Rams Offering Two (Future) Firsts for Burns

[CRA]

8 minutes ago, Zappy said:

Pep first four seasons had 40.5 sacks

Burns has 30.5 currently in his fourth season with 9 games left

Put some respect on BB

4 seasons in

Peppers was ROY, Pro Bowler, All Pro.  4th for DPOY.    

He also wasn't a pass rush specialist.  He was an everything specialist.    Forced fumbles, passes defended, blocked kicks, you name it.   Basically anything you can do on a football field - advantage Peppers.  Burns ain't bringing that package to the table.  It isn't close. 

Don't be disrespectful to what will be our first 1st ballot HOFer.  The only one we have drafted. 

[Catsfan69]

5 minutes ago, Zappy said:

Pep first four seasons had 40.5 sacks

Burns has 30.5 currently in his fourth season with 9 games left

Put some respect on BB

Lol in way less games Peppers had 10 more sack without looking about twice as many forced fumbles including a 60yd td, 3 interceptions including a 97 yd pick 6. 

 

LMFAO Burns doesn't belong in the same sentence as Peppers.

[LinvilleGorge]

3 minutes ago, WUnderhill said:

Coded racism.

And a great way to end up banned for continuing to drag Tinderbox topics out of the Tinderbox.

[Zappy]

Alright, alright .. I don't think Burns is Pep but you don't have to be Pep to be a great DE

[Catsfan69]

4 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

@Zappydef do these... because it appears Burns will have more than Pep did in both categories with less games

You understand Burns binifits from 17 game seasons right?

[grimesgoat]

6 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

That's just not how grading assets in the NFL works. Not when one bad season can get your butt fired as a coach or GM Outside of a small handful of truly entrenched guys.

And how are draft picks going to "appreciate"? We aren't talking about stocks or bonds here.

Same concept.  If a draft choice today is valued as a second, and next year the same pick is valued as a first, what would you call it?  That pick is just sitting around gaining value - just like an investment.  The gain could be volatile depending on how the underlying company (Rams) performs, but you should still see a gain in value.

I understand present values and the time value of money.  The question is, can you use two future firsts to invest in order to surpass Brian Burns' net (after cost) production over the next 8-10 years?

I bet a good GM could.

 

[Wundrbread33]

12 minutes ago, Pimpdaddy said:

Fit better get a pen...times running out...no brainer....

43 pages for a no brainer. 

[LinvilleGorge]

5 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

Lol in way less games Peppers had 10 more sack without looking about twice as many forced fumbles including a 60yd td, 3 interceptions including a 97 yd pick 6. 

 

LMFAO Burns doesn't belong in the same sentence as Peppers.

No he doesn't but very few in the history of the NFL do. He's #5 on the NFL's all-time sack leaders list for a reason.

[TheCasillas]

2 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

You understand Burns binifits from 17 game seasons right?

You understand that he hasn’t played a full 17 game season right? 

[LinvilleGorge]

5 minutes ago, grimesgoat said:

Same concept.  If a draft choice today is valued as a second, and next year the same pick is valued as a first, what would you call it?  That pick is just sitting around gaining value - just like an investment.  The gain could be volatile depending on how the underlying company (Rams) performs, but you should still see a gain in value.

It's not "gaining" anything. The value of the pick is devalued because the return is not immediate and there's the uncertainty of where the pick will fall within the round. That doesn't mean that it gains real value like a bond maturing.

[CRA]

3 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

No he doesn't but very few in the history of the NFL do. He's #5 on the NFL's all-time sack leaders list for a reason.

#2 all time blocked kicks

#2 all time in forced fumbles. 

Crazy stuff. 

[Toomers]

1 minute ago, LinvilleGorge said:

It's not "gaining" anything. The value of the pick is devalued because the return is not immediate and there's the uncertainty of where the pick will fall within the round. That doesn't mean that it gains real value like a bond maturing.

So the Giants would have been better off taking pick 39 in the 2021 draft than taking a next year’s 1st which wound up being 7th overall. Those Rams picks can be used to acquire other players at any time as well. 

  If your GM is making deals with self- preservation in mind, and not what’s the best value for the team, there is already much bigger issues. 

[Hugor Hill]

8 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

You understand that he hasn’t played a full 17 game season right? 

I guess last year doesn't count.

[LinvilleGorge]

4 minutes ago, Toomers said:

So the Giants would have been better off taking pick 39 in the 2021 draft than taking a next year’s 1st which wound up being 7th overall. Those Rams picks can be used to acquire other players at any time as well. 

  If your GM is making deals with self- preservation in mind, and not what’s the best value for the team, there is already much bigger issues. 

Don't hate the player, hate the game. If you were in that seat you'd be thinking self preservation too.