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!

     

Per Jonathan Alexander, Browns were willing to eat 50% of Bakers salary($9m) and Panthers said no. Apparently, the max we want to take is $5m, playing hardball with them.

Julio

By Julio,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

SizzleBuzz Grand Master

SizzleBuzz

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 6/4/2022 at 6:38 PM, Julio said:

Said it on his interview in Julian Council’s Locked On podcast. Joe Person previously reported that the Browns were only willing to take on 2-3m, so quite a difference.

None of the local "reporters" have any legit/real sources...

...they're just winging it 🤦‍♂️.

Edited by SizzleBuzz
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, rayzor said:

 

For all the talk of "legit" sources, I don't think he has proposed any sources we should be listening to. 

Considering how often we hear Panthers internal moves or prospective moves blasted in the media, doesn't seem like sources are much of a problem in that organization. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Has it been explained yet why there wasnt a straight Baker for Darnold trade?

Not sure it really needs too much explaining. They are ultimately trying to accomplish two things:

1. Jettison a toxic player.

2. Clear salary cap space.

Trading for Darnold straight up immediately torpedoes the second goal. 

They have backup QB's that are far better than Darnold so there is also the element of Darnold literally not being useful at all. It's very likely even if they did agree to the deal they would just cut him anyway.

The only way Carolina is going to be able to get rid of Sam is to pay most of his salary or give up a pick. He is a terrible player on an even worse contract(even at just 1 year).

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mrcompletely11 Grand Master

mrcompletely11

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Not sure it really needs too much explaining. They are ultimately trying to accomplish two things:

1. Jettison a toxic player.

2. Clear salary cap space.

Trading for Darnold straight up immediately torpedoes the second goal. 

They have backup QB's that are far better than Darnold so there is also the element of Darnold literally not being useful at all. It's very likely even if they did agree to the deal they would just cut him anyway.

The only way Carolina is going to be able to get rid of Sam is to pay most of his salary or give up a pick. He is a terrible player on an even worse contract(even at just 1 year).

I see the cap space angle but at some point they have to realize he is going to cost money one way or the other

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mrcompletely11 Grand Master

mrcompletely11

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, rebelrouser said:

You bring in Baker when you have a complete team except for qb and his good not great ability can get you in the playoffs. We aren't that. What would Baker realistically do for us? Two more wins and a worse draft pick and Corral less developed? Why?

I agree.  I would just start corral from day one and see what’s there.   Adding baker doesn’t do squat but for some reason this trade speculation will not stop

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
40 minutes ago, rebelrouser said:

You bring in Baker when you have a complete team except for qb and his good not great ability can get you in the playoffs. We aren't that. What would Baker realistically do for us? Two more wins and a worse draft pick and Corral less developed? Why?

Keep in mind that we are coming off two straight 5 win seasons so literally any improvement might buy a coach on the hot seat more time.

For the franchise and our future, it probably doesn't move the needle much unless Baker has some sort of unexpected renaissance here. 

This move is more about trying to not get fired, IMO.

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

    • countryboi
      Brooks RB, Placed on PUP, Out for 2025

      By countryboi · Posted

      You joke, but it can always be worse. He might walk with a limp or need assistance. Different sport, but Lonzo Ball couldn't even walk up steps a year after his injury.
    • Icege
      Brooks RB, Placed on PUP, Out for 2025

      By Icege · Posted

      I mean... a lot of the information that could've helped set better expectations has always been out there: There was no RB on the team under contract for the 2025 - 2026 season except for Miles Sanders. The team did not have a second round pick going into the 2025 season due to the trade for Young. Chuba's extension did not happen until the beginning of November. Jonathon Brooks was the clear RB1 in the class with a massive gap between RB1 & RB2. Example: Dane Brugler had Brooks as RB1, overall #48; Blake Corum was RB2, #81 overall. The Giants held pick #47 and had just lost Saquon Barkley to the Eagles in free agency. They were going to take Brooks had the Panthers not jumped in front of them. So if we're framing things with that context: Chuba was expected to be RB1 Miles (at the time) was RB2 Brooks was essentially RB3, stashed for rehab in 2024 with a long runway. The original injury occurred Nov 2023 while the re-injury occurred December 2024. That is right in the high-risk window for recurrence, especially in explosive athletes. The fact that it also happened on a non-contact play suggests possible biomechanical issues such as muscle imbalance, rather than a failed surgery (or bad decision-making).   NFL teams invest heavily in medically vetting prospects. If there had been a clear red flag in imaging or recovery markers, the team is going to find it. This sucks and the Panthers have sucked, yes, but this wasn't blind optimism or malpractice by the front office. It was a calculated decision based on the roster, draft capital, positional scarcity, etc.
    • Navy_football
      Clowney released

      By Navy_football · Posted

      Yep, but they can all rotate with Brown, Brown and Robinson (sounds like a law firm). Can't continue to have Derrick Brown out there for 90+ percent of the defensive snaps. An injury was bound to happen. 
×
×
  • Create New...