Thoughts on Gettleman and KK Short...

[panthers55]

37 minutes ago, thefuzz said:

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.

First of all there is no guarantee KK will be here 2 years.After rescinding the tag with Norman there is no automatic that we will tag him if we can't sign him this July or before the tag deadline next year. All we know is this year. Secondly Gentleman's bravado and recent comments suggest that he is taking things personal and may be in a pissing contest to let everyone he isn't running scared and can't be intimidated. 

Plus his history with Smitty and Norman suggest he is a pretty poor communicator when it comes to negotiations and even tends toward being vindictive. 

When we were capstrapped and needed tough negotiations he did a good job.  But now we need a slightly different skill set which Gettleman hasn't demonstrated which  to the team that he has a core he will retain and pay them well. KK should be on the list. Everyone talks as if KK wants Suh money but I haven't seen that. But offering 9 or 10 million right now would be as insulting as offering Norman 7 million last year. 

I won't go back and forth as this hasn't played out yet but I think his belief that he can keep playing cheap and just keep replacing players like pawns on a chessboard may bite us in the butt. After all you cant save the money given you have to spend 90% of your cap by CBS agreement. Norman's money was to pay KK. So let's at least make a serious offer. And no I don't think he is even trying at this point. 

[The NFL Shield At Midfield]

except gettleman had no problem opening up jerry's wallet for olsen, cam, kalil, and kuechly

[panthers55]

14 minutes ago, The NFL Shield At Midfield said:

except gettleman had no problem opening up jerry's wallet for olsen, cam, kalil, and kuechly

Because at least 2 of those 4 were signed relatively cheap. Olsen at 7 million a year is a really cheap contract for his production as is Kalil at 8 million.  Only Kuechly and Cam have been paid close to top dollar for their position.

[caatfan]

38 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

I won't go back and forth as this hasn't played out yet but I think his belief that he can keep playing cheap and just keep replacing players like pawns on a chessboard may bite us in the butt. After all you cant save the money given you have to spend 90% of your cap by CBS agreement. Norman's money was to pay KK. So let's at least make a serious offer. And no I don't think he is even trying at this point. 

You say 'cheap'. The other option is 'reasonable'. If you're cheap you don't have sustained success, and the same goes for making a handful of players the top paid for their position. Gettleman isn't stupid, so he'll avoid both extremes IMO.

[Mr. Scot]

34 minutes ago, stbugs said:

Olsen's contract wasn't cheap. Right now, he has the #8 contract per year as a TE, but only Jimmy Graham and Gronk had bigger contracts at the time Olsen signed his 3 year extension, so I'd say his deal was pretty good at the teim. Problem is you are looking in the rear view mirror. The 6 other TEs above him (or tied - Cameron), all signed their current contracts in the 2015 off season right after Olsen or this off season. Whose contract do you think most of those guys' agents used as the template? Clay and Cameron were within $100k of Olsen and Thomas was around Gronk's. This off season they all used Thomas as a benchmark.

Contracts aren't rocket science. We got Olsen "cheap" because he signed earlier than the hoard of young TEs who were up later (Ertz, Reed, Thomas and Kelce) and he wasn't Graham/Gronk. Gettleman made a good decision signing Olsen early, unlike waiting until Cox signed his deal this year (although KK's agent likely waited).

Your posts on this makes a lot assumptions. First of all, $7-8 million for Norman after 2014 wasn't a bad offer. At the time, that is in the top 10-15 range and I don't think Norman was in the top tier yet. Norman also wanted to bet on himself, which he did and he made the correct bet. You assume everything has been DG's fault and that he is low balling people. I have no idea what the final offer to Norman was, but I read $11 or 12M, which was top 5 money, but not #1 money. Our defense isn't built on paying CBs the top $$$. Snyder can do that and luckily win the division one year because the rest of his division had injuries/bad years.

