Don't Be Surprised if Jonathan Stewart is Traded Soon (1 Viewer)

[cstu]

Reasonable points on the salary cap situation going forward, but Stewart and Tolbert don't cost much this year (or in the future for Tolbert). I'm sure the team is focusing on taking another step forward this year, and if it means having three high quality RBs, I imagine they'll go forward with it. As mentioned, if there is a big need elsewhere, then maybe they'll consider moving one of them.

They won 6 games last year and 2 the year before that. Last year, their defense was ranked 27th in points allowed and 28th in yards allowed. I don't follow the Panthers closely, but it sure looks to me like there is a big need elsewhere. On defense.Last year, without Tolbert, they were 3rd in rushing yards and 1st in rushing TDs. If you ranked all of the Panthers' team needs going into this offseason, RB should have been last on the list.

Unless they have a plan to trade one of them...

It's next year that is the big question - depends on how things progress this year, but the IMO if all three stick this year and DeAngelo doesn't prove his contract, they let DeAngelo go next year and re-sign Stewart.

How much of a cap hit will it be to cut Deangelo after this season? The contract he signed last year included a $16M signing bonus, which should have been prorated at $3.2M per year (5 year contract) for cap purposes. That means after this year, there will still be $9.6M of that bonus that has not yet hit the cap, not including any other guarantees or incentives. Seems like a pretty steep hit to cut him or trade him, even after this season.7/29/2011: Signed a five-year, $43 million contract. The deal contains $21 million guaranteed, including a $16 million signing bonus and $5 million of Williams' second-year base salary. 2012: $5.25 million, 2013: $4.75 million, 2014: $5.75 million, 2015: $6.75 million, 2016: Free Agent

The cap hit for cutting him next year will be $4.85M ($9.6M - $4.75M 2013 salary) and $650k ($6.4M - $5.75M 2014 salary) in 2014. Looks like the plan is to part ways with Deangelo after 2014 if his play drops off.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Reasonable points on the salary cap situation going forward, but Stewart and Tolbert don't cost much this year (or in the future for Tolbert). I'm sure the team is focusing on taking another step forward this year, and if it means having three high quality RBs, I imagine they'll go forward with it. As mentioned, if there is a big need elsewhere, then maybe they'll consider moving one of them.

They won 6 games last year and 2 the year before that. Last year, their defense was ranked 27th in points allowed and 28th in yards allowed. I don't follow the Panthers closely, but it sure looks to me like there is a big need elsewhere. On defense.Last year, without Tolbert, they were 3rd in rushing yards and 1st in rushing TDs. If you ranked all of the Panthers' team needs going into this offseason, RB should have been last on the list.

Unless they have a plan to trade one of them...

It's next year that is the big question - depends on how things progress this year, but the IMO if all three stick this year and DeAngelo doesn't prove his contract, they let DeAngelo go next year and re-sign Stewart.

How much of a cap hit will it be to cut Deangelo after this season? The contract he signed last year included a $16M signing bonus, which should have been prorated at $3.2M per year (5 year contract) for cap purposes. That means after this year, there will still be $9.6M of that bonus that has not yet hit the cap, not including any other guarantees or incentives. Seems like a pretty steep hit to cut him or trade him, even after this season.7/29/2011: Signed a five-year, $43 million contract. The deal contains $21 million guaranteed, including a $16 million signing bonus and $5 million of Williams' second-year base salary. 2012: $5.25 million, 2013: $4.75 million, 2014: $5.75 million, 2015: $6.75 million, 2016: Free Agent

The cap hit for cutting him next year will be $4.85M ($9.6M - $4.75M 2013 salary) and $650k ($6.4M - $5.75M 2014 salary) in 2014. Looks like the plan is to part ways with Deangelo after 2014 if his play drops off.

