Thoughts on Gettleman and KK Short...

[KB_fan]

58 minutes ago, thefuzz said:

Yup.  You know who has to pay crazy money to non QB positions?  Teams with Eli Manning, Ryan Tannehill, and Sam Bradford/Carson Wentz under center.

If we didn't have Luke and TD, we would have paid him already, as he wouldn't be expendable, and he's not really, but KK doesn't win us 4 or 5 extra games every year....only Cam can do that.

Yes, this coupled with the lower cost of living / smaller market in CLT I think are very good reasons why we won't be paying top 3 money to other players besides Cam & Luke. 

Top 10, yes, probably DG will bite the bullet on a few more contracts in that range.  Maybe we'd go top 5 with KK (between Atkins and McCoy - i.e. up to 15 mil per year but not above).

[TuckerMax25]

Oh, so you just ignore the military part of it huh?  You're literally making excuses to make yourself make sense.  I hold myself to those standards, since I was in the Military.  Sorry, I'm not sorry you aren't impressed.  Let it go dude.  

Please stop. You're giving fellow veterans a bad name with your faux hardcore excellence crap.

[panthers55]

6 hours ago, Jeremy Igo said:

The problem here is you assume KK Short would sign for anything less than the top DT contract in the league. Gettleman has made him a reasonable offer to make him a well paid defensive lineman for the Panthers. Short isn't interested and willing to wait it out. Him not being signed isn't just a Gettleman thing. It takes both parties involved to agree or not agree to a contract.  

You assume that he got a reasonable offer from Gettleman. Do you think his offer of 7 million  to Norman before the 2015 was reasonable? I don't. And I doubt Gettleman is offering him top 3 money which he has already shown he is worth. We could give him a 5 or 6 year deal at 14 million a year and get his cap at 10 this year which is very doable and guarantee 60 million which is a 30 million signing bonus and guranteeing another 30 in his first 2 years salary or 3 if the first year salary is nothing.

Gettleman is still playing new York tough guy and thinks you can interchange pieces with no cost in chemistry or morale. We are becoming the team where you go to do great and then leave to make real money. Hard to get long term buy in by players who don't think the front office gives a flip. If Short is a priority then make him one and stop playing chicken and building ill will among the players. it may not be personal to Gettleman but it is to the players.All over a couple of million a year that we readily have. 

 

[Jeremy Igo]

3 hours ago, panthers55 said:

You assume that he got a reasonable offer from Gettleman.  

 

Not really. 

[panthers55]

2 minutes ago, Jeremy Igo said:

Not really. 

Then we agree on that....

[MHS831]

I have not read the entire thread, so excuse me if this point has been made in support of Gettlemen:

Look at Von Miller.  He was the Super Bowl MVP.  He wants to a huge payday.  Why would Denver NOT immediately give him what he wants?  They will wear Super Bow, l rings because of him, and that is the ultimate goal, right?  You have 2 teams that have been in the off-season news for NOT signing star players--Denver (Miller) and Carolina (Norman, Short).  You have other teams that have been in the news for signing huge contracts that are "setting the market."  Denver has been solid since Elway took over, and Carolina has been in the playoffs every year since Gettlemen took over.  Hmmn.

While past performance is the predictor of success, it is not what contracts pay for--so a freakish season is not to be rewarded with a long-term deal.  With a salary cap, addition at one position always relates to a subtraction at another.  So, if Philly is paying $17m to a DT, they are not market setters; they are prioritizing one position over another and showing a willingness to overpay.  Does that mean the next team needing to re-sign or sign a free agent DT should sign an identical deal?  Let's forget about needs at other positions, upcoming contracts, the probability that past performance will be sustained or increase.  Let's forget the role of supporting cast members, such as the underrated Star, let's not mention the quality of guards and tackles faced, etc.

I said the same thing about Greg Hardy, whose numbers came in bunches vs. rookie or backup OTs.  Gettlemen did not want to give him a lucrative, long-term deal, and was hammered.  He goes to Dallas, different supporting cast, different opposition.  Non factor.  Sure, there was a distraction, but that distraction should have motivate him to beast on the field. 