Also, why do people keep saying that they money we saved on Norman was earmarked for Short and that we are sitting on it? DG extended Kalil and Oher to the tune of $37M after saving the $14M on Norman and somehow he is still sitting on the money? Short may be asking for Suh money, but you are assuming we are low balling him. Similar to Norman, Short is actually on the older side of seeing his first contract. If Short is franchised, he will be 29 going into the first season of his 2nd contract. If Norman signed the franchise deal he would have turned 30 in the first season of his 2nd contract. Maybe their ages are a concern for their agents to make sure they maximize their 2nd deal. Maybe DG is thinking that signed Short to a Suh extension at age 29 isn't as smart as the message board folks think. Suh had 3 years of 8+ sacks and was 1 year younger than Short at the time of his big deal. Cox will 31 in the last year of his 6 year extension, versus Short being 29 when he starts his extension.

Lots more to think about there, it's not as simple as Jason La Canfora says.

Good first post.

[thefuzz]

1 hour ago, panthers55 said:

First of all there is no guarantee KK will be here 2 years.After rescinding the tag with Norman there is no automatic that we will tag him if we can't sign him this July or before the tag deadline next year. All we know is this year. Secondly Gentleman's bravado and recent comments suggest that he is taking things personal and may be in a pissing contest to let everyone he isn't running scared and can't be intimidated. 

Plus his history with Smitty and Norman suggest he is a pretty poor communicator when it comes to negotiations and even tends toward being vindictive. 

When we were capstrapped and needed tough negotiations he did a good job.  But now we need a slightly different skill set which Gettleman hasn't demonstrated which  to the team that he has a core he will retain and pay them well. KK should be on the list. Everyone talks as if KK wants Suh money but I haven't seen that. But offering 9 or 10 million right now would be as insulting as offering Norman 7 million last year. 

I won't go back and forth as this hasn't played out yet but I think his belief that he can keep playing cheap and just keep replacing players like pawns on a chessboard may bite us in the butt. After all you cant save the money given you have to spend 90% of your cap by CBS agreement. Norman's money was to pay KK. So let's at least make a serious offer. And no I don't think he is even trying at this point. 

 

Exactly what has led you to believe that, in detail?

 

[panthers55]

6 hours ago, caatfan said:

You say 'cheap'. The other option is 'reasonable'. If you're cheap you don't have sustained success, and the same goes for making a handful of players the top paid for their position. Gettleman isn't stupid, so he'll avoid both extremes IMO.

It isnt as if it has to be either or.  You can pay for top talent at critical positions and then fill in with vets, JAGs, and guys on rookie contracts. Gettleman isnt stupid by any means but lets remember this is his first stint as a GM.  It isnt as if he's done this before.  GMs can make mistakes, even the good ones. 

[panthers55]

7 hours ago, stbugs said:

Olsen's contract wasn't cheap. Right now, he has the #8 contract per year as a TE, but only Jimmy Graham and Gronk had bigger contracts at the time Olsen signed his 3 year extension, so I'd say his deal was pretty good at the teim. Problem is you are looking in the rear view mirror. The 6 other TEs above him (or tied - Cameron), all signed their current contracts in the 2015 off season right after Olsen or this off season. Whose contract do you think most of those guys' agents used as the template? Clay and Cameron were within $100k of Olsen and Thomas was around Gronk's. This off season they all used Thomas as a benchmark.

Contracts aren't rocket science. We got Olsen "cheap" because he signed earlier than the hoard of young TEs who were up later (Ertz, Reed, Thomas and Kelce) and he wasn't Graham/Gronk. Gettleman made a good decision signing Olsen early, unlike waiting until Cox signed his deal this year (although KK's agent likely waited).

Your posts on this makes a lot assumptions. First of all, $7-8 million for Norman after 2014 wasn't a bad offer. At the time, that is in the top 10-15 range and I don't think Norman was in the top tier yet. Norman also wanted to bet on himself, which he did and he made the correct bet. You assume everything has been DG's fault and that he is low balling people. I have no idea what the final offer to Norman was, but I read $11 or 12M, which was top 5 money, but not #1 money. Our defense isn't built on paying CBs the top $$$. Snyder can do that and luckily win the division one year because the rest of his division had injuries/bad years.

