Panthers in talks w/Josh Norman about extension

[Carl Spackler]

...This is were Hurney would go full  retard...Gman understands Normans worth..Norman needs to understand his worth...

 

Yes, but we're not going to win a damn thing if Gettleman lowballs every young talented player we have other than Kuechly.

[Pimpdaddy]

Yes, but we're not going to win a damn thing if Gettleman lowballs every young talented player we have other than Kuechly.

...Norman...coming up on 28...hes good but don't over pay for someone aging in the position, especially when we want to build the Dline..doesn't necessitate a phenomenal secondary...bad contracts with under performing talent has us in the position we are in today...I prolly wouldn't want him after 3-4 years from now... seriously....but ur the type will that will be bitching about it then...

[Carl Spackler]

...Norman...coming up on 28...hes good but don't over pay for someone aging in the position, especially when we want to build the Dline..doesn't necessitate a phenomenal secondary...bad contracts with under performing talent has us in the position we are in today...I prolly wouldn't want him after 3-4 years from now... seriously....but ur the type will that will be bitching about it then...

 

Paying someone their market worth is not a "bad contract." Also, try to use commas and periods every now and then instead of ellipses. 

[Carl Spackler]

The Dream Team some people want Gettleman to field on here includes Luke Kuechly and 52 scrappy UDFAs who Gettleman all signed for $2 each after saying "Take it or leave it" while wearing one of the suits Michael Corleone's character wore in The Godfather. 

[cgarsmoker]

The Dream Team some people want Gettleman to field on here includes Luke Kuechly and 52 scrappy UDFAs who Gettleman all signed for $2 each after saying "Take it or leave it" while wearing one of the suits Michael Corleone's character wore in The Godfather.

I'll bet it's tough finding pants sized 48-30 for that suit.

[Pimpdaddy]

Paying someone their market worth is not a "bad contract." Also, try to use commas and periods every now and then instead of ellipses. 

Whaaaa use a period, question or exclamation point!....Can't pay everybody market value. In Getteman I trust!

 

[panthers55]

I am not a capologist but isn't back loading and then constantly restructuring our players the main culprit is having 20+ million in dead money this year?

I feel like restructuring constantly is short sighted. It helps the immediate season but cripples the future.

Again I don't get into the weeds of how all this poo works, that is just how it seems to me

it still is a necessary evil for a few more years as we keep loading the team with rookies and guys on the cheap. Obviously the best plan would be to pay as you go and only have the remaining pro-rated signing bonus in dead cap space but we are not out of the woods yet. I was giving a way to fit everyone under the cap and still go after some free agents. Remaining competitive as we keep,dumping bad contracts and dead cap money from guys no longer on the team.

Many contracts are written with the notion that they are going to be restructured in a few years. Look at Brees for New Orleans. His salary is going to be restructured to,fit him in for another year. They can't pay his over 20 million salary but could work with 13 or 14 million. Restructuring is something every team does. It isn't a bad or good thing but a necessary evil.

But my point has been that the guaranteed amount is the biggest issue since that is dead cap space if they are cut no matter what. If you keep that low all along, even if you add a couple of million in a restructure, it is still manageable if they are playing at the level of a Davis for example. His contract is a prime candidate for a restructure or an extension.

[Dexterity]

He has every right to, but I don't think the Gman would give it to him.

Igo said it doesn't seem like he's about the money, he doesn't sound like it from his interviews and the two episodes on the podcast. So I think he'll resign here anyways.

Igo brown noses any player that talks to him.

[panthers55]

Restructuring doesn't change a players future salary, it changes their future cap hit. That salary is converted to a signing bonus and paid out then.

Example:

Player A:

2015: Salary - $10,000,000 Prorated Bonus $5,000,000 Cap Hit: $15,000,000

2016: Salary - $10,000,000 Prorated Bonus $5,000,000 Cap Hit: $15,000,000

Player A after restructure:

2015 Salary - $1,000,000 Prorated Bonus $9,500,000 Cap Hit: $10,500,000

2016 Salary - $10,000,000 Prorated Bonus $9,500,000 Cap Hit $19,500,000

As you can see the players future salary doesn't change during a restructure, his cap hit does.

Either way I think we are arguing over verbiage. My point was, that while I agree with you that the guaranteed salary is an important part of any contract, to say guaranteed salary is the "only" thing that matters is a bit of an overstatement.

For example Olsen's cap hit this past year was $7.8m, of which $5.2 was non guaranteed salary. That salary counted towards our available cap, so it does matter. If we would have paid him more we would have had less cap space.

http://overthecap.com/player/greg-olsen/1164

Your example is too simplistic. If you restructure a contract by converting some of this years salary and next years as well into a signing bonus then you are in essence restructuring future salary so yes you can. . And you appear trying to just be argumentative and literal. Of course salary matters if you plan to keep him but only the guaranteed part has to be paid no matter what. In the last restructure to Olsen it added 1.7 million to his cap but since the signing bonus was so low his cap is no more than it was last year and if we want to we can restructure again or extend him and reduce his cap hit to less than 5 million For 2015 and lock him up,for the rest of his career at an affordable amount for a probowler. The salary is easily manipulated or even dropped with little consequence if he doesn't work out while the guaranteed money is paid no matter what. Look how much we had to pay Smitty and that is all because we had to pay the guaranteed money. If it were non guaranteed salary it would have cost us much less. So in the scheme of things the guaranteed money is much more important than the salary which can be inflated to make your contract look huge but most players never see it all. Look at William' contract. It is the guaranteed money and dead cap consequence that made us keep him not the salary for any one year.

[AU-panther]

Your example is too simplistic. If you restructure a contract by converting some of this years salary and next years as well into a signing bonus then you are in essence restructuring future salary so yes you can. . And you appear trying to just be argumentative and literal. Of course salary matters if you plan to keep him but only the guaranteed part has to be paid no matter what. In the last restructure to Olsen it added 1.7 million to his cap but since the signing bonus was so low his cap is no more than it was last year and if we want to we can restructure again or extend him and reduce his cap hit to less than 5 million For 2015 and lock him up,for the rest of his career at an affordable amount for a probowler. The salary is easily manipulated or even dropped with little consequence if he doesn't work out while the guaranteed money is paid no matter what. Look how much we had to pay Smitty and that is all because we had to pay the guaranteed money. If it were non guaranteed salary it would have cost us much less. So in the scheme of things the guaranteed money is much more important than the salary which can be inflated to make your contract look huge but most players never see it all. Look at William' contract. It is the guaranteed money and dead cap consequence that made us keep him not the salary for any one year.

I wasn't trying to be argumentative, my only point was the term "all" is a bit misleading for those that don't really understand the cap.

Out of curiosity where is this 1.7m number come from you are referring to about Olsen.

[Yaboychris28]

Us showing interest in Norman this early shows exact how much we value him as a player

[Mol3m4n]

Us showing interest in Norman this early shows exact how much we value him as a player

Don't forget that we showed that same interest in Nate Chandler.

[t96]

Don't forget that we showed that same interest in Nate Chandler.

 

And we got him for nothing. He's still a decent backup guard so what he's making is perfectly fine,

[Mol3m4n]

And we got him for nothing. He's still a decent backup guard so what he's making is perfectly fine,

The thing is, if he didn't pan out, we paid too much. The only way we look smart is if he starts. He doesn't.

My point was don't pay a lot of attention to the timing of contact negotiations.