KK is no Hardy, thank God, but he did have double--digit sacks as a DT.  Most came when Star was holding his ground on a double team and several came when outside pass rush forced the QB to him--but he was there.  KK is very good, but is he worth emptying our bank account when there are so many big contracts on the horizon?  Seattle did just that, and their window will close soon.  Gettlemen is building something.  Watch him work.  KK will either sign a reasonable deal here or he will sign a deal that hurts another team.  He would be foolish, in my opinion, to seek $18m on a bad team when he could make $14m on a Super Bowl team.  $$$ is only part of what he should consider.  

[panthers55]

On June 26, 2016 at 10:08 AM, MHS831 said:

I have not read the entire thread, so excuse me if this point has been made in support of Gettlemen:

Look at Von Miller.  He was the Super Bowl MVP.  He wants to a huge payday.  Why would Denver NOT immediately give him what he wants?  They will wear Super Bow, l rings because of him, and that is the ultimate goal, right?  You have 2 teams that have been in the off-season news for NOT signing star players--Denver (Miller) and Carolina (Norman, Short).  You have other teams that have been in the news for signing huge contracts that are "setting the market."  Denver has been solid since Elway took over, and Carolina has been in the playoffs every year since Gettlemen took over.  Hmmn.

While past performance is the predictor of success, it is not what contracts pay for--so a freakish season is not to be rewarded with a long-term deal.  With a salary cap, addition at one position always relates to a subtraction at another.  So, if Philly is paying $17m to a DT, they are not market setters; they are prioritizing one position over another and showing a willingness to overpay.  Does that mean the next team needing to re-sign or sign a free agent DT should sign an identical deal?  Let's forget about needs at other positions, upcoming contracts, the probability that past performance will be sustained or increase.  Let's forget the role of supporting cast members, such as the underrated Star, let's not mention the quality of guards and tackles faced, etc.

I said the same thing about Greg Hardy, whose numbers came in bunches vs. rookie or backup OTs.  Gettlemen did not want to give him a lucrative, long-term deal, and was hammered.  He goes to Dallas, different supporting cast, different opposition.  Non factor.  Sure, there was a distraction, but that distraction should have motivate him to beast on the field. 

KK is no Hardy, thank God, but he did have double--digit sacks as a DT.  Most came when Star was holding his ground on a double team and several came when outside pass rush forced the QB to him--but he was there.  KK is very good, but is he worth emptying our bank account when there are so many big contracts on the horizon?  Seattle did just that, and their window will close soon.  Gettlemen is building something.  Watch him work.  KK will either sign a reasonable deal here or he will sign a deal that hurts another team.  He would be foolish, in my opinion, to seek $18m on a bad team when he could make $14m on a Super Bowl team.  $$$ is only part of what he should consider.  

The question I have is whether Gettleman is even offering 14 million at this point. We offered Norman 7 before 2015 and 10 after. Yet he got 16 from someone else. There is a huge difference between a guy playing for their team of choice and giving them a small discount versus working for 50% of what they are worth on the open market.  If we are talking the difference between 14 and 17 million a year it might actually  benefit KK to take the contract now. But if he is throwing numbers around which are way under what he knows KK will get next year, Short is going to do what Norman did which is to wait and it isn't even a hard choice. Getleman at least needs to offer enough money to equate to a tempting offer.

[the butch]

The rumblings I've been hearing is Getts drafted Butler because he knew a big contract was coming for KK.  Fresh meat ensures leverage for the offer.  Getts has valued each player based on their position within our scheme, and when the current market is bullish on that particular position where we have a contract coming up, look for Getts to continue this trend.

Just my thoughts.

[thefuzz]

3 hours ago, panthers55 said:

The question I have is whether Gettleman is even offering 14 million at this point. We offered Norman 7 before 2015 and 10 after. Yet he got 16 from someone else. There is a huge difference between a guy playing for their team of choice and giving them a small discount versus working for 50% of what they are worth on the open market.  If we are talking the difference between 14 and 17 million a year it might actually  benefit KK to take the contract now. But if he is throwing numbers around which are way under what he knows KK will get next year, Short is going to do what Norman did which is to wait and it isn't even a hard choice. Getleman at least needs to offer enough money to equate to a tempting offer.

Why?

KK is under contract this year, and the tag next year makes it easy to control him for 2 more seasons.

[csx]

The point of an extension is to lock up a player at a reasonable rates,not to pay top dollar as if they were a FA.

[caatfan]

On 6/26/2016 at 10:08 AM, MHS831 said:

KK will either sign a reasonable deal here or he will sign a deal that hurts another team.

