CMC and Shaq restructured

[Verge]

5 hours ago, Pup McBarky said:

Didn't Verge practically guarantee that neither Teddy nor Shaq would be on the roster this year? Or am I misremembering?

Yep. The restructure is odd, I will give you that. I was told he was "on the block"

Edited March 10, 2021 by Verge

[grimesgoat]

I don't understand all of the angst.  These moves provide flexibility.  If we don't spend the additional space, we can roll it over to next year.  Meanwhile, if Watson does become a possibility, we'll be able to fit him under our cap.

Oh the humanity.

[TheRumGone]

2 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

In fairness, we could end up being wrong on our takes of this....but this just seems so disturbingly familiar. 

Like @*FreeFua*said hopefully these are moves for some big move ie watson. But that doesn’t seem likely.

[Mr. Scot]

5 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

In fairness, we could end up being wrong on our takes of this....but this just seems so disturbingly familiar. 

Good news, though. The GM who made the "mediocre moves" agrees that this is not something he likes to do.

Fitterer said that between the unusual circumstances of the virus and the team's current cap status, it was necessary to do some things that would be otherwise out of character for him.

So while it might look bad for this season, that's reason to be encouraged about the future.

[SmartyHurney3]

5 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Well then the GM that wrote it must be an absolute moron, right?

Yeah? It was a stupid fuging contract, I said it then, I'm saying it now.

It's weird how being objective is a sin in this shithole of a forum.

That contract along with Shaqs will be remembered as some of Tepper/Rhules worst moves early on. They're what needs to be done to rebuild the Panthers. Throw Hurney under a bus all you want, it's not changing the dumb moves that those two keep piling on. The Panthers should have bottomed out last year and had the 1-2nd pick in the draft along with 2 third comp picks + a 4/5 + 2 6ths, and a fuging load of cap space. Instead they're doing everything thing they can to shoot for 8-8.

[SmartyHurney3]

1 minute ago, SmartyHurney3 said:

Yeah? It was a stupid fuging contract, I said it then, I'm saying it now.

It's weird how being objective is a sin in this shithole of a forum.

That contract along with Shaqs will be remembered as some of Tepper/Rhules worst moves early on. They're what needs to be done to rebuild the Panthers. Throw Hurney under a bus all you want, it's not changing the dumb moves that those two keep piling on. The Panthers should have bottomed out last year and had the 1-2nd pick in the draft along with 2 third comp picks + a 4/5 + 2 6ths, and a fuging load of cap space. Instead they're doing everything thing they can to shoot for 8-8.

*They're not doing what needs to be redone

Since this shithole doesn't allow edits.

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, SmartyHurney3 said:

Yeah? It was a stupid fuging contract, I said it then, I'm saying it now.

It's weird how being objective is a sin in this shithole of a forum.

That contract along with Shaqs will be remembered as some of Tepper/Rhules worst moves early on. They're what needs to be done to rebuild the Panthers. Throw Hurney under a bus all you want, it's not changing the dumb moves that those two keep piling on. The Panthers should have bottomed out last year and had the 1-2nd pick in the draft along with 2 third comp picks + a 4/5 + 2 6ths, and a fuging load of cap space. Instead they're doing everything thing they can to shoot for 8-8.

We like to call it "rebuilding".

[Harbingers]

5 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

It's a critical error to restructure Shaq. Restructuring a player who should be being released is peak Hurney. It's as if he never left.

Makes their deals more trade friendly now though I would assume. 

[top dawg]

34 minutes ago, Harbingers said:

Makes their deals more trade friendly now though I would assume. 

That, and it provides flexibility like @grimesgoatsaid. That's why I'm appropriately keeping my mouth shut...for now.

[BurnNChinn]

55 minutes ago, Verge said:

Yep. The restructure is odd, I will give you that. I was told he was "on the block"

 

9 minutes ago, top dawg said:

That, and it provides flexibility like @grimesgoatsaid. That's why I'm appropriately keeping my mouth shut...for now.

So they are still tradable even with the restructure?

[ForJimmy]

59 minutes ago, Verge said:

Yep. The restructure is odd, I will give you that. I was told he was "on the block"

Any chance it’s a way of trading him while eating some of his salary because it was too high to move him?

[electricbluecats]

2 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

Any chance it’s a way of trading him while eating some of his salary because it was too high to move him?

Nah I'm not sure why people are saying it makes it more tradeable, it's the actually opposite. This signifies they will 100% be here for this season. Since we know they'll be here for 2021, we've agreed to lock in all of their 2021 money to count against the cap ahead of time. This creates more potentially dead money, so you are giving up the flexibility to cut or trade the player in exchange for the ability to spread that cap charge out over the life of the contract. And given this is the first time the cap has ever dropped, it's a smart move. Every $1 saved this year is worth more than a $1 paid in the future as you're saving a higher percentage of the cap today than what it'll end up being in 2022, 2023, etc.  

Bonus money is how rich owners can get a leg up on the less financially powerful franchises. Not everyone can afford to pay out massive percentages of the contract value at signing. The league balances this is by saying "every penny that you give a player in signing bonus must count against your cap eventually." Otherwise the cash-rich teams would massively front-load huge bonuses and then trade these players to poorer teams who wouldn't have to pay the actual cash to the players, effectively circumventing the salary cap. That's the reasoning for "dead money" existing, it's all a competitive balance measure. 

[ForJimmy]

9 minutes ago, electricbluecats said:

Nah I'm not sure why people are saying it makes it more tradeable, it's the actually opposite. This signifies they will 100% be here for this season. Since we know they'll be here for 2021, we've agreed to lock in all of their 2021 money to count against the cap ahead of time. This creates more potentially dead money, so you are giving up the flexibility to cut or trade the player in exchange for the ability to spread that cap charge out over the life of the contract. And given this is the first time the cap has ever dropped, it's a smart move. Every $1 saved this year is worth more than a $1 paid in the future as you're saving a higher percentage of the cap today than what it'll end up being in 2022, 2023, etc.  

Bonus money is how rich owners can get a leg up on the less financially powerful franchises. Not everyone can afford to pay out massive percentages of the contract value at signing. The league balances this is by saying "every penny that you give a player in signing bonus must count against your cap eventually." Otherwise the cash-rich teams would massively front-load huge bonuses and then trade these players to poorer teams who wouldn't have to pay the actual cash to the players, effectively circumventing the salary cap. That's the reasoning for "dead money" existing, it's all a competitive balance measure. 

I guess my thought process (though now proven wrong) was he isn’t making any more total and we would be eating dead money if he is traded which means the team taking him would be responsible for his salary minus the dead money we are eating. This would be assuming a team wanted to give up capital for him, but stated his salary was too high.

[electricbluecats]

1 minute ago, ForJimmy said:

I guess my thought process (though now proven wrong) was he isn’t making any more total and we would be eating dead money if he is traded which means the team taking him would be responsible for his salary minus the dead money we are eating. This would be assuming a team wanted to give up capital for him, but stated his salary was too high.

I agree in general, that thought process isn't wrong and was definitely the case before the restructure. Today's move made it $9m more expensive to cut or trade so the team has decided not to go in that direction.