Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Realistic off-season trade scenarios


  • Please log in to reply
40 replies to this topic

#1 BigBeezy

BigBeezy

    MEMBER

  • Joined: 11-January 13
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 285
  • Reputation: 20
HUDDLER

Posted 20 January 2013 - 10:58 PM

Although you rarely see a lot of trades in the NFL, what are some realistic trades you wouldn't mind seeing the Panthers make this offseason?

Here are a couple I wouldn't mind seeing:

Trade #1: Jon Beason for Giants WR Hakeem Nicks

Reasoning: It's no secret Beason would prefer to stay in the middle and he probably won't get that opportunity here. The Giants are in desperate need of a middle linebacker and Beason is one of the best middle linebackers in the game, when healthy. Nicks is one of the best young WR in the league, who is often injured but still produces at a high level. Nicks is going into a contract year and both he and Cruz will want #1 WR money (think Antonio Brown, VJax contracts), which may make Nicks expendable. Might even be willing to include a late round pick to get this deal done because of the players' current contracts.

Trade #2: Deangelo Williams for Packers CB Tramon Williams

Reasoning: The Panthers could definitely use some help in the secondary, especially with Gamble likely being cut, and Tramon Williams is one of the better corners in the game. But the Packers have some young talented CB in Casey Hayward and Sam Shields, which could make Williams expendable. This trade would also give the Packers a legit starter at RB, which they've desperately seeking for quite some time.

These trades may never happen but neither is out of the realm of possibility. Thoughts?

#2 JawnyBlaze

JawnyBlaze

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 11-May 10
  • posts: 7,326
  • Reputation: 1,844
SUPPORTER

Posted 20 January 2013 - 10:59 PM

#2 is definitely out of the realm of possibility, I think
#1 is probably out of the realm of possibility.

#3 Marguide

Marguide

    South of the Border

  • Joined: 13-May 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,748
  • Reputation: 2,344
HUDDLER

Posted 20 January 2013 - 11:12 PM

I think you are way overvaluing Beason/DWill.

It wouldn't be terribly surprising to see Gamble given a chance to test the waters, or at least tell his agent that you would entertain trade offers because he wasn't in our future plans. If Chris was willing to sign a new deal with a potential new team, he would have some value.

#4 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 23,137
  • Reputation: 2,954
  • LocationMontford
HUDDLER

Posted 20 January 2013 - 11:14 PM

oh wait. the op said realistic. nm

#5 BigBeezy

BigBeezy

    MEMBER

  • Joined: 11-January 13
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 285
  • Reputation: 20
HUDDLER

Posted 20 January 2013 - 11:19 PM

#2 is definitely out of the realm of possibility, I think
#1 is probably out of the realm of possibility.


Why do you say that?

There's been rumblings that the Giants may be willing to part ways with Nicks. I agree, the Packers may not want to get rid of Williams, but they definitely want some better talent at RB and also have younger, cheaper options at CB.

#6 Kevin Greene

Kevin Greene

    I Don't Want To Get Off On A Rant Here But....

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 18,912
  • Reputation: 4,239
HUDDLER

Posted 20 January 2013 - 11:21 PM

Holy crap, Beason has like 11 tackles total the last 2 years.
And the Gmen will give us Hicks?

:lolu:

#7 JawnyBlaze

JawnyBlaze

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 11-May 10
  • posts: 7,326
  • Reputation: 1,844
SUPPORTER

Posted 20 January 2013 - 11:23 PM

Yea, the Packers definitely need a RB, but they can get one in the draft. One that's young and doesn't have a top 10 contract. If they did want Deangelo, we wouldn't get an outstanding CB in return.

I haven't heard these rumblings about Nicks, but even if they did we'd have to sweeten the pot. As much as I love Beason (and Deangelo), no team is going to trade a young blue chip #1 WR for a MLB coming off two early season ending injuries with a top 10 contract.

It's just a matter of value. WR has more value in today's NFL than MLB and CB has more value than RB.

#8 BeasonBeastingBacks

BeasonBeastingBacks

    Farewell Sweet Prince

  • Joined: 29-April 11
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,480
  • Reputation: 515
HUDDLER

Posted 20 January 2013 - 11:23 PM

realistic?
poo, theres nothing we can realistically do other than trade low round picks for scrubs

#9 Frizzy350

Frizzy350

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 25-January 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,416
  • Reputation: 594
HUDDLER

Posted 20 January 2013 - 11:25 PM

Ok your scenarios make sense but the value just is not on point. Beason has been on IR the past two seasons and has an extremely high cap number to go with it. Nicks may be expendable but he's a big, fast young receiver, they could get a much better offer than Beason.

I don't think the Packers have any intentions of bringing in a very talented running back. People look at their offense and say, oh well they NEED a runningback, because their running game stinks. I have a funny feeling that the Packers really don't give a damn about their running game.

#10 BigBeezy

BigBeezy

    MEMBER

  • Joined: 11-January 13
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 285
  • Reputation: 20
HUDDLER

Posted 20 January 2013 - 11:35 PM

Yea, the Packers definitely need a RB, but they can get one in the draft. One that's young and doesn't have a top 10 contract. If they did want Deangelo, we wouldn't get an outstanding CB in return.

I haven't heard these rumblings about Nicks, but even if they did we'd have to sweeten the pot. As much as I love Beason (and Deangelo), no team is going to trade a young blue chip #1 WR for a MLB coming off two early season ending injuries with a top 10 contract.

It's just a matter of value. WR has more value in today's NFL than MLB and CB has more value than RB.


Fair enough. I did mention adding a late round pick in the Beason/Nicks deal to make it work, which I wouldn't mind.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users