Dunno about that cap hit. Guess it depends on your definition of "hit" (or I am misunderstanding how the pro-rating works, which is also possible). For 2013, his salary would be 4.75M, and the pro-rated portion of his signing bonus would be 3.2M, so his net cap cost if he's with the team would be about 8M. And if he's released he has zero salary, but the remainder of his bonus, 9.6M, gets pushed into 2013 and assigned to that cap (that's what I was calling his "cap hit", but is probably more accurately described as "dead money"). So the net difference is only about 1M for 2013 if he really got cut prior to 2013. So from that standpoint, it is certainly possible the "hit" could be taken without serious ramifications in terms of having enough cap space to run the team.But my point was that just from a business management standpoint, it would be very difficult for a GM to say that a decision he made just a year or two ago was so bad he'd literally rather throw away 9.6M of the owner's money than just let the guy simply play out another year of his contract. I wouldn't think you'd get too many passes on mistakes like that.

 

[cstu]

Reasonable points on the salary cap situation going forward, but Stewart and Tolbert don't cost much this year (or in the future for Tolbert). I'm sure the team is focusing on taking another step forward this year, and if it means having three high quality RBs, I imagine they'll go forward with it. As mentioned, if there is a big need elsewhere, then maybe they'll consider moving one of them.

They won 6 games last year and 2 the year before that. Last year, their defense was ranked 27th in points allowed and 28th in yards allowed. I don't follow the Panthers closely, but it sure looks to me like there is a big need elsewhere. On defense.Last year, without Tolbert, they were 3rd in rushing yards and 1st in rushing TDs. If you ranked all of the Panthers' team needs going into this offseason, RB should have been last on the list.

Unless they have a plan to trade one of them...

It's next year that is the big question - depends on how things progress this year, but the IMO if all three stick this year and DeAngelo doesn't prove his contract, they let DeAngelo go next year and re-sign Stewart.

How much of a cap hit will it be to cut Deangelo after this season? The contract he signed last year included a $16M signing bonus, which should have been prorated at $3.2M per year (5 year contract) for cap purposes. That means after this year, there will still be $9.6M of that bonus that has not yet hit the cap, not including any other guarantees or incentives. Seems like a pretty steep hit to cut him or trade him, even after this season.7/29/2011: Signed a five-year, $43 million contract. The deal contains $21 million guaranteed, including a $16 million signing bonus and $5 million of Williams' second-year base salary. 2012: $5.25 million, 2013: $4.75 million, 2014: $5.75 million, 2015: $6.75 million, 2016: Free Agent

The cap hit for cutting him next year will be $4.85M ($9.6M - $4.75M 2013 salary) and $650k ($6.4M - $5.75M 2014 salary) in 2014. Looks like the plan is to part ways with Deangelo after 2014 if his play drops off.

Dunno about that cap hit. Guess it depends on your definition of "hit" (or I am misunderstanding how the pro-rating works, which is also possible). For 2013, his salary would be 4.75M, and the pro-rated portion of his signing bonus would be 3.2M, so his net cap cost if he's with the team would be about 8M. And if he's released he has zero salary, but the remainder of his bonus, 9.6M, gets pushed into 2013 and assigned to that cap (that's what I was calling his "cap hit", but is probably more accurately described as "dead money"). So the net difference is only about 1M for 2013 if he really got cut prior to 2013. So from that standpoint, it is certainly possible the "hit" could be taken without serious ramifications in terms of having enough cap space to run the team.But my point was that just from a business management standpoint, it would be very difficult for a GM to say that a decision he made just a year or two ago was so bad he'd literally rather throw away 9.6M of the owner's money than just let the guy simply play out another year of his contract. I wouldn't think you'd get too many passes on mistakes like that.

You're right, it's $9.6M in dead money but the overall effect on the cap would be $4.85M. I look at it two different ways - in terms of the total contract and the effect on current year's cap. In terms of effect on the 2013 cap, that's correct that the cap 'hit' for the year would be an extra $1.65M ($9.6M - $7.95M allocated for 2013).

Edit: I completely agree with the bolded. For Deangelo's example I think it would be difficult to decide to lose $1.6M in cap space to not have him play if he's healthy and effective.

