tukafan21

2 hours ago, Jon Snow said:

The Panthers had already turned down the 2 1sts for Burns prior to the Bears trade. Why would the Bears need 2 1sts plus Burns instead of 1 st plus Moore? That make the Burns fiasco even worse. Also the Bears could've drafted a wr or traded Burns for one. No I think the offer was their 1st for this years and a player or this year and next years 1st plus several 2nd round picks if no player involved. The players were one of the 3 you listed. Fitterer decided to give the only offensive skill player we had to draft a qb. What he thought said qb was going to do without someone to throw the ball to is beyond me. But he got to see Burns jerk him around all season so it worked out OK I guess. Fitterer is such a dumbass. 

I thought the word at the time was that if it was Burns instead of DJ, the 2025 pick needed to be a 1st instead of the 2nd that we gave up in the deal.

Even then, that the Bears were pushing for the DJ trade because of their need for a #1 WR.

Maybe I'm wrong, it was a long time ago and it's been all bad news since then, but I thought that was what the rumors/insider info was at the time.

And what we turned down for Burns has no bearing on what someone else would give up for Burns, especially as we saw what we got for him in the end, a far cry from that Rams offer. 

2 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

They wanted Moore, Burns, or Brown. It was already leaked. 
 

https://pantherswire.usatoday.com/2023/04/03/2023-nfl-draft-panthers-bears-trade-dj-moore-brian-burns-derrick-brown/

 

Yea, but I'm rather certain I had read that if we wanted to include anyone other than DJ (given their need for a WR), it was going to cost us an extra first rounder instead of the future 2nd.

Which I don't think we were ever going to do on our end.

Hence why it really was just DJ as a legitimate option on our end.

I have no problems with talking about hypotheticals, but at least keep them realistic.

The Bears were never going to make that trade with us if we insisted on Burns instead of DJ.

They were still hoping Fields was going to be their future QB at that point.  They wanted to get him a weapon and knew there wasn't any great WR options in FA or the draft last year.  The only way they were ever going to make that trade with us was by including DJ in the trade, so it's just a dumb hypothetical, sorry.

3 hours ago, MHS831 said:

Working for a season under Adam Thielen (another undrafted WR) should be a positive factor.  Some of these issues are correctable.  Many kids from small schools not only lack experience against DI schools, they lack the coaching that develops talent. 

Exactly, I mean it as no offense to his coaches, but they coach at Holy Cross and not a Power 5 school for a reason.

Given his success at that level and his solid testing, I'm surprised he went undrafted, seems like the type that could excel once he gets NFL level coaching.

One of higher expectations I've had for an UDFA in a long time.

1 hour ago, SCO96 said:

I see your point. However, what if Penix doesn’t have a stellar season in his first year as starter? If the Falcon miss the playoffs and his play is only competent at best I think the leverage swings the other way.

Sure, but if that happens, the draft pick will look even worse for the Falcons, as instead of getting them a player that could win now, they took someone who ran off their prize FA QB after 3 years and now looks like they may be a bust.

Penix was one of the more polished QB's in the draft and would have probably been a rookie starter if taken by someone with an uncertain starting QB, if he's not ready to step in and play well in year 3, then it's probably not going to work out.

So the only way it helps their contract situation, is if it doesn't work out as they plan, but if it does, they're going to cut Cousins after 2 years and then have to give Penix a monster deal the following offseason.

7 minutes ago, SCO96 said:

 Everyone talks about how important it is to draft a QB in round 1 and have the "5th year option" I haven't seen it play out the well over the past several years.

The good/great QB' aren't playing the first 5 years under their original deal.  After year 3 or 4 they are getting mammoth extensions.

Having Penix take over in year 3 may actually save the Falcons some money over the next 5 seasons. I doubt they'd give him an extension after his first year as a starter if he took over the starting position after the guaranteed portion of Kurt Cousins new deal ends in 2025.   In terms of playing time, Penix 3 years as a starter would be ending with the 5th year of his rookie deal (assuming his option was picked up). The money Penix would be making in year 5 of a rookie contract would be significantly less than the upper echelon 5 year starters are making now.

 

Given Penix age and injury history, if he starts in year 3 and kills it, there's no way his agent lets him show up to camp the next year without a new contract.

Because if that happens, it will mean the Falcons dumped Cousins to roll with Penix and they'll know they can't risk then screwing that up.  Penix would have all the leverage in the world and the Falcons would have no choice but to fold and give him the deal.

23 minutes ago, Shocker said:

Nothing wrong with wanting Zay he is a solid WR.  Don’t listen to these guys you do you.

Everybody begging for Coker when Zay is clearly more proven.  Weird 

I don’t think Coker makes this team

more proven at what?

He has less than 3,000 yards in 7 seasons, he's in the absolute best case scenario, a 4th WR for us this year and a camp body next year.

Coker is a pull at the slot machine with someone the team thinks has real potential or else they wouldn't have given that signing bonus to him.

Zay Jones' are a dime a dozen that we can pick up when final cuts happen, zero reason to sign someone like that right now with the current build of the WR room.

