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!

     

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

WarPanthers89

By WarPanthers89,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MHS831 Grand Master

MHS831

Posted
Posted

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.

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MHS831 Grand Master

MHS831

Posted
Posted

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MHS831 Grand Master

MHS831

Posted
Posted
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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted (edited)
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 by Mr. Scot
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pantherzack179812 Newbie

Pantherzack179812

Posted
Posted
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

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

    • ForJimmy
      Media touting tonight as The Shedaur Show

      By ForJimmy · Posted

      I think he did a solid job.  Honestly I liked his post game interview the best.  He gave himself a C and said he left a lot out on the field.  That kind of attitude can carry him far.
    • kungfoodude
      Coach asked about Coker!!

      By kungfoodude · Posted

      This is lacking a fairly considerable amount of context. For one, Adams(age 22) started 12 of 16 games, had 38 rec, 446 yds and 3 TD's on 66 targets(18 less, with 2 less games started). The main thing missing here is that the top two WR's for Green Bay that year combined for about 2800 yds and 25 TD's. Now if you want to throw a more accurate dart at Adams, take a look at year two. This year the production was spread around considerably and Adams didn't stand out from that pack(pun not intended).  So, if XL struggles mightily this season, I would probably keep that comparison in your quiver to counter argue. I would suggest that I don't think that scenario is probably very accurate for most HOF caliber WR's taken in the first round over the past 15 or so years. Adams was the 89th pick overall, as well. A little different hill to climb than XL, although not massively.
    • CRA
      Monday practice tweets

      By CRA · Posted

      to clarify I am not referring to Will Levis.  Not knowingly.   I just made that up and tried to use a reasonable guesstimate of what else was done.  That sounded in the ballpark.  At one time I did look it all up and there were several teams that had much more successful days downfield.   If that happened to be Levis' actual numbers than it's more of a lucky coincidence.  If memory serves, it wasn't just Will Levis that brought the claim into question, it was SEVERAL teams had better days.  and you are missing my entire point of the subjective nature of it all.  If PFF employee Doug watched Bryce's film and then used his same unique subjective vantage point to grade all 31 other starting QBs.  Then dumped into into a spread sheet, it would a subjective Doug take but at least it would be a level uniform subjectivity.   The grades are done by various people.  All watching and applying their own subjective view to a play.  Everyone isn't going to grade incompletions out the same.  Or completions.   So when you dump it all into a spread sheet and hit sort.....it's not actually a statement of fact as portrayed.  Which is why you sometimes get some head scratching stuff.  I'm not reframing anything.   I don't think.  I just wasn't going to look it all back up so I was talking vaguely off the general issue I have with PFF and treating any random claim they make as the truth. 
×
×
  • Create New...