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!

     

Why do we keep trading our FA acquisitions?


BurnNChinn
 Share

Recommended Posts

If the rumors are true that we were looking at Henderson in training camp it’s highly likely we kept as many te’s as we did in season for this opportunity. Jags were trying to sign Arnold in the offseason. I remember myself and some posters thinking it was weird we didn’t cut Ian. This was probably why. Tremble must’ve shown they feel comfortable with him in an expanded role to pull the trigger on this deal. Arnold is a solid player but is an atrocious blocker. We need a guy who can do both. Seems the staff is super high on tremble calling him this years Jeremy Chinn. 
 

perryman looked like he thought he could just miss practices and be the starter over Carter. Can’t play on this team if you don’t practice it looks like.

 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Smithers said:

We have only traded 2 - Perryman plays in a defense that allows short throws over the middle and doesn’t generate a ton of pressure.  He will naturally have more tackles than Carter playing in a defense where the QB can barely get the ball off.  And remember, tackles mean you allowed the catch or the runner made it to the second level.  

It’s also a situation of Perryman having more opportunities for tackles. Through three games, Raiders’ opponents are averaging approximately 16 more plays per game than Panthers’ opponents. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BurnNChinn said:

I don’t understand why we keep trading everyone we picked up, seems like we give up on them to soon. I thought Arnold looked solid. Also Perryman is tearing it up in Las Vegas 36 tackles in 3 weeks to Carter’s 10. Seems like Carter isn’t even out there, I never see him kinda disappears in the game. I know I will get poo from everyone but damn I mean why the quick changes early in the year?

Perryman was hurt too much and Carter has played well. I've noticed him out there, and even if he isn't putting up highlight reels every game, you can't argue with the results. We've all but snuffed out the run game so far. As for Arnold and D. Moore, we drafted their replacements, which made them expendable. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perryman didn’t practice because he was injured or just flat out didn’t want to. He was also vocally unvaccinated. Made a ton of sense to dump his ass.

Losing Arnold stings but considering how deep the Panthers are at TE it’s not going to sting for long. Once Tremble gets more snaps I think we will see him emerge. CB was a big need after Horn went down. I don’t think the staff trusts Bouye on the outside.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, BurnNChinn said:

There is a reason a team gave up on a top ten pick after 8 games, so that’s not a good sign. JS

Based on a few reports it looks like we traded Perrryman for the same reason the Jags traded Henderson, both players for whatever reasons couldn't get on the field, and the organizations decided to part ways.

One was a mid-tier free agent signing, who's probably not better than the guy we have starting now.

The other was a top 10 draft pick from a season ago whose potential is through the roof; you take that chance. 

 

 

  

 

 

 

  • Pie 1
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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...