draft.

Also, you gain no extra money. What happens is that if designated as post June 1st, you can then stretch out whatever dead cap is left into this year and next year instead of eating it all this year. Short has $11M in dead cap left so post June 1st puts $5M of the dead cap into 2022 and leaves only $6M in 2021. With cap rollover, it’s close to the same because the extra $5M in cap space to use after June 1st (that’s key as you can’t use it on Morton’s tag) is offset by $5M in dead cap next year. No matter what we still have all $11M in dead cap, just whether you spread some into next year to give yourself flexibility which in rebuild year two we should hopefully not need to use this year

In this instance, I believe its more about freeing up the money as soon as possible.  

Franchise tag deadline is early March.  If the Panthers wanted to use Short's freed up money to assist in tagging Moton, they can't wait till June 1st for it to come out.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like not making it a June 1st cut and just eating all of that money this year.  Realistically, we're not competing for anything next year.  But beyond that? Try to have the cap as clear as possible so we're not consistently taking decent percentages of dead cap with us each and every year. 

Now tag Moton and try to work out a deal ASAP

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stbugs said:

No need to wonder. The actual date of release doesn’t matter. It’s like IR designated to return. You don’t do that when you put the player on IR, before CV you just had two chances to come back. Similarly for post June 1st, it’s a designation and not a calendar option.  Cut today and you can use one of the two designations and say he’s a post June 1st cut. They added that to a prior CBA so the vet had a chance to join another team right away instead of after all FA and the draft.

Also, you gain no extra money. What happens is that if designated as post June 1st, you can then stretch out whatever dead cap is left into this year and next year instead of eating it all this year. Short has $11M in dead cap left so post June 1st puts $5M of the dead cap into 2022 and leaves only $6M in 2021. With cap rollover, it’s close to the same because the extra $5M in cap space to use after June 1st (that’s key as you can’t use it on Morton’s tag) is offset by $5M in dead cap next year. No matter what we still have all $11M in dead cap, just whether you spread some into next year to give yourself flexibility which in rebuild year two we should hopefully not need to use this year.

OTC is actually showing an additional $6-7 mil in total dead cap for cutting him pre-June 1st. It's actually more dead cap than he has remaining prorated bonus money. 

In fact it is more money than what he appears to have left in his contract. That's weird. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bababoey said:

I don't see how anyone that watched the games when Star and Short was here could come away saying Star was better.  I remember Star's last year here and everyone was saying on this board how they were so glad we signed Short and not Star.

Star was more critical to a good dline. Short got the stats but Star was the better player. Not everyone said they were glad we signed Short over Star. The loss of Star was the beginning of the end of our top tier defense. 

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Not one single pick that is asking me why we drafted a guy in the first place. It was a guy we needed and/or a guy that had certain traits making them stand out. Best of all, I feel everyone we drafted are capable of stepping onto the field this year and have a meaningful role (even Kuwatch on special teams). Obviously, nothing is guaranteed but I'm not seeing any huge flags on guys because they're risky projects or massive overreaches.
    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...