 

[smashingsilver]

Reasonable points on the salary cap situation going forward, but Stewart and Tolbert don't cost much this year (or in the future for Tolbert). I'm sure the team is focusing on taking another step forward this year, and if it means having three high quality RBs, I imagine they'll go forward with it. As mentioned, if there is a big need elsewhere, then maybe they'll consider moving one of them.

They won 6 games last year and 2 the year before that. Last year, their defense was ranked 27th in points allowed and 28th in yards allowed. I don't follow the Panthers closely, but it sure looks to me like there is a big need elsewhere. On defense.Last year, without Tolbert, they were 3rd in rushing yards and 1st in rushing TDs. If you ranked all of the Panthers' team needs going into this offseason, RB should have been last on the list.

Unless they have a plan to trade one of them...

It's next year that is the big question - depends on how things progress this year, but the IMO if all three stick this year and DeAngelo doesn't prove his contract, they let DeAngelo go next year and re-sign Stewart.

How much of a cap hit will it be to cut Deangelo after this season? The contract he signed last year included a $16M signing bonus, which should have been prorated at $3.2M per year (5 year contract) for cap purposes. That means after this year, there will still be $9.6M of that bonus that has not yet hit the cap, not including any other guarantees or incentives. Seems like a pretty steep hit to cut him or trade him, even after this season.7/29/2011: Signed a five-year, $43 million contract. The deal contains $21 million guaranteed, including a $16 million signing bonus and $5 million of Williams' second-year base salary. 2012: $5.25 million, 2013: $4.75 million, 2014: $5.75 million, 2015: $6.75 million, 2016: Free Agent

The cap hit for cutting him next year will be $4.85M ($9.6M - $4.75M 2013 salary) and $650k ($6.4M - $5.75M 2014 salary) in 2014. Looks like the plan is to part ways with Deangelo after 2014 if his play drops off.

Dunno about that cap hit. Guess it depends on your definition of "hit" (or I am misunderstanding how the pro-rating works, which is also possible). For 2013, his salary would be 4.75M, and the pro-rated portion of his signing bonus would be 3.2M, so his net cap cost if he's with the team would be about 8M. And if he's released he has zero salary, but the remainder of his bonus, 9.6M, gets pushed into 2013 and assigned to that cap (that's what I was calling his "cap hit", but is probably more accurately described as "dead money"). So the net difference is only about 1M for 2013 if he really got cut prior to 2013. So from that standpoint, it is certainly possible the "hit" could be taken without serious ramifications in terms of having enough cap space to run the team.But my point was that just from a business management standpoint, it would be very difficult for a GM to say that a decision he made just a year or two ago was so bad he'd literally rather throw away 9.6M of the owner's money than just let the guy simply play out another year of his contract. I wouldn't think you'd get too many passes on mistakes like that.

You're right, it's $9.6M in dead money but the overall effect on the cap would be $4.85M. I look at it two different ways - in terms of the total contract and the effect on current year's cap. In terms of effect on the 2013 cap, that's correct that the cap 'hit' for the year would be an extra $1.65M ($9.6M - $7.95M allocated for 2013).

Edit: I completely agree with the bolded. For Deangelo's example I think it would be difficult to decide to lose $1.6M in cap space to not have him play if he's healthy and effective.

The bolded is the key portion. Actually, he probably needs to be more than just "effective" to keep his job. While the $1.6M extra cap hit is a factor, not having to pay $5M in salary for an average, 30 yr old RB is probably a bigger one, especially if Stewart is a pending FA in the spring of 2013. After considering all of the posts in this thread, I think the most likely outcome is that Carolina keeps all three RBs this year (unless they get a very good trade offer for Stewart), re-signs Stewart, and then cuts DeAngelo next year.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Reasonable points on the salary cap situation going forward, but Stewart and Tolbert don't cost much this year (or in the future for Tolbert). I'm sure the team is focusing on taking another step forward this year, and if it means having three high quality RBs, I imagine they'll go forward with it. As mentioned, if there is a big need elsewhere, then maybe they'll consider moving one of them.

