Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

D-Will or Stewart trade?


  • Please log in to reply
126 replies to this topic

#16 Reapuh

Reapuh

    Top of The Game

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,443 posts

Posted 16 March 2012 - 10:50 PM

Tolbert plays both FB/RB. He's not half bad, but something would be up if we get him.

#17 megadeth078

megadeth078

    hate hate hate

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,064 posts
  • LocationTexas

Posted 16 March 2012 - 10:53 PM

How the hell do you guys figure we would more likely get rid of Stewart than Deangelo?

what is this? I dont even-

#18 jdpanther5

jdpanther5

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 597 posts
  • LocationBurlington

Posted 16 March 2012 - 10:56 PM

How the hell do you guys figure we would get rid of Stewart before Deangelo?

what is this? I dont even-


Well we certainly can't trade DeAngelo...no one's gonna touch that contract. Stewart on the other hand has a market.

I like Tolbert, but not if we overpay and ESPECIALLY not if it means we lose Stewart. I can't imagine Stewart being third on the RB payroll.

#19 drnll4

drnll4

    Junior Member

  • NEWB
  • PipPip
  • 47 posts

Posted 16 March 2012 - 10:56 PM

this makes no scene

#20 megadeth078

megadeth078

    hate hate hate

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,064 posts
  • LocationTexas

Posted 16 March 2012 - 10:57 PM

Well we certainly can't trade DeAngelo...no one's gonna touch that contract. Stewart on the other hand has a market.

I like Tolbert, but not if we overpay and ESPECIALLY not if it means we lose Stewart. I can't imagine Stewart being third on the RB payroll.


Dude, Stewart is our running back of the future. Dwill can get cut for all I care.

Since when do we NEED to trade either one anyways? Am I missing something?

#21 jdpanther5

jdpanther5

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 597 posts
  • LocationBurlington

Posted 16 March 2012 - 10:59 PM

Dude, Stewart is our running back of the future. Dwill can get cut for all I care.


Well that may be your thoughts but it certainly isn't happening...we made a large commitment to him and he just had a productive season, highly doubtful we just cut him for nothing. I agree Stewart is the best option for us long term, but I think the odds of him leaving the team are greater than DeAngelo's.

#22 KillerKat

KillerKat

    Top Banana

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,651 posts

Posted 16 March 2012 - 10:59 PM

We use 2 RB sets. Move Brokel to the #3 TE spot, move him to FB when we need him. Then we use all 3 of our RBs in rotation. It can work...that's basically what we've been doing.

#23 jdpanther5

jdpanther5

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 597 posts
  • LocationBurlington

Posted 16 March 2012 - 11:02 PM

Since when do we NEED to trade either one anyways? Am I missing something?


Maybe you're not talking to me here, but if so, that's not what I was getting at. You just made the comment about getting rid of one over the other, so naturally a trade made the most sense as far as "getting rid" of one of them because, at this point with their levels of productivity, neither of them should just be cut outright.

#24 megadeth078

megadeth078

    hate hate hate

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,064 posts
  • LocationTexas

Posted 16 March 2012 - 11:02 PM

Well that may be your thoughts but it certainly isn't happening...we made a large commitment to him and he just had a productive season, highly doubtful we just cut him for nothing. I agree Stewart is the best option for us long term, but I think the odds of him leaving the team are greater than DeAngelo's.

My point is, if we are ever in a position where we have to get rid of one of them, the team would more likely cut Deangelo before they trade Stewart. You don't trade a 24 year old top-tier running back who hasn't peaked and is as versatile and important to our offense as Stewart in favor of keeping our 30 year old one-dimensional running back or getting draft picks.

Maybe you're not talking to me here, but if so, that's not what I was getting at. You just made the comment about getting rid of one over the other, so naturally a trade made the most sense as far as "getting rid" of one of them because, at this point with their levels of productivity, neither of them should just be cut outright.


nah, not talking to you there. I just got that vibe from reading this thread.

#25 capfolly

capfolly

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 624 posts

Posted 16 March 2012 - 11:06 PM

Stewart is the future. Heck I think he's better than Williams in this offense now. If they trade Stewart I'll be pissed.

#26 klumme

klumme

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 850 posts

Posted 16 March 2012 - 11:08 PM

Tolbert is looking to get paid like Sproles. With D-Wills contract and Stewart FA after the season we wont have them all back. So we could move Stewart now and get something for him know instead of nothing next year.

#27 megadeth078

megadeth078

    hate hate hate

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,064 posts
  • LocationTexas

Posted 16 March 2012 - 11:17 PM

Tolbert is looking to get paid like Sproles. With D-Wills contract and Stewart FA after the season we wont have them all back. So we could move Stewart now and get something for him know instead of nothing next year.


Stewart is waiting patiently for his pay day. We would cut Dwill before trading Stewart. No amount of draft picks are worth getting rid of our running back of the future. We're not going to let him walk.

I didn't mean to thank you. :o

#28 mick eye

mick eye

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,047 posts

Posted 16 March 2012 - 11:18 PM

Dude, Stewart is our running back of the future. Dwill can get cut for all I care.


Enough said. Don't konw whyt i am typing. It is sacredlidgeaous to talk about trading one of "Double Troubel" But i would like to trade D-Will. Mentioned months ago that i kinda hoped Ol' Foxy wanted to reunite with him in Hile Migh City. Dwill's contract is likely very mngmt friendly, we have received a discount. 21 million guarateed is a small price to pay for what DeAngelo has done on the field. And most importantly what he can still do. Gauge the interest at least. Would love to move back into the top of the third. There is gonna be some guys hangingaround that would make an INSTANT IMPACKT. Whatever, Happy St. PAtricks weeknd.

#29 ed bell

ed bell

    Ruthless

  • ALL-PRO
  • 2,833 posts

Posted 16 March 2012 - 11:19 PM

Dude, Stewart is our running back of the future. Dwill can get cut for all I care.

Since when do we NEED to trade either one anyways? Am I missing something?

We don't need to trade either one...but why on earth would cutting D'Will make any sense whatsoever? I get it, some fans love Stewart and want D'Will sent out to pasture. The "30 year old RB's suck" reasoning is thrown out there all the time.

Funny things about the D'Will situation:

a) people expected him to get injured in 2011...he stayed healthy

.b )people expected him to get shown up by Stewart...they both did everything expected of them.

c) he's now in year two of his contract and is still 28 years old...re-structure him after 2012 and on we go.

#30 megadeth078

megadeth078

    hate hate hate

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,064 posts
  • LocationTexas

Posted 16 March 2012 - 11:23 PM

talk about running yards all you want, I do think he was shown up by Stewart.

Stewart was in more snaps and a lot of plays would have to get removed from our playbook if we only had D-will.

Stewart is the only reason the screen pass made a return to Carolina.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com