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!

     

There should be no issue with Watson waiving his trade clause per ESPN.

NCTHFL0567

By NCTHFL0567,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

NCTHFL0567 Experienced

NCTHFL0567

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, PandaMan said:

We’ve pretty much been his last choice all along.  No idea why now he might waive it for us, there are a lot of better teams that are interested 

Per report. He will waive it. So yeah. Better teams? Maybe. But not better for Houston's sake. Trading him to the AFC is a huge L for Houston. Pitt already said they were out. Tampa doesn't have the cap. Seattle doesn't have the players that Houston would covet. So yeah..............

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheCasillas Grand Master

TheCasillas

Posted
Posted

As of this very moment, there are only 9 teams that can afford a Watson trade, one of those teams on this list is actively restructuring contracts daily.....  🤔

1    Indianapolis Colts  
2    Miami Dolphins   
3    Seattle Seahawks    
4    New York Jets  
5    Chicago Bears    
6    Jacksonville Jaguars    
7    Cincinnati Bengals    
8    Las Vegas Raiders    
9    Carolina Panthers

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Evil Hurney Mentor

Evil Hurney

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, La Pantera said:

Sooo, 50 mill for Watson & Armstead? And this seems doable?

Yes. The team acquiring can restructure DW once the ink dries on the trade.

"A simple restructure would allow Watson’s 2022 cap hit to be as low as $9.53 million following a trade." (source: https://overthecap.com/the-cost-of-trading-for-deshaun-watson/)

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shocker Grand Master

Shocker

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

As of this very moment, there are only 9 teams that can afford a Watson trade, one of those teams on this list is actively restructuring contracts daily.....  🤔

1    Indianapolis Colts  
2    Miami Dolphins   
3    Seattle Seahawks    
4    New York Jets  
5    Chicago Bears    
6    Jacksonville Jaguars    
7    Cincinnati Bengals    
8    Las Vegas Raiders    
9    Carolina Panthers

It clearly is Seattle or us at this point.  Please let it be Seattle.  And technically Watson puts us over the cap so we can’t exactly afford him

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

TheCasillas

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, La Pantera said:

Sooo, 50 mill for Watson & Armstead? And this seems doable?

Its plausible, because if we are trading players in return on this deal and not just draft picks, that creates space as well. No telling who it will be, and there isnt mant options that would give us a shitload of money back, but with one or two more restructures and traded player(s)... D Watson and Armstead could happen. It will take some fancy money moves by Samir

2 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Maybe I am confused but how does that help us in regards to the salary cap? 

Didnt mean to confuse you, I was just stating that the weighted portion of the contract is paid for. So we could extend his deal and spread the numbers out if we end up landing him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mrcompletely11 Grand Master

mrcompletely11

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Evil Hurney said:

Yes. The team acquiring can restructure DW once the ink dries on the trade.

"A simple restructure would allow Watson’s 2022 cap hit to be as low as $9.53 million following a trade." (source: https://overthecap.com/the-cost-of-trading-for-deshaun-watson/)

This doesnt give me the warm and fuzzies about the situation. 

 

For a team to acquire Watson this year they would need to have $35 million to acquire the contract. Right now the only teams who would be capable of doing that are the Colts, Seahawks, Jets, Dolphins, and Jaguars. Plenty of teams can get there including the Lions, Steelers, Raiders, Bucs, Eagles, and possibly the Panthers. A team can restructure Watson’s contract for cap relief after the fact but would need the room, unless Houston picked up some of the cost, to execute the trade.

 

As it stands right now Watson’s contract has salaries of $35 million in 2022, $37 million in 2023, and $32 million in 2024 and 2025. Those would also be the salary cap charges associated with a team who trades for him. A simple restructure would allow Watson’s 2022 cap hit to be as low as $9.53 million following a trade. Watson’s 2022 and 2023 salaries are more or less guaranteed already, but a guarantee shouldn’t be of any concern for a team making this type of trade commitment as the expectation is to have a relationship well beyond the term of this contract.

Edited by mrcompletely11
  • Pie 1
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheCasillas Grand Master

TheCasillas

Posted
Posted
Just now, Shocker said:

It clearly is Seattle or us at this point.  Please let it be Seattle.  And technically Watson puts us over the cap so we can’t exactly afford him

you have to consider the players we are giving to the texans in the trade too. According to that article, we are in financial shape to make this happen. We still have about 4-5 options on the roster to restructure as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Evil Hurney Mentor

Evil Hurney

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, TheCasillas said:

Its plausible, because if we are trading players in return on this deal and not just draft picks, that creates space as well. No telling who it will be, and there isnt mant options that would give us a shitload of money back, but with one or two more restructures and traded player(s

For the prices being suggested, the Texans would hopefully be willing to take Darnold.

Edited by Evil Hurney
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shocker Grand Master

Shocker

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, TheCasillas said:

you have to consider the players we are giving to the texans in the trade too. According to that article, we are in financial shape to make this happen. We still have about 4-5 options on the roster to restructure as well

Agreed, just in a “be a dick” kinda mood.  😉

Edited by Shocker
  • Beer 1
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

    • Mistuh Jones
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By Mistuh Jones · Posted

      This is gonna be longest six weeks ever 
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...