They won 6 games last year and 2 the year before that. Last year, their defense was ranked 27th in points allowed and 28th in yards allowed. I don't follow the Panthers closely, but it sure looks to me like there is a big need elsewhere. On defense.Last year, without Tolbert, they were 3rd in rushing yards and 1st in rushing TDs. If you ranked all of the Panthers' team needs going into this offseason, RB should have been last on the list.

Unless they have a plan to trade one of them...

It's next year that is the big question - depends on how things progress this year, but the IMO if all three stick this year and DeAngelo doesn't prove his contract, they let DeAngelo go next year and re-sign Stewart.

How much of a cap hit will it be to cut Deangelo after this season? The contract he signed last year included a $16M signing bonus, which should have been prorated at $3.2M per year (5 year contract) for cap purposes. That means after this year, there will still be $9.6M of that bonus that has not yet hit the cap, not including any other guarantees or incentives. Seems like a pretty steep hit to cut him or trade him, even after this season.7/29/2011: Signed a five-year, $43 million contract. The deal contains $21 million guaranteed, including a $16 million signing bonus and $5 million of Williams' second-year base salary. 2012: $5.25 million, 2013: $4.75 million, 2014: $5.75 million, 2015: $6.75 million, 2016: Free Agent

The cap hit for cutting him next year will be $4.85M ($9.6M - $4.75M 2013 salary) and $650k ($6.4M - $5.75M 2014 salary) in 2014. Looks like the plan is to part ways with Deangelo after 2014 if his play drops off.

Dunno about that cap hit. Guess it depends on your definition of "hit" (or I am misunderstanding how the pro-rating works, which is also possible). For 2013, his salary would be 4.75M, and the pro-rated portion of his signing bonus would be 3.2M, so his net cap cost if he's with the team would be about 8M. And if he's released he has zero salary, but the remainder of his bonus, 9.6M, gets pushed into 2013 and assigned to that cap (that's what I was calling his "cap hit", but is probably more accurately described as "dead money"). So the net difference is only about 1M for 2013 if he really got cut prior to 2013. So from that standpoint, it is certainly possible the "hit" could be taken without serious ramifications in terms of having enough cap space to run the team.But my point was that just from a business management standpoint, it would be very difficult for a GM to say that a decision he made just a year or two ago was so bad he'd literally rather throw away 9.6M of the owner's money than just let the guy simply play out another year of his contract. I wouldn't think you'd get too many passes on mistakes like that.

You're right, it's $9.6M in dead money but the overall effect on the cap would be $4.85M. I look at it two different ways - in terms of the total contract and the effect on current year's cap. In terms of effect on the 2013 cap, that's correct that the cap 'hit' for the year would be an extra $1.65M ($9.6M - $7.95M allocated for 2013).

Edit: I completely agree with the bolded. For Deangelo's example I think it would be difficult to decide to lose $1.6M in cap space to not have him play if he's healthy and effective.

The bolded is the key portion. Actually, he probably needs to be more than just "effective" to keep his job. While the $1.6M extra cap hit is a factor, not having to pay $5M in salary for an average, 30 yr old RB is probably a bigger one, especially if Stewart is a pending FA in the spring of 2013. After considering all of the posts in this thread, I think the most likely outcome is that Carolina keeps all three RBs this year (unless they get a very good trade offer for Stewart), re-signs Stewart, and then cuts DeAngelo next year.

