Panthers uneasy with Gano

[TheRumGone]

2 hours ago, TN05 said:

So we missed an average of three points a year.

Damning evidence Gano sucks, really.

Context of the missed field goals matter as well. I’m not a gano hater though but this injury is not good.

[Waldo]

If Gano isn't healthy it doesn't matter, he's cut or IRed.

If kickers are close, take the cheaper and more available one. Gano lost a lot of value when kickoffs were nerfed.

[SBiii]

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

You actually just torpedoed your own position with that argument.

Remember, there's a huge difference in salary between the two. I'd have to look back at the exact numbers but I think it's in the range of five times as much. This would put the Panthers paying five times the salary to someone with only a 1% difference in effectiveness. 

That's as clear an argument as any that the Panthers should have kept Butker over Gano.

The salary is a sunk cost!  It doesn't matter!

Sure, given perfect 20/20 hindsight Butker's production comes cheaper than Gano's, that's undeniable....

....but that ship has sailed. 

[SBiii]

If Gano is traded to the Bears and Slye ends up with the yips...

...then what?

[Mr. Scot]

46 minutes ago, SBiii said:

The salary is a sunk cost!  It doesn't matter!

Sure, given perfect 20/20 hindsight Butker's production comes cheaper than Gano's, that's undeniable....

....but that ship has sailed. 

You've really latched onto that phrase "sunk cost". It's in an awful lot of your posts, so I'm guessing you believe it makes an effective argument.

It really doesn't.

Saying that we can't do anything about a mistake it was already made does nothing to argue for making that same mistake again.

[Mr. Scot]

33 minutes ago, SBiii said:

If Gano is traded to the Bears and Slye ends up with the yips...

...then what?

Nobody is trading for Gano.

[SBiii]

36 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

You've really latched onto that phrase "sunk cost". It's in an awful lot of your posts, so I'm guessing you believe it makes an effective argument.

It really doesn't.

Saying that we can't do anything about a mistake it was already made does nothing to argue for making that same mistake again.

Are you familiar with the concept?  Sunk costs that is....

A decision was made based on the information available a the time.  It was a rational and logical decision. 

If we get rid of Gano and Slye's yips show up in the regular season -- what's your solution?

If you could get Gano for the same price as Slye -- who would you choose?

[Peon Awesome]

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

Nobody is trading for Gano.

Gano should actually be a more attractive trade chip than you think. We paid his guarantees and are responsible for that part of his contract whether he plays for us or someone else. Whoever trades for him would be paying him at a non-guaranteed 3 year $8 million contract. You don't think a kicker needy team wouldn't happily give up a 6th or 7th at least if he can pass a physical for them?

[Mr. Scot]

39 minutes ago, Peon Awesome said:

Gano should actually be a more attractive trade chip than you think. We paid his guarantees and are responsible for that part of his contract whether he plays for us or someone else. Whoever trades for him would be paying him at a non-guaranteed 3 year $8 million contract. You don't think a kicker needy team wouldn't happily give up a 6th or 7th at least if he can pass a physical for them?

I think a kicker needy team would prefer having someone who's actually healthy enough to kick.

[Mr. Scot]

4 hours ago, SBiii said:

Are you familiar with the concept?  Sunk costs that is....

A decision was made based on the information available a the time.  It was a rational and logical decision. 

If we get rid of Gano and Slye's yips show up in the regular season -- what's your solution?

If you could get Gano for the same price as Slye -- who would you choose?

I'm familiar with the concept. That's how I know you're misusing it.

Basically you're trying to use that notion to negate the salary cap argument because you know the facts are against you in that department.

You're failing.

As to your question of who I would choose, first off that's not possible. But second, unless you can de-age Gano about ten years, I'm going with Slye.

Perhaps you should try to nullify the age difference between the two of them as well. You could attribute it to "sunk years".

[MasterAwesome]

18 hours ago, ellis said:

You shouldn’t miss 12 PAT’s in four years. 

I know they’re longer now, but nobody has missed more.

 

18 hours ago, ellis said:

That’s not a bias. That’s a fact.

 

8 hours ago, mjligon said:

How is pointing out that Gano missed 12 extra points in 4 years, more than any other kicker in the league, a bias? 

That’s cold hard facts @SBiiicrawl back into your hole

First off, that’s just flat out wrong lol. Gano isn’t even the Panthers’ kicker to have missed the most XPs in the last 4 years...that belongs to Chandler Catanzaro who closed out our year last season. He has missed 14 in the last 4 years, yet even HE doesn’t have the most misses in that time frame...that’s Jason Myers with 15.

But as far as your biases go, your apparent  bias is in the way you framed that statistical snapshot. Most misses in the last 4 years? Who, in good faith, would ever push absolute numbers rather than percentages? Any statistician or even anyone with any education in statistics would laugh you off if they heard you try and use absolute numbers to prove a point. This is going to virtually eliminate from contention (or at least largely favor) those kickers who haven’t even played the last 4 seasons.

If you take Gano’s XP percentages over the last 4 years, is he great? Hell no...he’s 39 of 57 which puts him in the bottom third of the league. But it’s far from the sensationalism of you painting him as the worst XP kicker of the last 4 years.

That being said...I’m 100% on board with the plan to IR Gano and cut him next year if Slye has a good season. He has had a hell of a preseason so far.

[SBiii]

6 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'm familiar with the concept. That's how I know you're misusing it.

Basically you're trying to use that notion to negate the salary cap argument because you know the facts are against you in that department.

You're failing.

As to your question of who I would choose, first off that's not possible. But second, unless you can de-age Gano about ten years, I'm going with Slye.

Perhaps you should try to nullify the age difference between the two of them as well. You could attribute it to "sunk years".

You may have heard the term before but clearly you do not understand the nuances of the concept. 

As for the salary cap, do you support Marty Hurney?  If so, why do you think he inked Gano to the new deal?

Why is it "not possible" for you to make a choice?  Sure appears you did.

The language in the last part of your post willy nilly but what I think you are saying is if Gano & Slye were both starting from square-1 today, and would cost the same amount of money no matter what....

....you would take Slye.

Is this true?  If so, why?

If Slye is hired and fails, what's your fall-back plan?

Thanks for your input.

Cheers mate.

 

[SBiii]

.

 

[The Huddler]

On 8/27/2019 at 10:58 AM, Jeremy Igo said:

Slye has shown he is a NFL kicker. We are extremely lucky to have found him. Other teams are wishing they did right now