Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

NFL execs: it’s going to take 3 first rounders at least for DeShaun Watson.

nctarheelreincarnated

By nctarheelreincarnated,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Tbe Grand Master

Tbe

Posted
Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, Mage said:

If you are rolling with the idea that we are drafting a QB in the 1st round this year anyway, then really its only 2 1st round picks and a rookie contract we're trading away.  That is definitely a fair deal for Deshaun Watson, even for a team rebuilding.

 

I was thinking this same thing.

We’d also be upgrading over any QB we’re likely to get in the draft.

Also, what’s the chance we hit on a franchise QB this year?

Pretty low right? 

So we’re prob going to be drafting another QB in the first in another year or two. 
 

We might trade away a 1st to trade up this year or in the future.

All in all, we’re likely going to spend two - three first round picks over the next 5-6 years trying to get that QB anyway.

It’s not a bad deal really.

Edited by Tbe
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AU-panther Mentor

AU-panther

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Tbe said:

I was thinking this same thing.

We’d also be upgrading over any QB we’re likely to get in the draft.

Also, what’s the chance we hit on a franchise QB this year?

Pretty low right? 

So we’re prob going to be drafting another QB in the first in another year or two. 
 

We might trade away a 1st to trade up this year or in the future.

All in all, we’re likely going to spend two - three first round picks over the next 5-6 years trying to get that QB anyway.

It’s not a bad deal really.

but if we spend 3 1st round picks to find a rookie QB we save around $100m over the life of that rookie contract.

Great QB on a rookie deal > than a great QB on their second deal

The QB on the second deal is just usually a safer pick because you know what he can do.

Every scenario we can come up with is a gamble, the greatest reward though, is finding a franchise QB in the draft.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CarolinaNCSU Proficient

CarolinaNCSU

Posted
Posted

For those worried about the rebuild, I would assume everyone wants to stay at 8 then for a QB?  Because if you support the trade up to #3, based on what the Eagles gave up for Wentz as a barometer...

  • 2016 #13 pick, 2016 3rd rounder, 2016 4th rounder, 2017 1st rounder, 2018 2nd rounder, 2 players. 

The above, is essentially 3 1st round picks if not more.  For Carson Wentz.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
trueblade Grand Master

trueblade

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, CarolinaNCSU said:

For those worried about the rebuild, I would assume everyone wants to stay at 8 then for a QB?  Because if you support the trade up to #3, based on what the Eagles gave up for Wentz as a barometer...

  • 2016 #13 pick, 2016 3rd rounder, 2016 4th rounder, 2017 1st rounder, 2018 2nd rounder, 2 players. 

The above, is essentially 3 1st round picks if not more.  For Carson Wentz.  

And they won the Super Bowl, two years later (2018) with Wentz injured and on the bench.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Davidson Deac II Grand Master

Davidson Deac II

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

I definitely don't see us as just a quarterback and a couple of good players away.

We spent years complaining because despite the fact we had Cam Newton, he didn't have a good enough team around him. I'm not a fan of seeing us go back into that position.

(and I don't really think Watson would be either)

The difference between winning and losing in the NFL razor thin.  If we averaged 5 points more a game, or allowed 5 less, or some combination thereof, we would be in the playoffs this year.  Add a few players in some key positions, and we could be significantly better next year.   Or we could be worse.  But personally I think with a guy like Watson, we would be significantly better.  

Not that I think he will come here, he won't.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
Just now, Davidson Deac II said:

The difference between winning and losing in the NFL razor thin.  If we averaged 5 points more a game, or allowed 5 less, or some combination thereof, we would be in the playoffs this year.  Add a few players in some key positions, and we could be significantly better next year.   Or we could be worse.  But personally I think with a guy like Watson, we would be significantly better.  

Not that I think he will come here, he won't.  

Fitterer's comments today framed things in the long term, indicating that we'd try to be competitive right now but the wins are probably down the road.

I suppose a big splashy move is still possible, but I'm not expecting it.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Growl Grand Master

Growl

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

If we don't get Watson we should really be hoping that the Jets do.  One less team to draft a QB in front of us.

Best case for us Jets get Watson, Miami decides to give Tua one more year.

The jets might not even go QB, what is it you think the Texans are gonna draft if they get in at 2 or 3

 

the best scenario for us is that everybody stays right where they are

Edited by Growl
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AU-panther Mentor

AU-panther

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Growl said:

The jets might not even go QB, what is it you think the Texans are gonna draft if they get in at 2 or 3

 

the best scenario for us is that everybody stays right where they are

Doh

They take Darnold in the trade, don't need to draft a QB?  I can't even say it with a straight face.

Damn I hate it when I say something stupid, I don't see how half of this board lives with themselves doing it all the time.

Got ahead of myself trying to be positive.

Ok, Dolphins stick with Tua, Jets or Texans take whoever of Fields/Wilson we like the least?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • PNW_PantherMan
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • tukafan21
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
    • Dave Gettleman's Shorts
      TIME TO SPECULATE

      By Dave Gettleman's Shorts · Posted

      adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
×
×
  • Create New...