I'm just not buying that scenario. First of all, unless he drops off a cliff ability wise for some strange reason, he'll still be a very good runner (career 5.1 avg is incredible and better than Stewart's excellent 4.8, and his 5.4 last year was the same as Stewart's). And if they don't pay Williams his 5M (which would represent a 3M "discount" considering they thought he was worth 8M/year as of last year), they'll just have to pay someone else even more - on TOP of the vast money they will have already committed to Williams (in terms of 2013 cap space AND real money already spent). If they re-sign Stewart, the MINIMUM he will count against the cap in 2013 is the pro-rated portion of his signing bonus (assuming it is an extremely back-loaded deal), which would be in the neighborhood of 4M+. Then add 1.5M for Tolbert, and probably another 1M or so for whoever else is on the roster. Add that to 9.6M Williams will cost against the cap, and you have 16M worth of cap space at one (traditionally fairy cheap) position. And again that assumes Stewart makes close to nothing for base salary in 2013. For that to make ANY kind of sense, the team has to really believe Stewart is a ton better than Williams. And then Hurney has to go to Richardson and tell him he'd like to sign another RB for another 21M guaranteed when they just signed the last guy to a mega-deal and then let him walk away with all of the bonus money after two years. That's going to be a rough conversation.In 2014 or 2015 (as his base salary escalates, and his pro-rated signing bonus cost drops), I can totally see dropping Williams being a more viable option, but 2012 is pointless and 2013 would be very painful.

 

[stbugs]

Green Bay would be a great football move. I don't think they would improve his fantasy stock much though.

I completely disagree. First of all, while Rodgers can score on the ground, Newton and Tolbert had 24 rushing TDs last year, 24. Ignoring splitting carries and receptions with Williams and Tolbert, just having the opportunity to score more TDs is huge.That said, unlike in Carolina, I think Stewart would be the clear #1 and get the bulk of the work. I would say that, barring any injury, he would be a lock for the top 10. Ryan Grant was successful with Rodgers and talent wise, Stewart is far better than Starks/Grant. With defenses keying on Rodgers, I cannot imagine a scenario where Stewart isn't averaging better than the close to 4ypc that Starks/Grant have been averaging the past couple years.Pretty sure you are a Packers fan and if I were you I would love Stewart there. Not that GB has trouble scoring, but Stewart would make Rodgers even more dangerous and unpredictable.

 

[Sabertooth]

Green Bay would be a great football move. I don't think they would improve his fantasy stock much though.

I completely disagree. First of all, while Rodgers can score on the ground, Newton and Tolbert had 24 rushing TDs last year, 24. Ignoring splitting carries and receptions with Williams and Tolbert, just having the opportunity to score more TDs is huge.That said, unlike in Carolina, I think Stewart would be the clear #1 and get the bulk of the work. I would say that, barring any injury, he would be a lock for the top 10. Ryan Grant was successful with Rodgers and talent wise, Stewart is far better than Starks/Grant. With defenses keying on Rodgers, I cannot imagine a scenario where Stewart isn't averaging better than the close to 4ypc that Starks/Grant have been averaging the past couple years.Pretty sure you are a Packers fan and if I were you I would love Stewart there. Not that GB has trouble scoring, but Stewart would make Rodgers even more dangerous and unpredictable.

Oh I do want him in Green Bay no doubt. And now that I think about it you make some great points. He's got enough talent to demand touches. Whereas Starks and Grant just don't warrant taking the ball out of Jordy and Jennings' hands.

 

[Banger]

Green Bay would be a great football move. I don't think they would improve his fantasy stock much though.

I completely disagree. First of all, while Rodgers can score on the ground, Newton and Tolbert had 24 rushing TDs last year, 24. Ignoring splitting carries and receptions with Williams and Tolbert, just having the opportunity to score more TDs is huge.That said, unlike in Carolina, I think Stewart would be the clear #1 and get the bulk of the work. I would say that, barring any injury, he would be a lock for the top 10. Ryan Grant was successful with Rodgers and talent wise, Stewart is far better than Starks/Grant. With defenses keying on Rodgers, I cannot imagine a scenario where Stewart isn't averaging better than the close to 4ypc that Starks/Grant have been averaging the past couple years.Pretty sure you are a Packers fan and if I were you I would love Stewart there. Not that GB has trouble scoring, but Stewart would make Rodgers even more dangerous and unpredictable.