Future picks are also valued less because you don't know where they'll fall in the round, so you almost have to make the trade assuming it will end up falling in the 25-32 pick of the round and if it's any better, then it's a nice bonus.

Combine that with the fact that a GM never knows if they'll still have the job, plus they would know the exact player they would be getting with the current pick, and it's pretty easy to see why future picks are valued less than a current year.

A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush

10 hours ago, ECUPantherFan said:

Because we need more veteran help at WR and he won’t break the bank. Would be a huge value pickup for what we’d have to pay him. 

No we don't, if anything, I'd argue that WR is one of the more set positions on the roster at this moment for this coming season.

We traded for Johnson to see if he can be a long term guy for us and to give Bryce a #1 who knows how to get open, he's locked in as the #1.

Thielen was a stud last year and is locked in as the starting slot

They think enough of Legette that we traded into the 1st to get him, he's locked in as the other starting outside WR as of now.

This is year 1 of a rebuild, the coaches basically need to find out what they have in Mingo by the end of the year, because of that, he's also locked in as our 4th option, any lower on the depth chart and we might as well just cut or trade him now or his next season is TMJ's from last year.

Giving Coker that signing bonus means they are all but expecting to keep him on the initial 53 (now, if he gets IR'd the first time he gets a paper cut, that's a different story, but it doesn't change the final 53 cut down math).

ISM looked solid in the returner role last year, so unless they like someone better than him during camp, he's also got a spot locked up.

So unless they plan on keeping 7 WRs on the initial 53, they likely only are looking for camp bodies at WR at this point, not someone they expect/want to find their way into the final 53.  And even if they wanted to keep 7 on the roster, at best we'd be looking for our 5th option.

Someone like Jones may be an option once we get to the final 53 and then they end up IR'ing Coker as I expect them to do, but because of all the above, we likely aren't in the market for any WRs for the time being.

33 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

He has to produce on the field first. Not going to worry about a 2nd contract before he plays a down with us. I hope that they keep the stable fresh by draft a RB every other draft at least. Makes second contract negotiations much easier. 

Well of course he has to produce first, but you can say that about any draft pick.

It's just that I'm more on board with us taking an RB with that kind of collegiate workload than I would be someone who had a CMC type of workload in college.

Because like you, in most cases, I don't love giving a big second contract to an RB, but I think he has a better chance at lasting through a 2nd contract given the minimal wear and tear on him compared to most elite RB prospects.

6 hours ago, Jon Snow said:

Maybe someday. I was never a fan of giving a RB a second contract. 

As long as he fully recovers from his ACL, if Brooks is performing, he's a PERFECT candidate for a 2nd contract

Most elite NFL RBs were 2 year starters in college, if not 3 or even 4, but because of the guys he was stuck behind, Brooks only has 1 season of wear and tear on him so far.

Combine that with him hopefully having a lighter workload this year while he's still getting back to 100%, he shouldn't have too many miles on his legs when it's time for a 2nd contract for him.

Brooks had 1,740 yards on 263 touches (238 carries and 25 catches)... in his entire college career

McCaffrey had 3,864 yards on 434 touches (337 carries, 45 catches, 15 PR, and 37 KR) in his Sophomore year alone.

CMC had 6,333 yards on 821 touches in his 3 year college career... it's going to take Brooks multiple NFL seasons to even get to the number of touches/hits that CMC took in college alone.

I also think this is why the team was okay with drafting him, as if he pans out, he's MUCH more likely to hold up for a full 2nd contract than most other elite NFL RB prospects.

3 hours ago, cookinbrak said:

So his dad is only 29?

I mean, first of all, I'm not the one who initially said he was a life long fan, it was in that tweet in the OP.

But more importantly, "life long fan" is a relative term, especially for a franchise like the Panthers.  I think anyone who was say, 10-12 or younger when the franchise started, and been a fan since the start, could claim to be a life long fan.

I'm 38, been a fan of the team since year 1 even though I'm not even from the Carolinas, after almost 30 years of fandom and following them since the beginning, I have no issue saying I'm a life long Panthers fan.

Very possible his dad is say around 40 years old and been a Panthers fan since the start.  And even if he's a little older, if you're a fan of a team for 30 out of your say 45ish years of life... that's "life long" in that instance.

Now knowing his dad has been a life long fan, combined with how quick the deal was announced and how much of a guarantee we gave him.

I wonder if his agent was telling teams not to draft him in the 6th and 7th round because he already knew he wanted to come here, especially as it gives him a good chance to make the team given our WR situation.

Because he should have been drafted, so maybe that is why he wasn't.

1 hour ago, Killah_Ray said:

Only player I’m looking at from Colorado is Hunter….

I don't think I want anyone from Colorado, I think the majority of their players are there for social media attention, not for becoming better football players.

I sure as hell don't want Sanders, he's way overrated and is going to be a headcase at the next level.  That's before even factoring in the Deion factor, he seems like he's Lavar Ball but with actual weight behind his words.

Same reason Deion is never going to be an NFL coach, he can motivate kids, he's yet to prove in the slightest that he can coach, and his schtick won't work on NFL players 

1 hour ago, Mol3m4n said:

RB is debatable. Sanders is terrible and Chuba isn't what I would consider "good."

