"We should have traded Burns" - a rebuttal

[Ricky Spanish]

I know a lot of people on here wanted us to trade away Burns for all those picks from the Rams. 

I'll admit, the offer was enticing, however I kept coming back to one question, "Who else do we have on this roster but Burns?"

The answer is no one really. That's why the offer from the Rams just wasn't good enough. If we were to trade Burns away, we need a first rounder NOW to help replace the huge void losing him would create. 

And the void would be huge. Sure, Burns leaves you wanting in terms of run defense, but I found something out about Burns compared to the other Sack Leaders around the NFL:

Burns Plays WAY MORE than EVERY OTHER Pass rusher ahead of him on the sack list:

Player	Snap Percentage
Nick Bosa	76%
Haason Reddick	74%
Matt Judon	77%
Myles Garrett	78%
Micah Parsons	80%
Chris Jones	81%
Brian Burns	87%

And that's including the Cincy game where he only played 66% of the snaps because we pulled him when we were getting stomped so badly. Take that game out of the equation and he's playing 89% of all the defensive snaps this year. So yeah, if he looks like he's taking some plays off, he might be, dude is gassed. It's not a conditioning issue, he is the team's only consistent pass rusher, and if we lost him we'd be completely screwed. Losing him would set our defense back significantly in terms of generating pressure against the opposing QBs.

I know QB is at the top of our list in terms of need this offseason, but I'd argue #2 is finding more consistent pass rushers to aid the only good defensive end on our team this year. Even getting some average dudes in FA that can spell Burns would go a long way in helping him and our defense out. Letting him rest one more play out of 10 would do wonders for his efficiency. 

 

[mrcompletely11]

2 minutes ago, Ricky Spanish said:

I know a lot of people on here wanted us to trade away Burns for all those picks from the Rams. 

I'll admit, the offer was enticing, however I kept coming back to one question, "Who else do we have on this roster but Burns?"

The answer is no one really. That's why the offer from the Rams just wasn't good enough. If we were to trade Burns away, we need a first rounder NOW to help replace the huge void losing him would create. 

And the void would be huge. Sure, Burns leaves you wanting in terms of run defense, but I found something out about Burns compared to the other Sack Leaders around the NFL:

Burns Plays WAY MORE than EVERY OTHER Pass rusher ahead of him on the sack list:

Player	Snap Percentage
Nick Bosa	76%
Haason Reddick	74%
Matt Judon	77%
Myles Garrett	78%
Micah Parsons	80%
Chris Jones	81%
Brian Burns	87%

And that's including the Cincy game where he only played 66% of the snaps because we pulled him when we were getting stomped so badly. Take that game out of the equation and he's playing 89% of all the defensive snaps this year. So yeah, if he looks like he's taking some plays off, he might be, dude is gassed. It's not a conditioning issue, he is the team's only consistent pass rusher, and if we lost him we'd be completely screwed. Losing him would set our defense back significantly in terms of generating pressure against the opposing QBs.

I know QB is at the top of our list in terms of need this offseason, but I'd argue #2 is finding more consistent pass rushers to aid the only good defensive end on our team this year. Even getting some average dudes in FA that can spell Burns would go a long way in helping him and our defense out. Letting him rest one more play out of 10 would do wonders for his efficiency. 

 

One huge flaw in your argument.   We are not winning NOW.  We are still a ways away from being competitive.   2 years minimum.   And that’s best case scenario 

[TheSpecialJuan]

I think we can get a better trade package this offseason 

[LinvilleGorge]

I defended turning the offer down at the time but honestly it was a great offer for a good player who we're gonna have to pay like a great player in a re-signing.

Yeah... we should've taken the offer.

[mrcompletely11]

1 minute ago, TheSpecialJuan said:

I think we can get a better trade package this offseason 

0% chance that happens 

[Ricky Spanish]

4 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

One huge flaw in your argument.   We are not winning NOW.  We are still a ways away from being competitive.   2 years minimum.   And that’s best case scenario 

Bull.

A good HC and we can win next season. Happens all the time. Rhule was just so incompetent people forget that teams turn around year over year all the time. 

We aren't that far off. 

 

[AU-panther]

8 minutes ago, Ricky Spanish said:

I know a lot of people on here wanted us to trade away Burns for all those picks from the Rams. 

I'll admit, the offer was enticing, however I kept coming back to one question, "Who else do we have on this roster but Burns?"

The answer is no one really. That's why the offer from the Rams just wasn't good enough. If we were to trade Burns away, we need a first rounder NOW to help replace the huge void losing him would create. 

And the void would be huge. Sure, Burns leaves you wanting in terms of run defense, but I found something out about Burns compared to the other Sack Leaders around the NFL:

Burns Plays WAY MORE than EVERY OTHER Pass rusher ahead of him on the sack list:

Player	Snap Percentage
Nick Bosa	76%
Haason Reddick	74%
Matt Judon	77%
Myles Garrett	78%
Micah Parsons	80%
Chris Jones	81%
Brian Burns	87%

And that's including the Cincy game where he only played 66% of the snaps because we pulled him when we were getting stomped so badly. Take that game out of the equation and he's playing 89% of all the defensive snaps this year. So yeah, if he looks like he's taking some plays off, he might be, dude is gassed. It's not a conditioning issue, he is the team's only consistent pass rusher, and if we lost him we'd be completely screwed. Losing him would set our defense back significantly in terms of generating pressure against the opposing QBs.