Oh I do want him in Green Bay no doubt. And now that I think about it you make some great points. He's got enough talent to demand touches. Whereas Starks and Grant just don't warrant taking the ball out of Jordy and Jennings' hands.

doesn't really seem like a GB move though...

 

[Sabertooth]

Green Bay would be a great football move. I don't think they would improve his fantasy stock much though.

I completely disagree. First of all, while Rodgers can score on the ground, Newton and Tolbert had 24 rushing TDs last year, 24. Ignoring splitting carries and receptions with Williams and Tolbert, just having the opportunity to score more TDs is huge.That said, unlike in Carolina, I think Stewart would be the clear #1 and get the bulk of the work. I would say that, barring any injury, he would be a lock for the top 10. Ryan Grant was successful with Rodgers and talent wise, Stewart is far better than Starks/Grant. With defenses keying on Rodgers, I cannot imagine a scenario where Stewart isn't averaging better than the close to 4ypc that Starks/Grant have been averaging the past couple years.Pretty sure you are a Packers fan and if I were you I would love Stewart there. Not that GB has trouble scoring, but Stewart would make Rodgers even more dangerous and unpredictable.

Oh I do want him in Green Bay no doubt. And now that I think about it you make some great points. He's got enough talent to demand touches. Whereas Starks and Grant just don't warrant taking the ball out of Jordy and Jennings' hands.

doesn't really seem like a GB move though...

 

[Mister CIA]

Speaking as a Stewart owner, the more I think about it, the more comfortable I become at the possibility of Stewart becoming/remaining 1A in very crowded situation. I love DeAngelo, but I expect his production to fade this year (he'll spike high two or three weeks is my guess). Through four seasons, Stewart has always been good for 180 touches, and I'd go so far as to set his floor at 200 touches in 2012, and 300 touches would not surprise me in the least.

"Objects in rear-view mirror are smaller than they appear." Put me down for 1400 total yards and 10 TDs.

 

[solorca]

I've been out of the country for the past two weeks, so I just came back to town to this news for the Panthers. At first glance, it looks like a weird move for the Panthers to make, but thinking about how great Tolbert is on special teams, I think that his signing makes a lot more sense. The Panthers need a solid FB and a special team leader (as bad as they were on defense last year, they were even worse on special teams), and he provides both. It just so happens that he's also a pretty damn good RB option as well if needed.

I don't think this is a threat to Jonathan Stewart's position on the team at all, and I would be shocked it they traded him (unless another team throws out an offer that is too good to be true). If anything, I see this as a possibility that Carolina locks up Stewart to a long term deal either this offseason or before he becomes a free agent next year, while cutting Deangelo after this season (the cap hit would be too heavy this year, but I THINK it would be quite a bit less next year).

As a Panthers fan, this move initially took my by surprise, but in actuality it shored up two need positions for the team as a solid FB and Special Teams leader. I'm happy with the move (obviously more from a fan perspective than a fantasy owner, of course)

 

[The Comedian]

I will still be surprised if Jonathan Stewart is Traded Soon.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

Published Tue Mar 27 1:05:57 p.m. PT 2012

(KFFL) The Carolina Panthers reportedly are not looking to trade RB Jonathan Stewart in the offseason.

 

[scott46984]

Looks like the Goodson trade just assured another year of Carolina for Stewart. Yippe.

 

[Shutout]

Speaking as a Stewart owner, the more I think about it, the more comfortable I become at the possibility of Stewart becoming/remaining 1A in very crowded situation. I love DeAngelo, but I expect his production to fade this year (he'll spike high two or three weeks is my guess). Through four seasons, Stewart has always been good for 180 touches, and I'd go so far as to set his floor at 200 touches in 2012, and 300 touches would not surprise me in the least.

"Objects in rear-view mirror are smaller than they appear." Put me down for 1400 total yards and 10 TDs.

Interesting take. I can buy that, although to get to 300 I'm guessing you meam if DWIl got hurt or something? That's pretty much a full time/clear starter load these days.

