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!

     

Offers for Burns

Mr. Scot

By Mr. Scot,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

AU-panther Mentor

AU-panther

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

I get the thought process behind wanting the two 1st rounders but elite pass rushers are one of the three most important positions in the NFL for a reason. 

It is definitely tough to turn down 2 first round picks but finding a Burns replacement may take either draft after draft to achieve or cost an amount in free agency that we could simply just invest in Burns.

So if you can replace him in free agency for the same amount it would take to resign him why wouldn't' you take the free picks.

Everyone keep trying to make the argument that you might not be able to replace him with the draft picks, you don't have to, you replace him with the $20m a year you save.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CanadianCat Veteran

CanadianCat

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

So if you can replace him in free agency for the same amount it would take to resign him why wouldn't' you take the free picks.

Everyone keep trying to make the argument that you might not be able to replace him with the draft picks, you don't have to, you replace him with the $20m a year you save.

Thats a good point actually. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Carl Spackler Grand Master

Carl Spackler

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

So if you can replace him in free agency for the same amount it would take to resign him why wouldn't' you take the free picks.

Everyone keep trying to make the argument that you might not be able to replace him with the draft picks, you don't have to, you replace him with the $20m a year you save.

Yes, you replace 11 sacks with 6, spend the same amount of money, come away with USFL rejects and somehow you're better. Air-tight logic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ForJimmy Grand Master

ForJimmy

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

So if you can replace him in free agency for the same amount it would take to resign him why wouldn't' you take the free picks.

Everyone keep trying to make the argument that you might not be able to replace him with the draft picks, you don't have to, you replace him with the $20m a year you save.

24 year old elite pass rushers probably don't become FAs very often.  If they do it's usually a bidding war in which they pick where they want to go.  

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

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, mrcompletely11 said:

The only thing I can think of is the belichick model of the price doesnt justify the production and they let them walk because there just isnt that many more years left playing top level.  I dont agree with it but its certainly a strategy

Well considering we allegedly turned down two first rounders, the FO has a very high value on him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, AU-panther said:

So if you can replace him in free agency for the same amount it would take to resign him why wouldn't' you take the free picks.

Everyone keep trying to make the argument that you might not be able to replace him with the draft picks, you don't have to, you replace him with the $20m a year you save.

Yeah but you have to replace him with someone of similar or better caliber. That isn't going to come cheaply. The odds of getting someone like that in free agency that isn't aging is limited or would garner a potentially even bigger price tag. If you trade for a guy similar, the price you have to pay probably looks similar to what you gave up. 

So really the best bet would be to have a pick in the range where you can get another elite DE talent. If that is the case, it's a wise choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Carl Spackler Grand Master

Carl Spackler

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Yeah but you have to replace him with someone of similar or better caliber. That isn't going to come cheaply. The odds of getting someone like that in free agency that isn't aging is limited or would garner a potentially even bigger price tag. If you trade for a guy similar, the price you have to pay probably looks similar to what you gave up. 

So really the best bet would be to have a pick in the range where you can get another elite DE talent. If that is the case, it's a wise choice.

But then you have to hope you at least get Vonnie Holliday and not Jason Peter, and you have to hope you didn't just give up Reggie White when you just gave up Reggie White and you totally just drafted Jason Peter

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AU-panther Mentor

AU-panther

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, kungfoodude said:

Yeah but you have to replace him with someone of similar or better caliber. That isn't going to come cheaply. The odds of getting someone like that in free agency that isn't aging is limited or would garner a potentially even bigger price tag. If you trade for a guy similar, the price you have to pay probably looks similar to what you gave up. 

So really the best bet would be to have a pick in the range where you can get another elite DE talent. If that is the case, it's a wise choice.

The idea of a hometown discount is largely overstated by fans.  If Burns is truly elite, he will get paid like an elite one, very similar to any free agent out there.

Did Reddick cost that much last year?  His production was pretty similar.

People keep looking at these decisions in a vacuum, that is how team building works.  Maybe you trade him and of the $20m you save you spend $15m on an edge that is 85% as good, then with the other $5m you improve another position slightly.  Then of the 2 draft picks one of them turns into a good player and that improves another position substantially.  Which combination gives you the best team?

I'm not saying give Burns away for nothing, I'm actually a big fan of his, I'm just staying the decisions aren't as simple as Burns vs potential edge drafted with gained pick.

 

 

 

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

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, AU-panther said:

The idea of a hometown discount is largely overstated by fans.  If Burns is truly elite, he will get paid like an elite one, very similar to any free agent out there.

Did Reddick cost that much last year?  His production was pretty similar.

People keep looking at these decisions in a vacuum, that is how team building works.  Maybe you trade him and of the $20m you save you spend $15m on an edge that is 85% as good, then with the other $5m you improve another position slightly.  Then of the 2 draft picks one of them turns into a good player and that improves another position substantially.  Which combination gives you the best team?

I'm not saying give Burns away for nothing, I'm actually a big fan of his, I'm just staying the decisions aren't as simple as Burns vs potential edge drafted with gained pick.

 

 

 

Yeah, I mean there are lots of variables but ultimately we have no real replacement for him so that is something we have to fix.

Also, we are pretty light on edge rushers in general. If we were a little more stacked at DE/Edge, I would say heavy consideration 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ImaginaryKev Grand Master

ImaginaryKev

Posted
Posted

You need good players at premium positions to win. I could understand trading him if you KNEW you could replace him with Will Anderson or that Clemson edge plus another first but that's not guaranteed. And teams kinda HAVE to pay players to play for them, that's how the league works. If you land a rookie QB, which they're going to do this upcoming draft bc if they don't they're insane, then you can absolutely justify paying a top 5 edge defender. 

And after yesterday you still wanna trade this guy for potential you deserve jail time, I don't make the rules

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ImaginaryKev Grand Master

ImaginaryKev

Posted
Posted

Also Burns is only 24 and still going to get better as a pass rusher, I do not care that he's not the best run defender. Criticizing that part of his game when he's great at the most valuable thing an NFL defender can do (getting the qb and staying healthy) does not make you a smart football fan, get over yourself

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catsfan69 Grand Master

Catsfan69

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, ImaginaryKev said:

Also Burns is only 24 and still going to get better as a pass rusher, I do not care that he's not the best run defender. Criticizing that part of his game when he's great at the most valuable thing an NFL defender can do (getting the qb and staying healthy) does not make you a smart football fan, get over yourself

He's not a great pass rusher. He's never had a 10 sack season even with 17 games. 

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

    • TD alt
      C Mc. Gotta love this guy!!

      By TD alt · Posted

      In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • TD alt
      Scourton isn't signed (& apparently it's a thing)

      By TD alt · Posted

      Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
    • jfra78
      Are all veterinarians this greedy ?

      By jfra78 · Posted

      Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...