We just drafted the top RB prospect in this year's class who is a 3 down back and coming off an ACL tear in November.

We just need two JAG's this year to have a 3 back rotation for the year while Brooks gets up to 100% by 2025 when he takes over as a bell cow back.

Given Sanders' cap hit, Chuba being at least average, and even someone like Blackshear in the wings, we're set at RB for this year now.

I'm one of the biggest Bryce haters on here, so this may come as a shock, but I don't have him on any kind of leash, if healthy, he's my starter for all 17 games no matter what, and maybe even all 17 games in 2025 too.

We aren't going to be a contending team until we replace him at QB and next year's QB class is very questionable at the moment.

I have no issue losing every game until we are able to replace Bryce with a legitimate replacement, so I'm not benching him when he sucks for someone better, someone who will give us a better chance to win games, but not good enough to make us long term contenders.

So start him 17 games, get a better draft pick and hopefully #1 next year.

If there isn't a sure fire QB prospect to take (and under no circumstances will I ever want Sanders, the kid is more about his personal celebrity image than being a player and I want nothing to do with Deion hovering over everything with him), pull a Chicago, trade it for a bunch of assets, and if we can't, then use it to get an elite prospect at another position and keep building out the roster.

Lose again in 2025 and get another Top 5 pick, at which point we take a new QB to move on from Bryce (fingers crossed it's Arch Manning at that point)

22 minutes ago, trucpfan said:

This is literally the best approach possible. Only thing is coaches don’t wake up and say we’re not contenders this year they’re trying to win in a bad way so if he helps us win he’ll get more touches but I think we’d be setting ourselves up for success with this formula. End up with a very high draft pick again in each round and we’re hopefully loaded with talented young players.

The coaches want to win, but they know we’re not contenders this year and playing the long game with a guy coming off a torn ACL the previous November is the smart play

17 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

OTC had it $8M this year then the rest spread out over the next two. OTC and Spotrac never match up on that sort of thing so it makes it difficult for us to really gauge. But yes eventually we owe him about $10M either way

I still think it makes more sense to keep him around this year anyways.

Brooks tore his ACL in November, even if he's ready to go for the start of camp, I'd like to see him on a low snap count early in the season and be part of a rotation all year, no matter how good he ends up looking.

We're not contending for the playoffs this year anyways, no need to risk putting too much of a workload on that knee before even the year mark of the injury.

Let him get through his rookie season in one piece as part of a 3 headed committee and then take the reins off him in year 2 and give him 20 or more touches a game as a 3 down back.

1 hour ago, Jackie Lee said:

You can kinda break even with a post June cut but it's still an $8M cap hit for him not to play at all. I guess you can pray for an injury on some other team and hope someone is desperate enough to split that $8M. Supply and demand is not in the RB markets favor though. Horrible contract

From what I saw, the $10 million dead cap hit was if he was a post June 1st cut, not $8

If it’s really $8, then that changes things as that is basically his cap hit anyways, at that point he probably would get cut or traded.

1 hour ago, jb2288 said:

Is there no way to trade the contract? My thought was always just let some team have him for free if they agree to take on a few mil of the contract

Nope, because dead cap hits are from the bonus already paid out.

He costs us that $7 million on the cap this season if on the roster, but the $10 and change if he’s not, no matter how it happens.

Cant get rid of him and then lose out on $3 million of cap space.  Thats either a decent vet we can’t sign or $3 million we can’t roll over into next season, either way it would be stupid.

At worst he’s a weekly inactive who we have in case of injuries, at best he’s part of a 3 man rotation this year with Chubba and the rookie, especially with him coming off the ACL, we probably should give him a light early work load.

4 minutes ago, csx said:

Is contributing this year the primary goal at this point? Or building  a roster ?

In this instance I think they're the same thing.

With who is available, I think there are players at CB, TE, Edge that are more likely to be starters and impact players down the line than we'd get from any Center prospects at the moment.

Any Center we take with the first pick of the 4th, we'd be able to likely get an equally good center prospect later in the draft or during camp cuts.

6 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

I would feel a lot more comfortable if they had a better plan B in place at the position myself. I'm just as confident in Colberts ability and availability for an entire season at the position as the team.

I think we're more likely to find a backup C option later in the draft than we would get potential impact rotational (if not starters) at other positions with this first pick in the 4th.

Take a CB, TE, Edge/LB, and they have a better chance at contributing this year than if we take a Center, who we can take later and/or look to pick up a training camp cut as a backup.

1 hour ago, Jon Snow said:

Brooks is what they thought they were getting in Sanders. Sanders will be gone as soon as it's financially feasible. 

Sanders will be on the team this year, it would be irresponsible if he wasn't.

He counts $7.7 million against the cap.

If we cut or trade him, we take a $10.5 million cap hit

It would literally cost us almost $3 million more in cap space to get rid of him than it would to just have him be a backup or inactive every week.

Jacob Cowing in the 5th or 6th

He's going to be a longtime successful slot WR in this league, I'm quite convinced of that.

Have him back up Thielen this year to learn and then take over as the starting slot WR next year, he'd be Bryce's safety valve with his crisp route running and sure hands.