Also, why do people keep saying that they money we saved on Norman was earmarked for Short and that we are sitting on it? DG extended Kalil and Oher to the tune of $37M after saving the $14M on Norman and somehow he is still sitting on the money? Short may be asking for Suh money, but you are assuming we are low balling him. Similar to Norman, Short is actually on the older side of seeing his first contract. If Short is franchised, he will be 29 going into the first season of his 2nd contract. If Norman signed the franchise deal he would have turned 30 in the first season of his 2nd contract. Maybe their ages are a concern for their agents to make sure they maximize their 2nd deal. Maybe DG is thinking that signed Short to a Suh extension at age 29 isn't as smart as the message board folks think. Suh had 3 years of 8+ sacks and was 1 year younger than Short at the time of his big deal. Cox will 31 in the last year of his 6 year extension, versus Short being 29 when he starts his extension.

Lots more to think about there, it's not as simple as Jason La Canfora says.

Contracts are made in the NFL not looking at the present but projecting how players will perform down the road. Who uses a tight end more than we do?  So when you look at Olsen you not only look at what he brings to the table which is considerable but what are you asking him to do.  So paying him 7 million to anchor the offense and be a number one receiving option means we use him more as a receiver than as a TE and he can block very well.  Much like NO used Graham.  So is 7 million a lot for what we use him for?  Not at all.  How many of those other 6 contracts above him have the production he does with the exception of Gronk? And even Gronk isnt asked to block and play fullback for example as we use Olsen.  So many of those guys make not only more than Olsen but arent as good or as diversified.  So I am not sure I agree with your point.  But lets move on.

Seven or 8 million was a low figure for Norman when you consider that for a few million more he would have likely signed here.  And lets remember that only guaranteed money counts.  I can offer you a contract for 20 million a year but unless I guaranteee a big part of it, it means little and can be changed or restructured with no penalty.  So looking at total amounts of money with no context is largely useless. As for Norman being top 10, he was ranked as the third best corner at the end of 2014 not 10th but only behind Chris Harris and Richard Sherman.  Sherman signed his contract before the 2014 season and averaged 14 million a season.  Should Nornan have made more than Sherman?  Of course not, but should he be offered only half?  No the answer should have been around 10 million a season and if Gettleman had offered that there is a good chance that Norman would still be in a Panther uniform.  Lets remember than Gettleman wouldnt offer him more than 10 after his 2015 season.  Again lowballing him by a lot.

 

Why did I say the money was earmarked for Short because Gettleman said it himself when he said KK was one of the core and he needed money to sign his core players.  As for extending Kalil and Oher, you have to not confuse total salary with cap or other issues.

We are not spending the money we saved on Norman for Kalil.  His cap hit in 2016 was already almost 12 million and with the extension will go down to 8 million in 2017 and will be 10 million in 2018. So the extension actually saved us money over what we paid this year.  Plus with Kalil's contract already accounted for this year we have 30 million in cap space.  Lets look at Oher. Oher's cap hit is 4.5 million this year.  His extension will average around 7 million a year so without seeing the actual cap numbers the difference will be roughly 2.5 million a year.  So we still have roughly 28 million to spend including their salaries and this doesnt include the very likely possibility that the cap will rise 10 million again next year meaning that anything we likely pay KK will be largely covered just by the increase in cap space irregardless of the 28 million.

As for Short being old, you seem the one making huge assumptions.  He just turned 27 and wont be 28 until February of next year.  So he isnt as old as Norman and he surely isnt on the old side for a second contract.  Secondly while 30 might be old for cornerbacks and running backs who rely on their speed, defensive tackles rely much more on technique and experience which actually can improve as they age.      Thirdly given that most people graduate from college around 22 and after a 4 year contract almost all of them are 26 or 27 if they stay in college for 4 years, how old do you think most players are on their second contract. You aged him 2 years when honestly he will just be turning 28 as he is either signed for us after this year or is signed as a free agent.  Not old at all for a DT. Lastly Cox will turn 26 while Short is still 27, they are 22 months apart so you might want to rethink your math there. At the end of his 6 year extension which starts next year Cox will have just turned 32.  At the end of a similar contract, Short would be 33 turning 34 in February.  Hardly enough of a difference to make a big deal about..

