Gantt believes Wharton may be at guard

...based on his $6 mil payday v/s a $7 mil or greater payday.

I disagree on the theory. I think that, as a starting tackle, they weren't going to go into this trying to give a hometown discount AND a discount for guard. Hell, the guard market's the ridiculously overblown market, I could see paying $7 mil for a top tackle. All that'd prove is that the difference between G and T is as negligible monetarily as it's treated in the franchise tag.

At any rate, he could still be a guard, and we could have sold him on that based on a big payday, but the payday could've been bigger. If he'd have stayed out, another month and he'd be the only young starting LT on the market, and better believe that's a higher payday than "I can say in Carolina and make less money as a guard".



I believe the guard idea is an optimistic one. I like that forethought, and in this scheme, maybe he could do it. It'd be a way, including a 1st round OT, to improve us. But I don't believe that's why we just sunk $35 mil into a guy we've wanted to keep at tackle, even in 04 when we had to move him.

 

He says it's Wahle money inflated for 2008. Why would they pay Wahle money for a guard not as highly regarded as Wahle. It doesn't make sense.

 

actually I'd believe the Wahle deal would be much higher if adjusted. If he got $5 mil (?) in 2005, guards were already getting $7 mil in 2007, compared to adjusting upward $1 mil/year in a total of 3 years' time?


conversely, I wouldn't at all be against grabbing a good tackle in the draft still, and putting him at LG. It even lines up with the people who want to pay Gross for just one year.

 

I don't think they've decided whether he's guard or tackle - but they've decided that they like him in either place - and now we have options.

Save Adams, Wharton was the top FA prospect. And Adams is old and will want a monnster deal, I think. That doesn't make Wharton great, but it illustrates what else was out there should we let him go.

I like the flexibility. I like that they can draft a top LT, have depth at LT in Wharton or the pick, move Wharton to LG if needed, it gives us alot of options. I like that it keeps Gross from trying to hold them over a barrel.

 

How does it compare to "tackle money"? Is he the first to have been extended this year? (I suppose I could have looked that up)

 

The way I read Gantt's piece is that the Panthers offered him this contract and project him as a guard, his agentt didn't forsee a better offer coming by anyone who thought he'd be a tackle.

 

I don't see that at all. Somebody is going to pay a starting tackle starting tackle money.

 

I don't follow much college ball, but I know guards tend to be drafted later than tackles, and having Wharton locked up would allow us a better opportunity to get a true impact player if we choose to go with o-line in round one. If there is a run on tackles, the top guard should be there I would think.

Question is... is there an elite guard prospect out there this year worthy of a mid-first pick? If not, is there an impact (starter) guard that projects to the 2nd or 3rd?

 

"To me, it cements the fact he's going to get a chance to play guard, because if they thought they could take him into the market as a tackle, there was more money available. "

 

Tackle money last year was over $7 million.

And Leonard Davis wound up at guard for that money. And that was last year.

Hutchinson made $7 million per year 2 years ago for a guard - he was a 3 time pro bowler - but it was 2 years ago and Wharton is cheaper.

I don;t want it to sound cheap - but it's not gargantuan the way these top Free agent o-line contracts have been.

If Gross gets out, I'm betting he'll fetch over $8 million per year.