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!

     

The Carolina Panthers are Idiots


davos
 Share

Recommended Posts

52 minutes ago, jayboogieman said:

I don't think Burns would be a good 3-4 OLB either. He can't cover nor does he play the run well. He's strictly a pass rusher.

That's how the Panthers use him and you see how well that's going.  He's a LB and no amount of hope and hype is going to change that. If the FO pays Burns like a DE then every single person involved with that decision should be fired.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Tr3ach said:

Burns definitely should have been traded for 2 firsts and a second.  I dont see how anyone could think differently.   Hes about to have to sign a new contract off of his rookie deal and he is a specialized player.  He is a speed rusher that can get picked on in the run game and misses sack sometimes because he can be a one direction rusher.   Rejecting the Burns deal is one of the worst moves the franchise has made in recent years personally and it still aggravates me every time I think about it.  I could see arguments made on both sides about moving Moore for a first.  I also think he is a specialized player that is more of a great #2 than a true #1.  A true #1 doesnt have some effort concerns and can get open by running really good routes alone, not by being schemed open mostly.   I love Moore but with a strong WR class I would have probably took that deal too but that one is more debatable.  Like I said he is a really good if not elite #2 with the right coaches.

Let me help you see it in another light. The draft picks were for 2024 and 2025 picks. Bradley Chubb went for a 1st and 4th at the deadline on his 5th year option. You don't think we'd get close to 2 1sts next year if Burns doesn't make sense at that point? We'll still get a 2024 and 2025 1st, but this way we have a chance to see whether a promising rookie qb and a competent coaching staff can lead to a quick turnaround first. Trade Burns for a 2024 and 2025 pick now and you're pretty much accepting we're not competing till 2025.

Also immediate impact pass rushers are rarely found outside of the top 10. For every Maxx Crosby there are 10 Yetur Gross Matos. There's a reason teams are offering so much for Burns. Now if we're in a full on rebuild and don't want to pay Burns like a premium pass rusher, fine, trade him next year. But I have no problem nixing a trade that doesn't help us for a couple years when we have Burns at a reasonable price through 2023.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Peon Awesome said:

Let me help you see it in another light. The draft picks were for 2024 and 2025 picks. Bradley Chubb went for a 1st and 4th at the deadline on his 5th year option. You don't think we'd get close to 2 1sts next year if Burns doesn't make sense at that point? We'll still get a 2024 and 2025 1st, but this way we have a chance to see whether a promising rookie qb and a competent coaching staff can lead to a quick turnaround first. Trade Burns for a 2024 and 2025 pick now and you're pretty much accepting we're not competing till 2025.

Also immediate impact pass rushers are rarely found outside of the top 10. For every Maxx Crosby there are 10 Yetur Gross Matos. There's a reason teams are offering so much for Burns. Now if we're in a full on rebuild and don't want to pay Burns like a premium pass rusher, fine, trade him next year. But I have no problem nixing a trade that doesn't help us for a couple years when we have Burns at a reasonable price through 2023.

Ok then, say we get a qb and a good coach this year and we start competing.  You can trade some of those extra draft picks for players then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jon Snow said:

That's how the Panthers use him and you see how well that's going.  He's a LB and no amount of hope and hype is going to change that. If the FO pays Burns like a DE then every single person involved with that decision should be fired.

I might be wrong here, but didn't we also draft him around the time we were toying with the idea of switching to a 3-4??

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Jon Snow said:

Anytime you can trade a LB for 2 1sts and a 2nd you do that without hesitation. 

We need DE's, true DE's. Not 3-4 outside linebackers. 

 

10 hours ago, Knaakedup said:

Been saying this since last year. He’s going to mess his career up by not getting with a team that’s running a 3-4. He’s not cut out for the Peppers/Rucker role we want him to be. 

This is what people don't get. They're arguing about "young talent" [blah blah blah], but he has never been the right fit for a 4-3 (or a Snow 5-1 or whatever). He is a 3-4 LB playing out of position. 

 

Let me tell y'all a story:

I was so peeved with Yahoo Fantasy Football for listing Burns as an LB. I wrote to them (tweeted at them and everything) a couple of seasons ago and argued that he should get a dual designation of "DE, LB" because though they listed him as an LB, the Panthers had him listed officially as a DE. They would not budge (though this year they have him listed as a DE). I thought about it, and just dropped him altogether, because he wasn't anywhere as consistent as top LBs, and he wasn't as consistent as top DEs either. Hell, even the top DTs outscore him (I have Quinnen Williams). Burns might be a sufficient BYE week replacement.

The point is is that he's a tweener. He would be much more effective as a pass rushing, 3-4 LB. We aren't maximizing his effectiveness or potential because that's not our preferred system. 

 

This is the real reason why we should have traded him for that type of haul.