 

[Buck Stop]

I think Stewart, and to a lesser extent, DeAngelo, are going to have a GREAT year.

Panthers coach Ron Rivera insists Mike Tolbert's primary position will be fullback in Carolina.

"Everybody keeps saying he’s a tailback. But he's a fullback to us," said Rivera. "Because again, we saw how we had used him in San Diego. We just thought this is a guy we’d love to have. ... If you can put an athletic, play-making fullback there, I think it helps you." The Panthers plan to keep the DeAngelo Williams-Jonathan Stewart rotation intact, with Tolbert as a lead blocker and situational third-down back. Tolbert's touches are sure to dwindle in Carolina.

 

[SelenaCat]

Looks like the Goodson trade just assured another year of Carolina for Stewart. Yippe.

Yeah, no way they trade either of them away now unless a rash of RB accidents makes teams desperate enough for a "can't refuse" kind of offer. So much for our pipe dreams of a fantasy-relevant Stewart this year.

 

[pantherclub]

Looks like the Goodson trade just assured another year of Carolina for Stewart. Yippe.

Yeah, no way they trade either of them away now unless a rash of RB accidents makes teams desperate enough for a "can't refuse" kind of offer. So much for our pipe dreams of a fantasy-relevant Stewart this year.

I think they play them all this year, then cut Dwill and give Stewart the longer deal.

 

[matttyl]

Speaking as a Stewart owner, the more I think about it, the more comfortable I become at the possibility of Stewart becoming/remaining 1A in very crowded situation. I love DeAngelo, but I expect his production to fade this year (he'll spike high two or three weeks is my guess). Through four seasons, Stewart has always been good for 180 touches, and I'd go so far as to set his floor at 200 touches in 2012, and 300 touches would not surprise me in the least.

"Objects in rear-view mirror are smaller than they appear." Put me down for 1400 total yards and 10 TDs.

Interesting take. I can buy that, although to get to 300 I'm guessing you meam if DWIl got hurt or something? That's pretty much a full time/clear starter load these days.

I'm not sure of the split of carries/touches and all that....but can we at least assume 2,600+ rushing yards, 28+ rushing TDs, a few receiving TDs, and another 1,000 receiving yards by the RB/FBs to go around between Cam, J Stew, D Will and Tolbert?With the recent news that Tolbert was signed to be primarily a FB, I don't see why J Stew and D Will can't both be very productive fantasy RBs next year. There is enough to go around this year. Long term, J Stew is either the RB to own there or he'll leave next year as be the primary guy on a different team. It may be J Stew's best situation to remain in Carolina if D Will is done in a year.

 

[Tau837]

I think Stewart, and to a lesser extent, DeAngelo, are going to have a GREAT year. Panthers coach Ron Rivera insists Mike Tolbert's primary position will be fullback in Carolina."Everybody keeps saying he’s a tailback. But he's a fullback to us," said Rivera. "Because again, we saw how we had used him in San Diego. We just thought this is a guy we’d love to have. ... If you can put an athletic, play-making fullback there, I think it helps you." The Panthers plan to keep the DeAngelo Williams-Jonathan Stewart rotation intact, with Tolbert as a lead blocker and situational third-down back. Tolbert's touches are sure to dwindle in Carolina.

I didn't follow Carolina closely last year. Did they normally use a fullback in their formations?Aside from that, I don't get them saying they will use him as a situational third-down back. In what situations is Tolbert better than both Stewart and Williams? I don't see it.

 

[Tau837]

I'm not sure of the split of carries/touches and all that....but can we at least assume 2,600+ rushing yards, 28+ rushing TDs, a few receiving TDs, and another 1,000 receiving yards by the RB/FBs to go around between Cam, J Stew, D Will and Tolbert?

No, I don't think those are reasonable assumptions. Last season, Carolina QBs and RBs combined for 2349/26 rushing and 616/1 receiving. You are projecting about a 10% increase in rushing and about a 70% increase in receiving. There is no basis to think their receiving jumps up like that, and it is more likely the rushing goes down by 10% than up by 10%.IMO the right way to estimate this is to break down the offense to estimate the number of touches for each of these guys. When you don't approach it that way, it tends to lead to this kind of overestimating.