As Mr Scot said , a good first post, but you seem a little fuzzy on the math and the facts.

[panthers55]

9 hours ago, thefuzz said:

 

Exactly what has led you to believe that, in detail?

 

Part of my job is to read between the lines, understand people's motives, and analyze patterns of behavior. So let's watch it unfold. I hope I am wrong and they reach an agreement in the next 2 weeks given that these deals are often done at the last minute.  But if I were a betting man (and I am not) I would be betting we don't reach an agreement at least before the season starts.

[csx]

We could very well be better off reaching an agreement after the season if he doesn't have as strong as year statistically. It would be nice to lock him up now but it's not the end of the world if not.

[tiger7_88]

8 hours ago, panthers55 said:

Part of my job is to read between the lines, understand people's motives, and analyze patterns of behavior. 

Welcome to The Huddle, Mistress Zelda!

How's the palm reading biz these days?

[panthers55]

10 minutes ago, tiger7_88 said:

Welcome to The Huddle, Mistress Zelda?

How's the palm reading biz these days?

Check this out. By the way my ring finger is longer than my index finger.... and my fingers on both hands match up well.  How about you......

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/07/palm-reading/395288/

[thefuzz]

12 hours ago, panthers55 said:

Part of my job is to read between the lines, understand people's motives, and analyze patterns of behavior. So let's watch it unfold. I hope I am wrong and they reach an agreement in the next 2 weeks given that these deals are often done at the last minute.  But if I were a betting man (and I am not) I would be betting we don't reach an agreement at least before the season starts.

If you are analyzing DG's behavior, then you know the outcome already.

He values KK's ability, production, and clean record.  He knows that KK brings something to the table that not many men walking this Earth can bring, he wants to extend KK and make sure that we aren't grooming players for other teams to poach....however, he is a true team first guy that will not break the bank for 1 player.

I prefer DG's approach vs Hurney's approach so far.  We are looking at becoming a consistent winner, something that we have never been before in our history.  We are set up, barring major injuries to be a "Patriots" like team for quite a while.  I want that, I want as many cracks at a Lombardi as possible.

IMO, paying KK Suh type money will hurt this team long term....now I'm not here saying that KK is asking that...but how do we know?

[panthers55]

2 hours ago, thefuzz said:

If you are analyzing DG's behavior, then you know the outcome already.

He values KK's ability, production, and clean record.  He knows that KK brings something to the table that not many men walking this Earth can bring, he wants to extend KK and make sure that we aren't grooming players for other teams to poach....however, he is a true team first guy that will not break the bank for 1 player.

I prefer DG's approach vs Hurney's approach so far.  We are looking at becoming a consistent winner, something that we have never been before in our history.  We are set up, barring major injuries to be a "Patriots" like team for quite a while.  I want that, I want as many cracks at a Lombardi as possible.

IMO, paying KK Suh type money will hurt this team long term....now I'm not here saying that KK is asking that...but how do we know?

You love to use extremes to try and prove a point but no one is saying Gettleman should be like Hurney or pay him Suh money.  Those are your words not mine.  I said KK would likely play for top 3 money which is not Suh money which is a ridiculous 19 million a year.  But number 2 money-Dareus,  is 15.8 million and third is Gerald McCoy which is 13.6 million.  Fourth is Atkins at 10.6.  So I think that somewhere between 10.6 and 13.6 is where it should be.  The question is whether low ball Gettleman is offering in that range.  If KK turns down 12-13 million then we should wait until after the season and can tag him for between 13-14 million.  But I dont agree that paying KK 12-13 million a year wont hurt the team long term and will be more likely to assure that the defensive line will be good for the next 5 or 6 years so we can make those cracks at the Lombardi. Particularly when the cap is likely to go up another 10 million between this year and next and we have 30 million of cap room already.  I know not everyone will be under contract but next year our projected cap room will be almost 50 million.  And that assumes no increase and no roll over from this year.