Edited by top dawg
  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/7/2022 at 2:49 PM, TheCasillas said:

I dont understand the concept of "Trade 2 first round talents who are established in the league for 3 first round picks." 

Trading DJ would kill our cap situation and give us 20million in total dead cap. Trading Burns creates a huge hole on the roster. 

I agree, BUT...

Burns is a very, very good player, but I would have a lot of trouble turning down 2 rd 1 picks and a 2nd for him. very very good DE's get very very big contracts. I think he can be replaced by a rookie, even if we bundle a few picks to move earlier into the first to pick him. And that would leave us on a 5 year cheap deal with extra picks. I loves me some Burns, but that's a lot to turn down.

Who ever is QB next year will need DJ, and his contract is doable. We would have been idiots to trade him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have traded him for that haul in a second. He will come due to be paid and we are going to have to WAY overpay him more than he is worth to keep him at which time we may then decide to let him walk and we get nothing. He is simply not worth one of the highest paid DE salaries in the league simple as that. Unless he comes out next year setting record sacks but I think we all know he is not going to do that.

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

    • If we pay Bryce like a franchise QB we're completely and utterly buttfuged.
    • In my view, the realistic expectation for this team to compete will start 2027.  At that time, I think we could be looking at the following (this is HIGHLY speculative):   QB:  You know, Bryce.  I am not a fan, but they don't ask me.  But there is reason for hope--and here it is.  Bryce will be entering his prime.  Since we are likely to pay him, there will be changes that I include throughout this exercise--I realistically speculate on what they are going to do with Bryce and then I realistically speculate on what means in terms of the cap and other positions. Bryce HAS IMPROVED.  The idea is that if you give him more weapons and protection, that will continue.  His career:   At this rate, if his growth continues, by 2027 we should expect nearly 30 TDs and about 12 Interceptions and a Rating of about 98.  His completion percentage should settle at 65-66% or so.  If that happens, you can win with it. The following stats demonstrate how the Panthers will be able to afford it (and re-sign Ickey) My guess is they will require about $60m per year. This is why rookies who can play are important.  It also helps us see the blueprint.  You may disagree, but this is the cruel realities of the salary cap. Robert Hunt:  Cut post June 1 and save $19m.  Who do you replace him with?  Ickey. Tershawn Wharton:  Cutting him saves nearly $15m.  We should all hope to see Aaron Hall (UDFA) make the roster and play well.  Regardless, this is a position we would likely have to address in the next draft. Trevin Moehrig:  Cutting Moehrig as the starting SS saves this team $16.5m.   Ransom will be on year 3 of a cheap rookie deal and should be more than ready to take the reins.  their styles are similar.  Furthermore, FS Wheatley (R, 4th round) will be starting. Taylor Moton:  So much depends on his knee, but I have an idea that he can play another 3 years.  extending him could save the team about $5m per year.  Cutting him outright would save the team about $21m. In the most drastic situation, we have to cut Moton and the other three players mentioned.   We would need (in all likelihood) a starting DT and RT.  It is possible that the DE would be addressed, but Wharton's production (so far) could be equaled by a rookie.  Look for a cut free agent and a 2027 draft pick here.  If you cut Moton, you save $21m, and that would be the only big hole to fill.  Having Ickey at RG gives you some depth at T, and Ickey could be the guy.  T could be pick in the 2027 draft (first round), fwiw.  It saves you $21m while costing you $5m, for example. We get younger, creating a core of Freeling, Hecht, and the RT first rounder in 2027) along with Ekownu (second contract in the $15m range, and Lewis, whose contract would be in the $16m range if not extended.)  The OL cuts (Hunt, Moton) would save $40m.  The OL would get younger and still solid with veterans at G.   By cutting Wharton (no brainer if his play stays the same) and Moehrig (good player--but we have Ransom on a rookie contract who would not be that much of a drop off--if any) in addition to Hunt and Moton, we would save over $70m in cap room. We would be able to give Bryce bag  and we would have enough to re-sign Ickey (if the knee is not too risky) to a Guard contract (probably at a discount, coming off that injury).  Furthermore, we could add a RT in the draft (or a RG if Ickey moves to RT) and that would be the only large hole to fill. Correct my logic if you see issues-- On defense, in addition to the aforementioned, Scott ($2m contract) is out, replaced by a 4th round rookie contract. CB Jackson's contract ($7.8m) expires and he is (possibly) replaced by a rookie contract.  At Edge, patrick Jones II's $10m contract expires and he is likely a reserve, and his role is absorbed by Phillips, Scourton, Princely, and possible an UDFA like Isaiah Smith or a 2027 draft pick.   These productive developmental players over the past 2 drafts will pay huge dividends.  On paper, I see the team getting much younger and possibly better while cutting nearly $100m and reallocating that money to get more production.          
    • If everything played out and that last thing happened, I probably just quit. 
×
×
  • Create New...