 

[matttyl]

I'm not sure of the split of carries/touches and all that....but can we at least assume 2,600+ rushing yards, 28+ rushing TDs, a few receiving TDs, and another 1,000 receiving yards by the RB/FBs to go around between Cam, J Stew, D Will and Tolbert?

No, I don't think those are reasonable assumptions. Last season, Carolina QBs and RBs combined for 2349/26 rushing and 616/1 receiving. You are projecting about a 10% increase in rushing and about a 70% increase in receiving. There is no basis to think their receiving jumps up like that, and it is more likely the rushing goes down by 10% than up by 10%.IMO the right way to estimate this is to break down the offense to estimate the number of touches for each of these guys. When you don't approach it that way, it tends to lead to this kind of overestimating.

Well, the TEs had about 1,000 receiving yards last year, and I don't think Shockey is back (back anywhere for that matter). I see a lot of that going to primarily Tolbert, with maybe some to the other RBs. They won't be going 2 TE as much, but rather substituting one of them for Tolbert in the base offense.

 

[identikit]

I'm not sure of the split of carries/touches and all that....but can we at least assume 2,600+ rushing yards, 28+ rushing TDs, a few receiving TDs, and another 1,000 receiving yards by the RB/FBs to go around between Cam, J Stew, D Will and Tolbert?

No, I don't think those are reasonable assumptions. Last season, Carolina QBs and RBs combined for 2349/26 rushing and 616/1 receiving. You are projecting about a 10% increase in rushing and about a 70% increase in receiving. There is no basis to think their receiving jumps up like that, and it is more likely the rushing goes down by 10% than up by 10%.IMO the right way to estimate this is to break down the offense to estimate the number of touches for each of these guys. When you don't approach it that way, it tends to lead to this kind of overestimating.

Well, the TEs had about 1,000 receiving yards last year, and I don't think Shockey is back (back anywhere for that matter). I see a lot of that going to primarily Tolbert, with maybe some to the other RBs. They won't be going 2 TE as much, but rather substituting one of them for Tolbert in the base offense.

You could be right.Or they just get another TE and do the same thing they've been doing.Shockey's not all that irreplaceable.

 

[Tau837]

I'm not sure of the split of carries/touches and all that....but can we at least assume 2,600+ rushing yards, 28+ rushing TDs, a few receiving TDs, and another 1,000 receiving yards by the RB/FBs to go around between Cam, J Stew, D Will and Tolbert?

No, I don't think those are reasonable assumptions. Last season, Carolina QBs and RBs combined for 2349/26 rushing and 616/1 receiving. You are projecting about a 10% increase in rushing and about a 70% increase in receiving. There is no basis to think their receiving jumps up like that, and it is more likely the rushing goes down by 10% than up by 10%.IMO the right way to estimate this is to break down the offense to estimate the number of touches for each of these guys. When you don't approach it that way, it tends to lead to this kind of overestimating.

Well, the TEs had about 1,000 receiving yards last year, and I don't think Shockey is back (back anywhere for that matter). I see a lot of that going to primarily Tolbert, with maybe some to the other RBs. They won't be going 2 TE as much, but rather substituting one of them for Tolbert in the base offense.

You could be right.Or they just get another TE and do the same thing they've been doing.

Shockey's not all that irreplaceable.

 

[matttyl]

Oh I know that he's not irreplaceable or anything, but he did have like 500 receiving yards in that offense. From what I remember, Carolina played a lot of 12 personnel (1 RB and 2 TEs) last year. They didn't bring in Tolbert to sit him on the bench, he'll be used as the fullback in their primary offense, which I think will go to a more 21 personnel base (2 RB/FBs and 1 TE). I can see close to 1,000 receiving yards between Tolbert, J Stew and D Will - though I think the vast majority of it will be Tolbert's.