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!

     

David Newton thinks Torrey trade really worked out


RumHam

Recommended Posts

I love the trade.

Veteran deep threat to replace Ginn and mentor Curtis Samuel on the speedster role while also giving DJ Moore somebody that he can share something in common with (UMD  alumni) to assist with his development.

We got rid of Worley, who then was cut by the Eagles.

Folks are criticizing him for not being a deep threat, but at the same time we aren't calling the deep shots. People were saying that Torrey is good for two routes, fly and comeback. After last week, I saw posters say that he was only good at deep dig routes and drags.

He's never going to get the credit that he is due and that's fine. He was brought in for a reason, and that was to mentor while also giving us dependability in regards to execution. He's had some hiccups, but nowhere near the type of hiccups that we saw from DJ Moore.

His signing also led us to the signing of Eric Reid which while it isn't what some people were expecting, it IS better than Colin Jones getting starts outside of the Buffalo nickel position (which I would be more comfortable having Shaq play than Jones).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, AU-panther said:

Most people don't realize that the vast majority of NFL rosters are made up of guys making less than $1,000,000.  Anybody making more than $5,000,000 is really one of your "big money" guys.

Think about it this way.  If I told anyone on this forum that they could build a roster from scratch but they can only have 10 players that make more than $5m a year.  Would they sign Smith?

I think sometimes GMs are more comfortable paying these 3-8m salaries than they are paying really huge money, >$10m, to really good players.  When if fact a lot of these 3-8m guys give you replacement level production.  

Some people say "its only $4m" but if you can get that same production for $800k, that is substantial, especially when you multiply it by several players.  That allows you to sign that expensive player that actually does give elite production.

 

Agreed.

The idea behind trading for Smith was to get a deep threat. Instead, he's only been effective in short to medium routes. We already had guys who could do that, and they weren't making five million dollars.

What I think most people consider the bigger issue right now is that Smith is playing ahead of more talented options, receivers who could not only be a legitimate deep threat, and equally more dangerous to take the ball even on a short route and run for a greater gain.

Defenses have caught on to the fact that we're not getting it downfield. I seriously doubt that changes if Smith remains the starter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Agreed.

The idea behind trading for Smith was to get a deep threat. Instead, he's only been effective in short to medium routes. We already had guys who could do that, and they weren't making five million dollars.

What I think most people consider the bigger issue right now is that Smith is playing ahead of more talented options, receivers who could not only be a legitimate deep threat, and equally more dangerous to take the ball even on a short route and run for a greater gain.

Defenses have caught on to the fact that we're not getting it downfield. I seriously doubt that changes if Smith remains the starter.

"effective" is relative.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/player/_/id/14032/torrey-smith

12 catches for 110 yards?

On pace for less than 400 yards?

10th highest cap hit on the team

Could be taking snaps from younger guys.  What develops players more, a vet in the WR room? or more snaps?

Every off season people complain when we don't sign proven vets, but then when the season gets going the same people are calling for the younger guys.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, pantherclaw said:

Lol. And you still don't understand it. 

Please explain then. You want to test your knowledge, or lack there of. You are the one acting like it doesn’t exist. Dazzle us. Tell me exactly what I don’t understand? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • i think i go in the opposite direction of most. my ideal retirement is living in some old downtown area in a flat above some shop or something.  life out in the country was just something i got real tired of. My kids actually miss some of living out there, which i understand. that was where they grew up for the most part. 40 acres with a 2.5 acre pond. it was beautiful, but also way too much (and too expensive) for me to keep up with. 
    • FLASHBACK: I remember back when ESPN was just starting--he was their anchor.  They used to show stuff like Rodeo and field hockey--I remember laughing when he went to a commercial mocking a cycling competition in Utah (or something similar--I made that up) and I laughed.  I told my dad, "We may have us a new anchor when we get back from commercial."  When they came back from commercial, Berman was looking very serious and he said, "Any comments by me do not reflect the views of ESPN....The men and women who cycle are dedicated athletes and we are honored to shine light on their sport." (Paraphrasing).  Dad laughed hysterically. My first memory of him--and that was like 1980.
    • Might not have a team without them. Although that probably applies to the Panthers, too.
×
×
  • Create New...