ARTICLE: Panthers want to make a run at Deshaun Watson...clearing cap space to do so

[Mr. Scot]

12 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

When you have to go back 20 years it might not be relevant anymore.

You really only have to go back five. Peyton was a shell of himself when we played the Broncos.

Again though, you're still talking about a formula that works maybe once every ten years. I prefer something a little more consistent.

[MHS831]

You need a QB.  a good one.  Does that mean sell the farm to buy some magic beans.  Here is the way I think of this trade with Watson:

The three first rounders (equivalents):

1.  Brown, DT

2.  Burns DE

3. Moore WR

In addition, they will want 2 more starters and probably (hopefully) Bridgewater.

Watson played well on a team without much of a supporting cast in Houston this past year.  They won 4 games.  Will this not be the same situation with a depleted roster here?

So this becomes about the difference between Bridgewater with a supporting cast and Watson without a solid supporting cast.   Of course, you have to assume Watson cannot have a supporting cast if we make the trade--maybe that is illogical.

Can we have a supporting cast for Watson (with the cap, free agency and draft?)  That is the challenge.

 

And the Panthers might be banking everything on this unusual year in free agency--can we fill these gaps with quality players AND go after Watson?  It is possible.

[MHS831]

Watson's current contract is about $16m vs. the cap and rises to $40m in 2022.  Not sure what Houston would have to eat in a trade, but if this is true, and I am very far from being knowledgeable in this area, why are we clearing cap room NOW?  In addition, cutting Bridgewater post June 1 saves the team $8m ($3m pre-june 1 cut).  I noticed that we have not used the Post June 1 cut yet--even on Short--are we saving that for Bridgewater?  I dunno.  So if we make this trade, in 2021 we have as little as $8m invested in QB--so why the moves to make cap room?

Well, these were OBVIOUS moves, but if we have to give up picks and players, we will need to be effective in free agency over the next few years.  In addition, we need some room to restructure Watson's deal in 2022--where he gets $35-40m.  Of course, thanks to KC, he may want that to be his average over the next several years.  Funny how these teams (Seattle comes to mind, KC) high on Super Bowl nectar, give these huge deals to players and that sets the market.  Remember the Flacco contract? 

So shoot some holes in my logic because this is how I see it--and I am not a fan from this perspective like some of you, so I am wrong a lot.

[MHS831]

53 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

You really only have to go back five. Peyton was a shell of himself when we played the Broncos.

Again though, you're still talking about a formula that works maybe once every ten years. I prefer something a little more consistent.

If you ask me, I was never impressed with Flacco who won the SB in 2013.

[Mr. Scot]

10 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

If you ask me, I was never impressed with Flacco who won the SB in 2013.

Same.

And while I'd never say Russell Wilson isn't a good quarterback, it is fair to point out that Seahawks Super Bowl victory had a lot less to do with him than it did their defense.

Edited February 21, 2021 by Mr. Scot

[BurnNChinn]

50 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Same.

And while I'd never say Russell Wilson isn't a good quarterback, it is fair to point out that Seahawks Super Bowl victory had a lot less to do with him than it did their defense.

[Pantherzack179812]

5 hours ago, MHS831 said:

You need a QB.  a good one.  Does that mean sell the farm to buy some magic beans.  Here is the way I think of this trade with Watson:

The three first rounders (equivalents):

1.  Brown, DT

2.  Burns DE

3. Moore WR

In addition, they will want 2 more starters and probably (hopefully) Bridgewater.

Watson played well on a team without much of a supporting cast in Houston this past year.  They won 4 games.  Will this not be the same situation with a depleted roster here?

So this becomes about the difference between Bridgewater with a supporting cast and Watson without a solid supporting cast.   Of course, you have to assume Watson cannot have a supporting cast if we make the trade--maybe that is illogical.

Can we have a supporting cast for Watson (with the cap, free agency and draft?)  That is the challenge.

 

And the Panthers might be banking everything on this unusual year in free agency--can we fill these gaps with quality players AND go after Watson?  It is possible.

How I look at 3 1sts

Vernon Butler

Kelvin Benjamin 

Shaq Thompson 

 

5/10 1st round picks hitting is lucky

[KatsAzz]

On 2/20/2021 at 11:13 AM, TheMaulClaw said:

Im not anti Watson but if what you're saying is true why did the Texans suck so bad last year with the type of season Watson had? Don't fool yourself its a team game.

Words of wisdom and a great question. Thank you Sir.