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!

     

When has a blockbuster NFL trade worked out for the team who gives up everything?

Happy Panther

By Happy Panther,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Soul Rebel Experienced

Soul Rebel

Posted
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, Jay Roosevelt said:

There really isn't a comparison to the type of trade offer it'd take to get Watson because there isn't another example of a team trading 25 year old elite franchise QB. This deal - whoever makes it - will become the new standard for 'blockbuster' trades in the NFL.

Agreed....the only trades that come to mind for this deal is Walker and Ricky Williams...neither are QBs. 

I feel like if we substitute YGM instead of Burns to the packages being offered, we should get a deal done.

21 FRP

22 FRP

23 FRP

CMC

YGM

Keeping our 2nds and 3rds will go a long way and we can find another RB. YGM hurts, but still having Burns and Brown on our DL and Chinn in the secondary doesn't set us back as much. We can sign someone like Carson or draft a RB in the fourth round.

Edited by Soul Rebel
Link to comment
Share on other sites
imminent rogaine Experienced

imminent rogaine

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Smithers said:

Steelers trading for Minkah Fitzpatrick.  Seahawks trading for Jamal Adams.  Cardinals trading for Deandre Hopkins.  
 

to name a few...

The cardinals gave up a second, future fourth, and a dilapidated David Johnson... I wouldn’t call that “giving up everything”. They also sucked and didn’t make the playoffs. 

Adam’s is on his 5th year option and will be an UFA. I think “working out” is tbd. If they can’t keep him, then they gave up that capital for a two year rental and at least one of those resulted in zero playoff wins.

Edited by imminent rogaine
  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Agent Blue Newbie

Agent Blue

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, OneBadCat said:

So long as we keep one of Burns or CMC I think we’ll be alright.

This stuff about trading two firsts with CMC, Burns, and Robby Anderson is wack though.

That only works if we get picks in return as well. I’m talking multiple second and thirds.

Dude Burns and CMC are not even on the same level. DEs are a million times more valuable than RBs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted

Bears had 4 straight losing seasons.  Gave up a poo ton for Mack.  Haven’t had a losing season the last 3 since acquiring him....despite horrific QB play.   3 straight Pro Bowls.   I’d say that is working out well.  Just need some average QB play. 

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Peon Awesome Experienced

Peon Awesome

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, TheCasillas said:

 

 

Minkah Fitzpatrick has the most caused turnovers in the NFL over the last 2 seasons with the Steelers and was rated the second best safety in the league.... how did that not work out for the Steelers?

Adams set the record for the most sacks by a secondary player in a single season in nfl history and was the 5th best safety in the league.

Beating a team doesnt change the fact that the trades were good or not. I believe the Cardinals won a bc of Hopkins himself as well... Also, these players are still in the league.... you can't say that they are a failed trade. Hopkins is one of the best WRs in the game... hands down.

These ARE blockbuster trades bc they are trades for the best players at their position that cost a lot of capital for a team to get......

Both Fitzpatrick and Hopkins were good trades but let's not get carried away by calling them blockbusters. They got Fitzpatrick for a single 1st round pick. Hopkins was had for a 2nd round pick. Your definition of blockbuster seems way skewed. 

I'll give you Adams as a "blockbuster" perhaps but if we look back in 3 years are we sure we're going to say that was a definite win for Seattle? They gave up 2 1sts and an ok starter for 1 year of Jamal Adams. And in that 1 year they couldn't make it out of the wildcard round after making it to the divisional round the year before. Now if they want to keep him, they're looking to have to pay him $20 million per year on a multiyear deal. Not many winning teams succeed giving that much to a box safety. He might be worth it more than others but it leaves less money for more prominent positions, like the offensive line that's letting Wilson get hammered and may drive him out of Seattle. I have a feeling history is not going to say that was a slam dunk win for the Seahawks. But we'll see.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheCasillas Grand Master

TheCasillas

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Peon Awesome said:

Both Fitzpatrick and Hopkins were good trades but let's not get carried away by calling them blockbusters. They got Fitzpatrick for a single 1st round pick. Hopkins was had for a 2nd round pick. Your definition of blockbuster seems way skewed. 

I'll give you Adams as a "blockbuster" perhaps but if we look back in 3 years are we sure we're going to say that was a definite win for Seattle? They gave up 2 1sts and an ok starter for 1 year of Jamal Adams. And in that 1 year they couldn't make it out of the wildcard round after making it to the divisional round the year before. Now if they want to keep him, they're looking to have to pay him $20 million per year on a multiyear deal. Not many winning teams succeed giving that much to a box safety. He might be worth it more than others but it leaves less money for more prominent positions, like the offensive line that's letting Wilson get hammered and may drive him out of Seattle. I have a feeling history is not going to say that was a slam dunk win for the Seahawks. But we'll see.