That's my feeling. I think he'll get an offer that puts him in the top tier of DTs, but not in Suh/Cox territory. Gettleman isn't gonna play the highest paid game if it's gone off the deep end. Some fans tend to look at the particular, isolated contract situation, but it's the GM's job to look down the road and at all the players and contracts.

[panthers55]

1 hour ago, thefuzz said:

Why?

KK is under contract this year, and the tag next year makes it easy to control him for 2 more seasons.

Because he is supposedly one of your core players and you want to negotiate in good faith.  It isnt about just what you do with KK but how you treat the players in general.  The other players are watching what happens and drawing conclusions.  If we want to be the place where other players want to come and feel that we are a great place then refusing to pay players fair market value and only giving them the absolute minimum you have to, isnt going to make anyone feel that they want to be there or that you value them.

If you want players like Thomas Davis to play in the Superbowl with a broken arm then you have to make them feel valued and want to live and die for the franchise.  Davis does that because we went out of our way to keep him when most folks would have dumped him. Honestly I doubt Gettleman would have kept him in 2011/2012 when he got hurt.  Sure he got a new contract by Gettleman in 2015 when he was playing at a high level but Gettleman would have dumped him after 3 ACL injuries.  Business is business, players understand that but Gettleman is taking it to an extreme when he doesnt need to anymore. I am not against most of his moves but think he should be working harder to keep KK.  With the franchise tag estimated for 2016 around 13.5 million for a DT, he should be around that figure now and he likely would be signed.  KK is a special player who may be the best DT we have ever had in our franchise history.

[panthers55]

1 hour ago, caatfan said:

That's my feeling. I think he'll get an offer that puts him in the top tier of DTs, but not in Suh/Cox territory. Gettleman isn't gonna play the highest paid game if it's gone off the deep end. Some fans tend to look at the particular, isolated contract situation, but it's the GM's job to look down the road and at all the players and contracts.

Depends on the player.  Did we look at Cam and start pinching pennies?  No, because we looked at the value he brought and realized that he was an integral part of the offense.  KK is that on defense.  He personally had more sacks than any other player on the team.  If you look at the whole D line besides Short, they accounted for a total of 19 sacks between 9 other players.  Then there is Short at 11 sacks which is huge for a DT.   Sure you manage the big picture but when you have a special talent you pay them accordingly. 

[thefuzz]

15 hours ago, panthers55 said:

Because he is supposedly one of your core players and you want to negotiate in good faith.  It isnt about just what you do with KK but how you treat the players in general.  The other players are watching what happens and drawing conclusions.  If we want to be the place where other players want to come and feel that we are a great place then refusing to pay players fair market value and only giving them the absolute minimum you have to, isnt going to make anyone feel that they want to be there or that you value them.

If you want players like Thomas Davis to play in the Superbowl with a broken arm then you have to make them feel valued and want to live and die for the franchise.  Davis does that because we went out of our way to keep him when most folks would have dumped him. Honestly I doubt Gettleman would have kept him in 2011/2012 when he got hurt.  Sure he got a new contract by Gettleman in 2015 when he was playing at a high level but Gettleman would have dumped him after 3 ACL injuries.  Business is business, players understand that but Gettleman is taking it to an extreme when he doesnt need to anymore. I am not against most of his moves but think he should be working harder to keep KK.  With the franchise tag estimated for 2016 around 13.5 million for a DT, he should be around that figure now and he likely would be signed.  KK is a special player who may be the best DT we have ever had in our franchise history.

Players like TD don't play with a broken arm because of money, they play like that because they are driven, and want to win.  I understand what you are saying, but I don't agree with this line of thinking.  The first thing out of every players mouth when they talk about money is always "this is a business".  The Panthers have proven over and over again that we will pay our players.....if they get spun out by Gross and Smitty being asked to take pay cuts, they need to look at Cam, Luke, CJ, TD, Stew, Kalil, Olsen, etc.

What speaks louder than words however, is the Ginn's, the Ohers, the CJ's, the Peanuts.....

My biggest argument with many on these type discussions.....what I bolded.  How in the world can we know just how hard DG is trying to keep KK?  We have no clue, all we know is that KK wants to get paid, DG wants KK here, now it's time to get to the hated business part of the game.  Personally, I don't want us giving KK a Suh type contract, and if that's what he's after, the he is the one that isn't working hard to stay here, not the other way around.

Either way, he is a Panthers for 2 more seasons at least....IMO.