Burns

[DaveThePanther2008]

Just for a topic.  I am against trading Burns.

But for the sake of conversation and argument. 

If we were to package Burns in a deal to move up to the #1 spot.  What do you want in return?

No way I trade Burns and #9 just for the #1 spot. 

[TJKJ23xx]

Burns should only be traded if the ask for his contract is astronomical and doesn’t make sense for our future and leverage in the terrible NFCS in the near future. If they do in fact trade him it will be for picks either predominantly in this draft and or next. I’m not for or against it. I just feel the value and cap have to align to even want to do it. Now if they can get a first this year and some pieces fall in place getting Tyree Wilson or Myles Murphy and still having a top 25 first to match would be more than ideal. 

[WarPanthers89]

Burns will not be traded. He’s a pro bowl DE and only 24 years old. Plus……we have absolutely no talent at DE other than him. 

[SmokinwithWilly]

Trading to 1 will require 3 1sts and a 2nd at least. It's about even with 9 and Burns to 1. 

[WUnderhill]

 

12 minutes ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

Trading to 1 will require 3 1sts and a 2nd at least. It's about even with 9 and Burns to 1. 

Sorry I don’t think any team will value it like that. We missed our opportunity to get 2 1sts for Burns.

[PleaseCutStewart]

If we aren't trading Burns for 2 1sts and a 2nd, then I don't think our dumbass front office will trade him for anything

[Khyber53]

Burns doesn't need to be traded. He does, however, need an additional stud DE to pair with. He's great, but he isn't the bust through double teams kind of guy. 

[PleaseCutStewart]

23 minutes ago, WarPanthers89 said:

Burns will not be traded. He’s a pro bowl DE and only 24 years old. Plus……we have absolutely no talent at DE other than him. 

Agreed we have no DE talent, but if you want to give Burns the highest contract ever for a DE (which I'm sure is something our dumbshit franchise would do), then I'm guessing your last name must be Hurney

[Brooklyn 3.0]

We'll be debating if not trading Burns was a mistake for years.

[TheMaulClaw]

I think we should trade Burns for a 1st and maybe more, then draft two 1st round DE's.

[LinvilleGorge]

1 hour ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

No way I trade Burns and #9 just for the #1 spot. 

Honestly... I doubt Burns and #9 would get you #1.

[Htarnation4.0]

37 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Honestly... I doubt Burns and #9 would get you #1.

I think you are correct...and it's amazing that a sure fire pro bowl caliber player is worth less than "potential" of undrafted players.  

[Ivory Panther]

Question: Is Burns that much better than Yannick Ngakoue? 

I think Burns + 9 gets you to AZ 3rd or Burns + 9 + 2024 first gets you CHI first.

Sign Yannick 3 years $35M which is kind of what he got from the Raiders before being traded to Indy.

 

[LinvilleGorge]

12 minutes ago, Htarnation4.0 said:

I think you are correct...and it's amazing that a sure fire pro bowl caliber player is worth less than "potential" of undrafted players.  

The value of players on cheap rookie contracts is real. You're going to have to pay Burns big $$$. Rookies have way lower cap hits.