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!

     

Stafford-Goff swap is happening

Mr. Scot

By Mr. Scot,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
  • Author
Posted
4 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

I think they just really hate that Goff contract. I don't blame them.

From what I've been reading, unwillingness to take on Goff's contract was what was holding up the deal.

When the Rams offered enough that the Lions relented, that's when it happened.

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
unicar15 Experienced

unicar15

Posted
Posted

They just nuked Watson’s hope of getting traded. Idt anyone is trading 4-5 years worth of 1st round picks for one player. Maybe I’m wrong but that seems like it’s the price tag and I don’t think anyone can afford that. 
 

The Rams don’t have picks for years...but they’re in win now mode. I can’t think of a team in the Watson picture who would be in that mode. Maybe you could make the argument for the Panthers and Saints if they added him. But that’s a stretch. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shocker Grand Master

Shocker

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, unicar15 said:

They just nuked Watson’s hope of getting traded. Idt anyone is trading 4-5 years worth of 1st round picks for one player. Maybe I’m wrong but that seems like it’s the price tag and I don’t think anyone can afford that. 
 

The Rams don’t have picks for years...but they’re in win now mode. I can’t think of a team in the Watson picture who would be in that mode. Maybe you could make the argument for the Panthers and Saints if they added him. But that’s a stretch. 

We could only offer the next 3 firsts cant trade them further out than that.  Our other picks though would be in play.  We can probably forget them taking Teddy and we probably have to throw in whatever player they want too.  Sick.

Edited by Shocker
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, unicar15 said:

They just nuked Watson’s hope of getting traded. Idt anyone is trading 4-5 years worth of 1st round picks for one player. Maybe I’m wrong but that seems like it’s the price tag and I don’t think anyone can afford that. 
 

The Rams don’t have picks for years...but they’re in win now mode. I can’t think of a team in the Watson picture who would be in that mode. Maybe you could make the argument for the Panthers and Saints if they added him. But that’s a stretch. 

The price for Stafford was likely a 1st and 3rd. The price for taking Goff's contract was a 1st. 

Don't assume that Watson is suddenly going to have to require 4-5 first round draft picks to obtain.

  • Pie 5
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shocker Grand Master

Shocker

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Trading Teddy is going to require us giving up draft capital. I said this before the Stafford trade.

Of course but Goffs deal was worse than Teddys so...still insane pricetag for Watson.  I think he stays there anyway 😏

Edited by Shocker
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, unicar15 said:

They just nuked Watson’s hope of getting traded. Idt anyone is trading 4-5 years worth of 1st round picks for one player. Maybe I’m wrong but that seems like it’s the price tag and I don’t think anyone can afford that. 
 

The Rams don’t have picks for years...but they’re in win now mode. I can’t think of a team in the Watson picture who would be in that mode. Maybe you could make the argument for the Panthers and Saints if they added him. But that’s a stretch. 

The Rams haven't had a 1st round pick since 2016 yet they've had four consecutive winning seasons. That's the type of consistent success a Panthers fan could only dream about.

  • Pie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I hope this takes the Lions out of the running for a QB but I'm not at all sure that it does.

Person pointed out that even if it does, they're in a very good position to trade back if someone else wanted to move into that spot and take a quarterback.

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

    • Joe Bear
      Okay, now face the facta guyd

      By Joe Bear · Posted

      No, it will be a raw 6'7" 17-year-old European who just played basketball for the first time in March and who the idiot GM "had first on our board." He'll play the whole G-League season, get in 42 games for the Hornets and average 1.1 ppg on 35% shooting. Been there, seen that.
    • ForJimmy
      JJ Jansen on tanking

      By ForJimmy · Posted

      We missed on Burns at his peak value. That’s the problem with trading for picks 2-3 years away (which people were convinced the Rams would suck by now and these would be higher picks btw). Each year away the pick is the further in value it drops. Fitt was clearly hired based on turning us around quickly. It’s one of the many reasons tanking isn’t really a thing as our player JJ is telling you in this original article. It would take the whole organization from the owners down admitting they aren’t winning soon with Burns and picks 2-3 years away having more value because that’s when we are still rebuilding. It would only make sense if Fitt had a longer leash and would more than likely be the ones making these picks anyway which you wouldn’t want. The question is would you rather have those Rams picks with the strong possibility of Fitt still being here or would you rather Fitt try to “win now” like he did and expedite his firing? Altering the timeline would affect more than just the Rams picks. 
    • HaricotVert
      Potential changes to playoff seeding

      By HaricotVert · Posted

      I dont buy the idea that it would create more competitive games Given this: Seed Current Format Record Proposed Open Seeding Record 1 Lions 15–2 Lions 15–2 2 Eagles 14–3 Eagles 14–3 3 Buccaneers 10–7 Vikings 14–3 4 Rams 10–7 Commanders 12–5 5 Vikings 14–3 Rams 10–7 6 Commanders 12–5 Buccaneers 10–7 7 Packers 11–6 Packers 11–6 That would mean Wild Card round would have been Eagles (14/3) v  Pack(11/6) Vikings(14/3) v Bucs(10/7) Commanders(12/5) v Rams(10/7) Instead of Eagles (14/3) v  Pack(11/6) Bucs(10/7) v Commanders(12/5) Rams(10/7) v Vikings(14/3) Then with the reseed it would mean that highest remaining seed would always draw the lowest remaining team.
×
×
  • Create New...