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

By Ricky Spanish,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Toomers Mentor

Toomers

Posted
Posted
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
carpanfan96 Grand Master

carpanfan96

Posted
Posted
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
carpanfan96 Grand Master

carpanfan96

Posted
Posted
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
Toomers Mentor

Toomers

Posted
Posted
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
Toomers Mentor

Toomers

Posted
Posted
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
carpanfan96 Grand Master

carpanfan96

Posted
Posted (edited)
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
Navy_football Grand Master

Navy_football

Posted
Posted

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
frankw Grand Master

frankw

Posted
Posted
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
Toomers Mentor

Toomers

Posted
Posted
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
carpanfan96 Grand Master

carpanfan96

Posted
Posted (edited)
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
Toomers Mentor

Toomers

Posted
Posted
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
Navy_football Grand Master

Navy_football

Posted
Posted
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
carpanfan96 Grand Master

carpanfan96

Posted
Posted
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
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Navy_football
      Alejandro Avila: Are We Really About To Hand Offensive Rookie Of The Year To An 'Okay' Receiver?

      By Navy_football · Posted

      Adam Thielen had 1000 yards with rookie Bryce. I guess he's using that as comparison. Just kidding. Calm down. 
    • kungfoodude
      Someone's not gonna be happy

      By kungfoodude · Posted

      We definitely improved from 2024 to 2025, to me the results were less important than the roster in that regard. It's better. It's still a very bad roster but continuing to be better is the goal. The changes we are talking about at QB are about spending LESS resources. Not picking up Bryce's 5th is a big potential savings. Significantly better QB's have been had in recent years for half or less than what Bryce will get in 2026. To say nothing of an extension(the ridiculous subject of this thread) which would cripple roster building by saddling it with a bloated QB contract for an awful QB. The price for Bryce, I mean who is even making that argument anymore? I don't think you are seeing anyone in this thread discussing trading up to #1 for Mendoza.  We are talking about cheap backup and FA QB's and Day 2 and 3 draft guys. That is literally tied to the idea of roster building. IMPROVE at QB while you build the roster so that we can actually potentially attract a franchise QB or when you make that big move up(SF for Lance) that your roster is so good that the impact is largely negated.  After all, improving over Bryce is an extremely low bar to hit. Let's not assume that standing pat would have resulted in a sudden spurge in good decision making. Don't forget who was making all those roster calls at the time. Bryce or not, we would have fuged it up in some way because we had idiots at the helm. We may still yet. Also, it's easy to say we can't get in the habit of switching QB's like that but there are also plenty of situations where that flip was the correct decision. Richardson to Jones, Rosen to Murray, Fields to Williams, Lance to Purdy(technically some nuance to this), etc. There is no real danger of Bryce leaving and suddenly becoming an elite QB. We all do know this, no matter how big of a Bryce stan you may be. His ceiling is middling game manager. So there isn't some crazy risk of moving on.
    • Navy_football
      Someone's not gonna be happy

      By Navy_football · Posted

      Honestly. You can see it on the field. Bryce will literally skip a pass on the ground rather than throw a contested catch to XL. Especially when it's one where XL would have to fight back to the ball. Coker is actually really good at that. Coker lacks real NFL speed (not a small thing), but he maxes out in most other categories. 
×
×
  • Create New...