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!

     

Sax's Grand Plan Spectacular


saX man
 Share

Recommended Posts

I don't see the Panthers trading away that much draft capital. And if they do, it's going to be a tough time digging out of it if Watson tears his ACL again or Prescott's ankle isn't healed. 

Would rather just draft Trey Lance or just build the roster up and be patient finding a franchise QB.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, BurnNChinn said:

We don’t have to give up 3 first rd picks right, if he gets tagged we only have to give up two? I would do that in a heartbeat. You shouldn’t have to give up players either right? 

Depends on the type of tag, theres three: Non-exclusive, Exclusive, and Transition Tag.

Non-exclusive, we can negotiate with Dak, if he agrees on an offer sheet with us, Cowboys can match it and keep him.  If they don't match, then he's ours and that's when we have to compensate the Cowboys with 2 1st round picks.  Cost of tag is average top 5 salaries in the position of the PREVIOUS 5 years.

Exclusive, the player cannot negotiate with any other teams.  Cost of tag is average of top 5 salaries in the position of the CURRENT year.  Most costly.

Transition, same as the non-exclusive but we don't have to give the Cowboys any compensation.  Cost is average of top 10 salaries in the position of the PRIOR year.

(For all 3, the cost are either those or 120% of the player's prior year salary, whichever is greater).

The transition tag on Dak is most likely out of the question.  If they place the Non-exclusive tag on him, I'd gladly give up 2 1st round picks for him.

Edited by DeSim
  • Pie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, DeSim said:

Depends on the type of tag, theres three: Non-exclusive, Exclusive, and Transition Tag.

Non-exclusive, we can negotiate with Dak, if he agrees on an offer sheet with us, Cowboys can match it and keep him.  If they don't match, then he's ours and that's when we have to compensate the Cowboys with 2 1st round picks.  Cost of tag is average top 5 salaries in the position of the PREVIOUS 5 years.

Exclusive, the player cannot negotiate with any other teams.  Cost of tag is average of top 5 salaries in the position of the CURRENT year.  Most costly.

Transition, same as the non-exclusive but we don't have to give the Cowboys any compensation.  Cost is average of top 10 salaries in the position of the PRIOR year.

(For all 3, the cost are either those or 120% of the player's prior year salary, whichever is greater).

The transition tag on Dak is most likely out of the question.  If they place the Non-exclusive tag on him, I'd gladly give up 2 1st round picks for him.

I'd put the non-exclusive tag on him if I didn't plan on keeping him. I think there would be a line of teams at that 2 1st round pick price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, joemac said:

Boy, Gettlemagic really knocked it out of the park with his first rounders, didnt he?

To be fair it's harder to pick all pro talent when you're drafting in the mid to late 20's compared to the top 10 because your teams actually make it to the playoffs. 

Also, comparatively based on draft position and output, Gettleman's drafts were better than Hurney's based on value and production:

Source

image.png.3deadb2297c8413e25d799aeb8feeb43.png

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BurnNChinn said:

We don’t have to give up 3 first rd picks right, if he gets tagged we only have to give up two? I would do that in a heartbeat. You shouldn’t have to give up players either right? 

You know, I think you're right on this ha.  I shall make further amendments. 

Regards,

Organtico Chipopo

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jbland said:

WTF is wrong with this board? Y’all are acting like three first round draft picks is nothing. That is a huge amount of draft capital that could potentially harm us for a decade. 

No one ever brings that up. If all this doesn’t work out we’re looking down the barrel of not being relevant again until 2030.  

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

    • then we're stuck.  tbh, at this point i would settle for just making it interesting. forget winning a superbowl for now. just get a team that can win games consistently and hope that it's enough to get to the big dance.  we want superman. we aren't getting superman. we had him and we blew our chance with him.  find a way make it work and hope that we can with this little guy and quit wishing our lives away for the second coming of superman. it just ain't happening.
    • Gonna have to strongly disagree with you here. Here are the last 20 Super Bowls - only two of them IMO had QB that didn't play like Superman to get them there/win the game/both, and that was Peyton in 2015 and Ben in 2005. Even then they both had that ability, Peyton was just old and Ben young. That said, there were flashes in the pan like Foles in 2017 and (to a lesser degree) Flacco in 2012. But even counting that, it's 4/20. 20% odds aren't good enough and Bryce was absolutely drafted at #1 to be a guy that elevates an entire team and plays like Superman. If he can't do that then it's a failed pick, full stop. Being a poor man's Teddy doesn't cut it for a #1 overall and that's true for any team, not just Carolina.
    • the problem is if we're waiting for Cam v2, we're going to be waiting decades longer.  our best hope is that bryce is better than we all think he is and that canales is able to work some serious magic with him and the scheme to help him live up anywhere close to the potential we thought he had. he's a smart kid. we just have to be able to have a situation that allows him to use his smarts.  the truth with cam was that een he had to have a system tailored for his skillset coming into the league. the difference between him and luck (which was the debate in '09 when we thought luck was an option) was that with luck, he could be placed in any offense and it would work...hence the higher floor he had  than cam. cam, though, needed an offense that was built around him to reach his potential. he could have done alright in a more pro-style offense, but to reach his ceiling (which was seen by a lot of people as being higher than luck). i don't think having to have an offense tailored around what you can and can't do well is a problem for people who can develop around them...after they've truly identified what those can and can't items are. we didn't have that last year. i think we have that this year. we want a guy who can carry a team on his back, but those kind of guys are very rare. we don't need to spend our time trying  find that guy, because even when you have them there's no guarantee that they will be enough.  championships are won, quite often, by teams who learn to compensate for less than the greatest QB play. you have a great defense and can protect the ball while wearing out the other defense and you've got a chance.  we don't need Bryce to be superman (despite where we drafted him and what we paid to get him). we just need him to be able to run (manage) a good offense. 
×
×
  • Create New...