Toomers

Now it’s an accounting trick? But only certain teams know how? What part isn’t simple math? Void years, in any form, is a rule that is available for everyone. Who are these owners who are complaining? Players love it. So good luck getting rid of them. And this front office has spent this team up to cap hell adjacent.

Yes. All 4 void years when his contract is up after SB. It’s actually an example of using it wisely. Like Reddick before, it was a 1 yr/6M contract. Same setup. They were worth that so it’s not an issue. But that is dead money that was used last year.

Then it’s not a loophole. It’s an organizations choice. The owner is paying it this year either way. It’s just getting most early instead of over 17 games in the fall. Void years hit immediately when a player is no longer on the team. It’s the same as dead cap. It doesn’t just stay there over years after a player is gone. What’s Matt Ionnadis cap hit for Carolina in 2023?

What loopholes are only available to certain teams? Every team has the same amount. Every year. They Saints chose this route with a HOF QB. Not unreasonable but they knew what was coming. Now any good players are getting older, with huge dead money attached. They have no QB. Have to let players leave. All that for 7-10. No 1st rounder. But it’s unfair to let a franchise destroy itself? And those old contracts have dead money and void years when they “drop off”. Thomas will be dropping off with a 25M dead cap hit shortly.

That “myth” has cost them much more than just CGJ. Armstead, M Williams, and Hendrickson were huge losses they couldn’t sign. They are about to cut Thomas at a 25M dead cap hit. AFTER that, they will ONLY be 33M over the cap. Definitely the blueprint I would want my team to emulate.

You were pretty sure there wasn’t even a 2nd round pick offered too. And with 25M/yr and 3 premium picks, if you can’t replace him the wrong people are making decisions.

Let’s look at those trades. The 49ers had pick 48 in the 2nd in 2021. Yet MIA took a future 1st(2) instead of taking the 2nd that year. Why would they do that if picks lose value? The Bears had pick 39 in the 2nd in 2021. Yet the NYG took a future 1st instead. Why? Please continue. You posted a PFF list that has him 10th(for this season and weeks ago)but doesn’t include Watt, J Bosa or Sweat as they clearly state. Then when some of their evaluation showed his weakness, you went after their credibility. The only thing you have proven is if it doesn’t fit the narrative, spin it until it does.

Pick 37 can be a player or a chip in a trade. First it was future 1sts aren’t worth a 2nd and a 3rd year, now it’s the high 2nd doesn’t matter, only the future firsts. I really can’t keep up with the spin cycle to make overpaying one player seem like a good idea. So you’re fine with the GM making moves in his best interest’s and not the team. Just want to make sure that’s where we are at.

So one specific trade means every team in the league feels the same way. Where are all these videos we were promised? A poll from the summer that doesn’t include many players who have passed him. Highsmith, Reddick, Sweat, Hendrickson, Judon, Lawrence, Hunter.

No. You gave mid round examples. Do you feel those are similar to trading 2–3 1sts for a QB. In the draft. You believe a team would rather have a 2nd and a 3rd this year over a first in 24 and 25? Thinking like that is how you wind up with Everette Brown. 1st round talent will still be superior a majority of the time whenever and however the picks used.

He a top ten what? DL? How can someone who is a liability on 40% of his snaps be a top 10 DL? He’s nowhere close. Even if it’s just Edge players he’s not.

So value wise, every team should trade its future 1sts for 2nd round picks in the current draft?

Why? Josh Uche has 11.5 sacks in 350 snaps. Justin Houston(3.5M) has 9 in 387 snaps. Plenty more. And I can almost guarantee they would play the run as well or better than Burns. Sacks are overrated. The 2019 defense was beyond horrible and they were 2nd in the league in Sacks. Crazy is turning down all that draft capital for the privilege of paying a player well over what he’s worth.

Considering you can replace Burns AND improve another position with just the money you would overpay Burns, the picks are bonus. A big bonus. And what’s the difference when they are as far as the team is concerned. First rounders will have value until they are used. If you’re trading up for a QB, those future firsts have way more value than a 2nd or 3rd this year. And pick 37 is about as close to a first as you will get. What’s your next deflection point? This is fun.

Maybe someone would. Wouldn’t be me. I’ve been here 4X as long as you and have predicted so many things about the Panthers, correctly, it’s almost scary. The evidence is all on here. Most from a time you didn’t exist. So you think that they will get a similar offer for Burns again. That is not happening. He’s a 16M DE now. Not a 4M one. Who is going to have to be signed to a huge extension. That extra first and second are gone. Best they will get is a first, and even that’s debatable.

There it is. Like clockwork. Any dissenting opinion brings the “why are you here” whining. And who said Burns is average. Saying he deserves 16-18M/yr instead of 25M doesn’t scream average. It’s just where he fits with other top pass rush specialists. No one I’ve compared Burns to is average. And as I stated, Reddick is an EXAMPLE. There are many others who have signed similar deals to what Burns should get. Now stop deflecting and tell me why overpaying Burns is better than 25-30M/yr and two 1sts and 37th pick this year. Those Steelers found a replacement for Bud Dupree pretty quick with the 102nd pick. And he’s better than Burns already.

Absolute desperation. His salary and position made him a target and their window was slamming shut. A coach who’s ready to bail out. Donald thinking about retirement. Stafford hurt. OL got bad fast. McVay was looking for one last ride. Yet the Panthers couldn’t accept the gift and had to turn down a winning lottery ticket.

I’m saying you are downplaying his value with those statements. Which is what their intention was. Right? You remove one DE(Burns) and there’s enough money to get a pass rush specialist like Reddick, Smith Judon…etc AND a solid 3 down DE on the other side. What are you putting over there with a 27M/yr Burns? Still the same hole to fill with less money and 3 less quality picks. Would Reddick have stayed to play for his college coach who gave him the chance in 2021 that no one else would. Who knows? It’s irrelevant. There are many others that have signed similar deals in the last two seasons. Reddick is an example of a player similar to Burns. Except no one wants to pay him 25M for …..reasons. The only hypothetical scenario tied in knots here is the “we should overpay him because” theory that somehow believes Burns should be paid like Bosa, Watt and Garrett. And turning down 3 quality picks is the price to pay him.

Reddick had 12.5 sacks in 2020 with ARI. Who were their talented players that were the reason for that?

That’s on you. And the poster you agreed with who insinuated that people didn’t “understand” when they actually did. It’s been common knowledge and rehashed in numerous threads on here for two months.

Once again, why can’t you replace Burns with the 25-30/yr you now have. Since you don’t have to overpay a one dimensional DE to be something he’s not? Would you rather have a Reddick/ Bozeman combo or a Burns/Eflien-type combo. Which is better for the team overall? Not only is that part easy to choose, but now you have 3 premium picks on top of already improving the team. Starting with pick 37(or so) this year. Then two extra(and likely top half 1st rounders to trade for a QB or take two more quality players on rookie deals. That’s 5 quality players for not overpaying Burns. Explain how that is better for the team? It’s is amazing how this fanbase falls in love with players.

I think you are both completely lost. Jonathan Jones of CBS Sports is reporting that the Rams offered their 2024 first rounder, 2025 first rounder and a second round pick in 2023 in exchange for Burns.

What about the 2nd that is pick #35-37 this year? Something I’m not understanding about that?

So maybe it’s a better idea to invest in multiple DEs instead of paying 25-30M to the guy who needs help already. You give a DE that much and he supposed to make the player on the other side better. Get some actual 3 down DEs. Then take those picks and trade up or for a QB without mortgaging the future. Or use them and build a complete team. How is keeping Burns and overpaying him a better option than 5 quality players( on rookie deals)