Percy Harvin
#1
Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:29 PM
News has come out that Percy Harvin is likely to be traded due to a tirade he gave at his coaches. Here is a player who is dynamic and young, but also has a bad attitude...ala Steve Smith back in the day.
Now normally, the Panthers don't make these types of bold moves, but that was with the old GM, and Gettlemen may try to fill a hole while also giving us some cap relief.
So what I was thinking, since Percy Harvin is injury prone, he isn't going to go for a first rounder, but a second rounder and change. However, we do have players that we would be glad to trade, including Jon Beason, also coming off injury. If I'm Gettlemen, I'm gonna try and trade Beason (or Gamble if they would want him more) + a 2nd or 3rd rounder for this guy. This gives us a dynamic Wideout, lessening what we need to do in the draft, plus getting rid of the salary. In terms of the attitude, hopefully SS can take him under his wing and teach him how to deal with it. I also realize we would need to probably give him a new contract with the deal, which could be the biggest burden to deal with.
Do you guys think that there is a chance something like this would happen, and if so, would you do it?
#2
Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:33 PM
#3
Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:35 PM
#4
Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:38 PM
#5
Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:40 PM
#6
Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:41 PM
Did you just compare Percy Harvin to Steve Smith?
Yes I am....they are similar size and have similar games. I'm not sure if your dissing Harvin or Smith with this
#7
Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:45 PM
#8
Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:46 PM
But I really like the idea of adding him to the team.
I predict he ends up in NE, though.
#9
Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:47 PM
Remember when Steve had attitude problems? How did that work out?
It worked out by him probably retiring a Panther....so pretty well
#10
Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:49 PM
#12
Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:50 PM
I think another reason why they're trying to trade him is because he's a free agent next year
Yeah that's why we would need to sign him to an extension if we would do a trade like this, which could be problematic
#13
Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:52 PM
#14
Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:52 PM
#15
Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:54 PM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users