Blockbuster trade is pretty plain and simple. It doesnt have specific parameters... and since blockbuster trade is deemed a media terminology, here is the definition:

A blockbuster trade means not only trading a superstar. But there is a move between team's players that the media gives it "Hype". Because the persons involve in that trade are marque names for most sports fans.

Edited by TheCasillas
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
KillerKat Grand Master

KillerKat

Posted
Posted
46 minutes ago, BrisbanePanther said:

Why are we setting the standard at championship or bust for grading a trade?

We're Panthers fans. If Watson delivers two consecutive winning seasons, then he'd already something never done before--even with all the priceless first rounders drafted in the past. Gotta crawl before we walk.

Because most people are idiots

  • Pie 2
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

    • MasterAwesome
      How many Qbs can you name better than Bryce Young?

      By MasterAwesome · Posted

      You kinda gloss over this, but this is really at the crux of this whole argument....which Flacco are we talking here?  You bring up that he played with 3 different teams but ignore the fact that his performance varied quite a bit from team to team. 2024 Colts: 65.3% completion, 12 TDs, 7 INTs, 220.1 YPG, 7.1 Y/A, 90.5 rating 2025 Browns: 58.1% completion, 2 TDs, 6 INTs, 203.8 YPG, 5.1 Y/A, 60.3 rating 2025 Bengals: 63.4% completion, 12 TDs, 3 INTs, 290.6 YPG, 6.8 Y/A, 96.2 rating 2025 Flacco (Browns + Bengals): 61.1% completion, 14 TDs, 9 INTs, 252.0 YPG, 6.1 Y/A, 80.8 rating vs. 2025 Bryce: 62.7% completion, 14 TDs, 7 INTs, 196.2 YPG, 6.2 Y/A, 86.0 rating I bolded the comparison that I think objectively makes the most sense...just simply comparing the two QBs for the entire season.  Otherwise you'd be cherry-picking Flacco's time with the Bengals and ignoring his earlier stint with the Browns, which sounds an awful lot like people cherry-picking Bryce's stats in the second half of last season. So again, which Flacco?  Basically the only thing consistent with Flacco across each of these teams was his W/L records: 2-4, 1-3, and 1-4 respectively.  I'd say if we're comparing each version of him to Bryce this year: Colts Flacco > 2025 Bryce, Browns Flacco <<< 2025 Bryce, Bengals Flacco >> 2025 Bryce, and 2025 Flacco < 2025 Bryce - Flacco this year only beats out Bryce on YPG but in part because he throws significantly more passes (almost 60 YPG more than Bryce, despite a lower Y/A which is pretty telling) .  Flacco is maybe the most apt case study about how important a QB's circumstances are to his success.  He was easily a bottom 3 QB in Cleveland and arguably top 10-15 in Cincinnati...and we're talking about the same player from the same season.  All that happened was taking him from one team and plopping him onto another team; nothing inherently changed about him as a QB.  Funny enough I think that's all that one dude on here was trying to say when he made that long poorly-received post after having an epiphany working for PFF behind the scenes or w/e.  That it's largely short-sighted to just try to evaluate QBs in a vacuum when there are so many variables at play that ultimately decide whether a QB is successful or not.   I think Bryce has been mediocre at best this season and I'm ready to move on regardless of how he ends this season - I'm highly skeptical a strong end to the season will carry over into next year considering how last year ended and this year began.  I would certainly agree that he's a bottom-third QB this year.  I just don't understand you scoffing indignantly at anyone holding the opinion that Bryce has had a better season than Flacco...I can only assume it's recency bias.  Or maybe you know the stats don't support you, which is why you're conjuring up the god-forsaken arbitrary "eyeball test" which is the kinda thing people in here were saying about Fields for years, pinky promising that he really truly was a franchise QB despite his awful stats.  Perhaps it's called the eyeball test because I roll my eyes anytime I hear someone bring it up seriously as an argument.
    • CRA
      A question no one is asking about Bryce and The Panthers

      By CRA · Posted

      CMC said he expected to play his career here.  He didn't think he would be traded.  Carolina decided they wanted to trade him.  He picked here he wanted to go.   But we dumped him.  For largely peanuts.   But we dumped DJ Moore and he never had a blood and guts game.   So it's never a guarantee. 
    • Manna
      A question no one is asking about Bryce and The Panthers

      By Manna · Posted

      I have many people telling me CMC was blindsided and heartbroken by the trade, but that's not how I remember everything going down.  49ers are pretty wounded right now on defense so if our offense can sustain drives and score, that'd be the difference maker. Their offense? I'm not scared of CMC. 
×
×
  • Create New...