I know QB is at the top of our list in terms of need this offseason, but I'd argue #2 is finding more consistent pass rushers to aid the only good defensive end on our team this year. Even getting some average dudes in FA that can spell Burns would go a long way in helping him and our defense out. Letting him rest one more play out of 10 would do wonders for his efficiency. 

 

With $25-30m you can atleat replace a large part of his production,  The draft picks are just bonus.

Or you use the $30m to help other positions and spend the draft picks on rushers. 

 

[PleaseCutStewart]

If we were a year or two away from being super bowl threats, I could buy your argument. Unfortunately, we are probably several years away from that. By that point, if we have burns, I'm sure we will be trying to find a way to shed his cap hit...

Let's be honest... Outside of good qbs and the truly elite non-qb players, there aren't many players that I would not take two first rounders and a second round for.

It was a really bad mistake to not take that offer. We are way closer to the Texans skill level than the bills, Chiefs, Bengals, etc. Skill level.

[Ricky Spanish]

7 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I defended turning the offer down at the time but honestly it was a great offer for a good player who we're gonna have to pay like a great player in a re-signing.

Yeah... we should've taken the offer.

Would have helped our Tank, that's for sure. 

We'd have no one to replace him with though, and that would set us back a few years in terms of a creating a solid pass rush. 

[Toomers]

3 minutes ago, Ricky Spanish said:

I know a lot of people on here wanted us to trade away Burns for all those picks from the Rams. 

I'll admit, the offer was enticing, however I kept coming back to one question, "Who else do we have on this roster but Burns?"

The answer is no one really. That's why the offer from the Rams just wasn't good enough. If we were to trade Burns away, we need a first rounder NOW to help replace the huge void losing him would create. 

And the void would be huge. Sure, Burns leaves you wanting in terms of run defense, but I found something out about Burns compared to the other Sack Leaders around the NFL:

Burns Plays WAY MORE than EVERY OTHER Pass rusher ahead of him on the sack list:

Player	Snap Percentage
Nick Bosa	76%
Haason Reddick	74%
Matt Judon	77%
Myles Garrett	78%
Micah Parsons	80%
Chris Jones	81%
Brian Burns	87%

And that's including the Cincy game where he only played 66% of the snaps because we pulled him when we were getting stomped so badly. Take that game out of the equation and he's playing 89% of all the defensive snaps this year. So yeah, if he looks like he's taking some plays off, he might be, dude is gassed. It's not a conditioning issue, he is the team's only consistent pass rusher, and if we lost him we'd be completely screwed. Losing him would set our defense back significantly in terms of generating pressure against the opposing QBs.

I know QB is at the top of our list in terms of need this offseason, but I'd argue #2 is finding more consistent pass rushers to aid the only good defensive end on our team this year. Even getting some average dudes in FA that can spell Burns would go a long way in helping him and our defense out. Letting him rest one more play out of 10 would do wonders for his efficiency. 

 

That’s also many more snaps to accumulate sacks. Burns has 12.5 sacks in 951 snaps. Reddick has 16 sacks in 767 snaps. 
 

 Would you rather have 

Reddick type DE(which is what Burns is anyhow) at 15-17M/yr 

BOZEMAN at 8-10M/yr

OR

Burns 25M/year

 2M/yr FA C(that’s worse than Eflein)

Then on top you get 3 premium draft picks that look better every day. 
 

 

[Waldo]

The only real reason to not trade Burns for that package is because it would have looked awful in regards to Wilks being able to have a legitimate year. CMC and RA all made sense and were great moves. Trading Burns would have looked bad. 

We can still trade him. Whatever but if he signs a giant new deal then expectations change real fast. 

[mrcompletely11]

3 minutes ago, Ricky Spanish said:

Bull.

A good HC and we can win next season. Happens all the time. Rhule was just so incompetent people forget that teams turn around year over year all the time. 

We aren't that far off. 

 

With what qb?

[Toomers]

4 minutes ago, Ricky Spanish said:

Would have helped our Tank, that's for sure. 

We'd have no one to replace him with though, and that would set us back a few years in terms of a creating a solid pass rush. 

Are the Panthers not allowed to buy 15-17M/yr DEs like so many teams have the last two years. 
 

Reddick

C. Jones

z. Smith

Hendrickson

Hunter

Judon

Nwosu

With 25-30M and 3 picks you can pick anyone and still have leftover money and draft capital 

[Waldo]

7 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

With what qb?

If it goes poorly the question is with what RB?

Keep Burns or trade him, the coaching is priority # 1. Giants are in the playoffs lol.