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!

     

Panthers are now the betting favorite for the #1 pick


Martin
 Share

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Pantha-kun said:

I really wonder if any one making these prediction has any hard evidence or its all just uninformed guesswork. Logically the colts should have the best senario for trading up to 1. The have higher picks to trade and Bears wouldnt need to drop that far and probably still wind up with the best defensive player in the draft.

The only equalizing factor would be if the Panthers were willing to trade more picks away than the Colts were wiling to. 

It's not a prediction. It's betting odds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ForJimmy said:

San Fran traded 3 firsts for Trey Lance 2 years ago and still made a nice playoff push this year.  If Lance was able to play in that last playoff game Purdy got injured, who knows what would have happened.  If nothing else San Fran shows up that trading up for a top 3 QB isn't as crippling to a franchise as people think.  Ask the pretty recent Super Bowl Winners the Eagles and the Rams.  

It's too early to see any affects of that trade in their roster. At least wait until they are finished giving up firsts to judge. It will be 2024 before any cumulative affect could be analyzed.

Their original pick turned in to Micah Parsons a likely future HoF player if he stays healthy 

Edited by csx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, PantherKyle said:

I think we go get Bryce at 1.

They seem focused on the OL right now--and i do not take Bryce if I cannot protect him. So they could be planning for his arrival.

I also get him a solid receiving TE.  While everyone is saying, "This is a good year to draft a TE," they are not wrong.  But if we do not have pick #39, it is also a draft that should drive the asking prices of TEs down in free agency. 

A guy I like is Foster Moreau of the Raiders.  He is under 26 right now, played a ton of snaps last year, averaged 12.7 yards per catch and had over 400 yards.  In this market, he could be picked up for a good free agent contract, in my opinion.

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

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...