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

Just now, frankw said:

Congratulations on your many very big achievements here sir I should never have questioned your status. Back to Burns. If the Rams had a first in this years draft and that was included in the offer then Scott Fitterer probably pulls the trigger. That's what this always circles back to. What is the value on a first round pick one year two years or three years from now? Seems to be anything but settled opinion.

Considering you can replace Burns AND improve another position with just the money you would overpay Burns, the picks are bonus. A big bonus. And what’s the difference when they are as far as the team is concerned. First rounders will have value until they are used. If you’re trading up for a QB, those future firsts have way more value than a 2nd or 3rd this year. And pick 37 is about as close to a first as you will get. 
 

   What’s your next deflection point? This is fun. 
 

   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Toomers said:

Considering you can replace Burns AND improve another position with just the money you would overpay Burns, the picks are bonus. A big bonus. And what’s the difference when they are as far as the team is concerned. First rounders will have value until they are used. If you’re trading up for a QB, those future firsts have way more value than a 2nd or 3rd this year. And pick 37 is about as close to a first as you will get. 
 

   What’s your next deflection point? This is fun. 
 

   

I get the value of the trade in a rebuild but to think 12+ sacks is just replaceable so easy is actually quite crazy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

so if thats the case why dont we see the reverse in trading?

If your talking normal trading it's because of what I mentioned earlier. 

 

A future pick's point slot isn't guaranteed, it's 1-32 possibilities. A player to player trade or a trade within the same draft has a defined value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, carpanfan96 said:

I get the value of the trade in a rebuild but to think 12+ sacks is just replaceable so easy is actually quite crazy. 

Why? Josh Uche has 11.5 sacks in 350 snaps. Justin Houston(3.5M) has 9 in 387 snaps. Plenty more. And I can almost guarantee they would play the run as well or better than Burns. Sacks are overrated. The 2019 defense was beyond horrible and they were 2nd in the league in Sacks. 
 

Crazy is turning down all that draft capital for the privilege of paying a player well over what he’s worth. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, carpanfan96 said:

If your talking normal trading it's because of what I mentioned earlier. 

 

A future pick's point slot isn't guaranteed, it's 1-32 possibilities. A player to player trade or a trade within the same draft has a defined value.

So value wise, every team should trade its future 1sts for 2nd round picks in the current draft? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Toomers said:

Why? Josh Uche has 11.5 sacks in 350 snaps. Justin Houston(3.5M) has 9 in 387 snaps. Plenty more. And I can almost guarantee they would play the run as well or better than Burns. Sacks are overrated. The 2019 defense was beyond horrible and they were 2nd in the league in Sacks. 
 

Crazy is turning down all that draft capital for the privilege of paying a player well over what he’s worth. 

It's not just about sacks. 

 

He's 4th in pressures since drafted. He's 12 in defensive stops this season. Top ten in sacks as well to be a kicker. He's a top ten dline player.  Yeeesh

Edited by carpanfan96
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Panthers don't have a player worth two 1st rounders and a 2nd. The Rams gave them an offer they couldn't refuse - and they did. Burns has too many limitations and can be made a liability if properly game planned against. I'd much rather have a Charles Johnson and Greg Hardy DE lineup than Burns and some JAG. Just solid and consistent play from both sides. Against the run and the pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Toomers said:

Considering you can replace Burns AND improve another position with just the money you would overpay Burns, the picks are bonus. A big bonus. And what’s the difference when they are as far as the team is concerned. First rounders will have value until they are used. If you’re trading up for a QB, those future firsts have way more value than a 2nd or 3rd this year. And pick 37 is about as close to a first as you will get. 
 

   What’s your next deflection point? This is fun. 

Trading Burns is a rebuild move and you are not going to get Reddick or any other premium FA pass rusher to commit unless you overpay. For many free agents playing for a contender is also a part of their decision making process. Yeah you still have guys who will take a payday on a bottom dweller but pass rushers have more choices given the need around the league. They aren't going to be in a hurry to hitch their wagon to the rebuilding Panthers. You keep saying pick 37 like that's such a big bargaining chip. If you want to move up for a QB firsts are all that matters. But if you're the general manager of a team needing a young promising QB on a rookie contract are you going to pass up staying put and taking the quarterback you're targeting for the 37th pick or a 1st two years from now knowing your job is on the line right now? Scott Fitterer is not the only NFL GM without the benefit of time to waste. Everyone wants to win now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, carpanfan96 said:

It's not just about sacks. 

 

He's 4th in pressures since drafted. He's 12 in defensive stops this season. Top ten in sacks as well to be a kicker. He's a top ten dline player.  Yeeesh

He a top ten what? DL? How can someone who is a liability on 40% of his snaps be a top 10 DL? He’s nowhere close. Even if it’s just Edge players he’s not. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Toomers said:

He a top ten what? DL? How can someone who is a liability on 40% of his snaps be a top 10 DL? He’s nowhere close. Even if it’s just Edge players he’s not. 

Not just my rating, this is from nfl executives. he's a Top 10 edge rusher and one of the best young players in the NFL. He ranked top 25 of young defensive players and I've already linked multiple articles in this thread showing this. 

Edited by carpanfan96
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, carpanfan96 said:

Didn't say that, said that's how the valuation works out and give proof of said valuation. 

 No. You gave mid round examples. Do you feel those are similar to trading 2–3 1sts for a QB. In the draft. You believe a team would rather have a 2nd and a 3rd this year over a first in 24 and 25? Thinking like that is how you wind up with Everette Brown. 1st round talent will still be superior a majority of the time whenever and however the picks used. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Toomers said:

He a top ten what? DL? How can someone who is a liability on 40% of his snaps be a top 10 DL? He’s nowhere close. Even if it’s just Edge players he’s not. 

Burns is not a top 10 DL. Heck Washington has 3 or 4 I'd put above him. Even with his sack advantage. There's more to playing the position. He can't set the edge. He opens run lanes and gets out of position even when pass rushing. And he misses tackles at the WORST possible times. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Toomers said:

 No. You gave mid round examples. Do you feel those are similar to trading 2–3 1sts for a QB. In the draft. You believe a team would rather have a 2nd and a 3rd this year over a first in 24 and 25? Thinking like that is how you wind up with Everette Brown. 1st round talent will still be superior a majority of the time whenever and however the picks used. 

Go back to the 2021 draft. 

 

 

 

Eagles move up from 12th to 6th. 

 

Difference in value of the picks in 2021 was 379 points. A 2nd round value.  

 

Eagles gave up a 22 1st round pick.  

 

There ya go. 

 

It's the same for every single team,  it's how the draft works

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...