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!

     

Rams Offering Two (Future) Firsts for Burns

OnlyPantherFaninMaine

By OnlyPantherFaninMaine,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

TheCasillas Grand Master

TheCasillas

Posted
Posted
Just now, Panthering said:

Prob similar to the money now > money later approach in finance. Also I suppose it makes sense to view it as the worst possible outcome to keep it conservative but still.... first round picks are first round picks. Blue chip talent in there if you approach it the right way. 

There is a huge drop in talent around picks 12-14 in the NFL draft. Front office experts refer to it as the "talent shelf." Sometimes you get lucky and a guy you had as a top 10 slips late (Burns) other times you get left with what is there (Kadrius Toney)... If you can't land in the top 14 range... then your pick isnt as valuabel as you hoped.... mathmaticaly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheCasillas Grand Master

TheCasillas

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Yes vs the value of the picks right now, not in the future and that is what we are discussing and its not math its how things are valued on a chart

you dont plan for the future of a franchise with "well it could be better next year, so lets make the trade" ... you plan based of the floor potential and not the ceiling. Then it's a bonus at that point. This is probably the exact reason why there is no deal in place with the Rams.... if they are talking... then its for more picks to recoup any loss from the "floor"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted

This is a tough one, TBH. Burns is bordering on being an elite pass rusher but by the same token is also isn't yet an elite pass rusher. He is coming up on his deal but we also have the franchise tag that we can use to keep him around if necessary.

So, this is really a bet on what we think of Burns, what we think the Rams will be in 2024/2025 and that Burns will always fit in our defensive scheme.

It's not as simple as "fug YEAH, TRADE HIM" or "fug NO, NOT ENOUGH!"

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NorthTryon Mentor

NorthTryon

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, pantherj said:

You thought I wouldn't respond to your complaining? No one in this thread wants to hear you complain, it's annoying, so get back on topic. You're the kind of dude who complains a lot and it's a burden.

I'm not complaining, I just know how it is when you have someone too hype about NFL stuff and ultimately have no real say in how it goes. I'm excited for where the Panthers are headed. I am also realistic and also know how NFL teams operate. You don't trade character guys that are good in their prime as a starting point for whatever the plans are going forward. Just be open for debate when the trade doesn't happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheCasillas Grand Master

TheCasillas

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

You didn't post anything but Burns from what I saw.

 

BRB

Ill post again. here you go:

Brian Burns with 9 games to go and Burns averaging .7 sacks per game, which would end him at 11.3 sacks on the year and a total of 37 sacks. Conservative estimate. 

image.png.8b8c08c480b5eca4f66c9baf62326468.png

Khalil Mack

40.5 total sacks his first 4 years. 

Game started difference is in Mack's favor heavily.... and games played will be one in BB's favor if he plays the rest of the year.

image.png.667af76049af449fe4a0c0ffa8f7a868.png

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
grimesgoat Experienced

grimesgoat

Posted
Posted

I'd do the deal.

We're probably picking 3rd. Stroud and Young will likely be gone.

So instead of picking Levis/Hooker way too early, we grab Anderson or Murphy.  Instant Burns replacement on a rookie deal.

Then we can see if Corral is any good, keep developing PJ, and have a ton of ammo for a QB in 2024. 

 

  • Pie 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catsfan69 Grand Master

Catsfan69

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

i already posted the data in this thread because another person challenged it. You wont have to look far.

You didn't post anything but Burns from what I saw.

 

BRB

 

So I looked and it seems Mack had 2.5 more sacks per year which is huge by itself. 

But in year 2 he had 15 and year three 11.

Burns has never had a double digit year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • CRA
      Monday practice tweets

      By CRA · Posted

      to clarify I am not referring to Will Levis.  Not knowingly.   I just made that up and tried to use a reasonable guesstimate of what else was done.  That sounded in the ballpark.  At one time I did look it all up and there were several teams that had much more successful days downfield.   If that happened to be Levis' actual numbers than it's more of a lucky coincidence.  If memory serves, it wasn't just Will Levis that brought the claim into question, it was SEVERAL teams had better days.  and you are missing my entire point of the subjective nature of it all.  If PFF employee Doug watched Bryce's film and then used his same unique subjective vantage point to grade all 31 other starting QBs.  Then dumped into into a spread sheet, it would a subjective Doug take but at least it would be a level uniform subjectivity.   The grades are done by various people.  All watching and applying their own subjective view to a play.  Everyone isn't going to grade incompletions out the same.  Or completions.   So when you dump it all into a spread sheet and hit sort.....it's not actually a statement of fact as portrayed.  Which is why you sometimes get some head scratching stuff.  I'm not reframing anything.   I don't think.  I just wasn't going to look it all back up so I was talking vaguely off the general issue I have with PFF and treating any random claim they make as the truth. 
    • PNW_PantherMan
      Monday practice tweets

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      Jones got projected as the next Eli because they share a similar goofball, on the spectrum energy.  That's my theory.
    • CRA
      Monday practice tweets

      By CRA · Posted

      I didn't think underrated was the wildest statement. The passing and offensive command he showed in week 18 against Atlanta was as good as any QB that has ever played for this franchise.  I mean THAT part is wild.  Which plays into the overrated part.  End of regulation I don't think he even hit 200 yards passing.  I mean he had a very efficient day vs a weak defense.   As good as we have ever seen in Carolina?   
×
×
  • Create New...