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!

     

"We should have traded Burns" - a rebuttal


Ricky Spanish
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Zaximus said:

I just can't buy the double team argument either.  I've seen Tight Ends and running backs solo OWN Burns during games.  There isn't a good argument as to why it was a good thing, with what we know about Burns and how he is playing right now.  But, we have to move on, just add it to the plethora of other Panther mistakes.  The biggest thing will be when we have to re-sign him because it'll look even worse if he walks, but, now he has all the leverage knowing this.  

He’ll never just walk. We’d use the franchise tag to trade before that happened. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, carpanfan96 said:

That same NFC scout told me that Burns "still has huge upside, and while his production has been good, he would really take off if his offense scored more often, to where he could pin his ears back an extra 15-20 times per game."


 

 

Exactly what I've been saying, if burns is at 75% of snaps on defense and pass rushing most of those his stats would skyrocket on a more balanced team. Dude is standing up on pass rush attempts because he gets ran on and gashed if he doesn't stay disciplined, now he does. Our run d has improved tremendously over the last few weeks compared to the last two years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Cavscout said:

Burns could still be traded in the offseason. The Panthers wouldn't have gotten a 1st rd pick this year from the rumored Rams trade anyhow so it wouldn't have really helped going into next year.

We would have gotten a 2nd.  And that is the problem with the panthers for the past 3 years, we are looking for immediate gratification instead of developing a plan and going with it.

  • Pie 2
  • The D 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, carpanfan96 said:

Not gonna quote everyone on this but coaches and gms have talked about it. 

 

A future first is worth a pick in the middle of its round divided by 2 and that goes down the further out it is. 

 

So next year's first from the Rams would have a draft value of a pick in the middle of the 2nd round, the one after that would have a value of a third round pick. 

 

That's how draft pick trade valuation works. 

 

Every single team uses similar valuation charts

You could not be more wrong here.  That is a simplistic and short sighted way of looking at things.  Do you believe fitt had the same line of thinking when he traded cmac?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours 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 

After this FA period / draft this response could be considered flawed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

cool, who is the qb in your scenario?

That's the question. Unless we build around Darnold and hope Corral develops, a rookie QB is likely into year 2 before making significant growth. That's why most of the people saying we should have taken the trade are saying 2 years or longer. We lack a HC, OC, DC, and QB. That's a unicorn offseason to get all that right in one year and make a playoff run. 

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Biscuit said:

We let Peppers just walk.

And the restructures around tagging him were very costly as well not just in money but you could be cutting or keeping guys solely based on money. Big double whammy.  I always thought JR was all over those decisions and told Marty to make it work financially. 
 

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

    • It seems the needs for the Panthers are at positions that tend to require intelligence to lift others--going from "good to great"--FS, ILB, and C--as you say. While i like Rodriguez a lot (can see the Hurricanes [Jarvis] and Panthers with a mustache player to get the fans into it)--I also like Golday (WLB?).  However, take a look at smallish Kyle Louis (Pitt).  He is known to be cerebral, but he is small (5'11" I think) and for that, I moved him lower.  But look at the different LB events at the combine--he is near the top in most of them.  I see him as a sleeper.  So if we wait until the second round, we can get a solid LB.   So what if we grab a free agent edge specialist (veteran) for pass situations and help develop Princely.  We draft FS (Oregon) first--maybe trading back to do so--I dunno.  We sign a free agent ILB and draft a rookie like Rodriguez or Louis.  In the third, we could probably find a center, like (former OT Parker from Duke) or Slaughter or Pew (may have to trade up).   So, as you say, others are fighting for Edge players, WRs, and OTs early like seagulls on the beach fighting over spilled corn chips, We sit back, grab intelligent players that make others better.  FS, ILB, and C. OT scares me more that Edge if we do this--but for those screaming for an edge--we have edge players--2 with starting experience who have had some degree of success.  JC Davis can play either T spot and he is good at pass blocking--a bit raw--but could be developmental depth that could play in a pinch. Or you could draft a solid OT with shorter arms that are driving them down into day 3--and convert them to G or C later.  Nijman and BC being re-signed could provide enough to hold down the job until a developmental OT (World, Oregon?) prepares for a shot at it.  Wagner (ND) could play LT but is probably a future RT--he is expected to be drafted early day 3.  My favorite day 3 OT sleeper?  Keagan Trost, Missouri. Great run blocker, soild pass blocker in SEC--just shorter arms.  Maybe a guard down the road, but for the time being, a T.  Not ideal, but at least you are building for the future.  
    • I'm not like most people in this thread in regards to Love. I'm not like most in regards to RBs either. I think certain ones will always be drafted in the first round because they are valued that highly. From an on-the-field perspective, they are as valued as ever; business-wise and contract-wise at times to re-up, that's where things can get tricky with valuation. That being said, Love oozes potential and makes higher-ups' mouths water. I know that he if somehow he is available at 19, he will be considered if not taken. You don't leave that type of talent on the board unless there is another compelling player of arguably equal or more value at another position of need that may have a higher priority (like maybe Sonny Styles). Now all that being said, I  don't realistically see either one of them being there at 19 according to the draftniks.
×
×
  • Create New...