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!

     

#1 CJ Trade

razorwolf

By razorwolf,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

JawnyBlaze Grand Master

JawnyBlaze

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, OldhamA said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but he's less highly thought of at Ohio St than Fields was, right?

He was available at #9.

If anyone ever thought of Fields higher than Stroud they have no business having opinions on QB prospects.  Stroud is being seriously talked about at #1, Fields never was. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Navy_football Grand Master

Navy_football

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

If the Bears were goin to drop to 9 it would probably include Burns in the trade package. 

 

That would make sense, since the Bears have enough cap to sign him long term. If Burns is worth 2 (1sts) and a 2nd, then we'd only need to give up the 9th pick and Burns to make it happen - right? 😂

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Carolina Cajun Veteran

Carolina Cajun

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, top dawg said:

That's hard to say because of Fields' slide, but when the process began (and probably into February, if not March, not to mention their entire collegiate careers), I believe that Fields absolutely was thought of higher than Stroud has ever been thought of. 

If I remember correctly he and Trevor Lawrence were 1A/1B going into the offseason after the national championship.  I think he had some stuff that threw off some teams at the combine and his pro days, also remember that some teams get enamored with random poo during the draft process (IE Zach Wilson and Sam Darnold, Make a few throws at pro day and you're gold).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Toomers Mentor

Toomers

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

That would make sense, since the Bears have enough cap to sign him long term. If Burns is worth 2 (1sts) and a 2nd, then we'd only need to give up the 9th pick and Burns to make it happen - right? 😂

Burns isn’t worth that anymore. He wasn’t worth it when the Panthers turned it down. 

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JawnyBlaze Grand Master

JawnyBlaze

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

That would make sense, since the Bears have enough cap to sign him long term. If Burns is worth 2 (1sts) and a 2nd, then we'd only need to give up the 9th pick and Burns to make it happen - right? 😂

I’d guess two firsts and Burns is what it would actually take 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jackie Lee Grand Master

Jackie Lee

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

That would make sense, since the Bears have enough cap to sign him long term. If Burns is worth 2 (1sts) and a 2nd, then we'd only need to give up the 9th pick and Burns to make it happen - right? 😂

Probably also a 2 and a future 3rd or something and get 5th back. It's always some garbage on the back end like that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Navy_football Grand Master

Navy_football

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, JawnyBlaze said:

I’d guess two firsts and Burns is what it would actually take 

So 4 firsts and a second?! 

Being sarcastic...

Burns was never worth what the Rams were willing to give up for him. But those 2 firsts and a second would've made it possible to move up and still have significant draft capital left over. The team drastically overvalued their guy.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Toomers Mentor

Toomers

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

So 4 firsts and a second?! 

Being sarcastic...

Burns was never worth what the Rams were willing to give up for him. But those 2 firsts and a second would've made it possible to move up and still have significant draft capital left over. The team drastically overvalued their guy.  

6DB49492-68AF-4385-9941-9A67B65A2DBA.gif.a47f7a53bc809a8fa285d45e96e4dba7.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JawnyBlaze Grand Master

JawnyBlaze

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Navy_football said:

So 4 firsts and a second?! 

Being sarcastic...

Burns was never worth what the Rams were willing to give up for him. But those 2 firsts and a second would've made it possible to move up and still have significant draft capital left over. The team drastically overvalued their guy.  

I mean, maybe a 1st, 2nd and Burns. It’s not probably going to be an exact value of what Burns could get is in a trade for picks. Besides, the Burns trade was two future firsts, so he was worth two seconds and a third if we’re talking “value” for trading up for a player this year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Navy_football Grand Master

Navy_football

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, JawnyBlaze said:

I mean, maybe a 1st, 2nd and Burns. It’s not probably going to be an exact value of what Burns could get is in a trade for picks. Besides, the Burns trade was two future firsts, so he was worth two seconds and a third if we’re talking “value” for trading up for a player this year. 

Any 1sts the team could offer would be this year's and then future ones. We could have given up the 9th pick, our second, the Ram's second, and the Ram's first next season. And still would have had a second this year, and a first next year, and 2 firsts in 2024. Along with our franchise QB (we'd hope).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JawnyBlaze Grand Master

JawnyBlaze

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

Any 1sts the team could offer would be this year's and then future ones. We could have given up the 9th pick, our second, the Ram's second, and the Ram's first next season. And still would have had a second this year, and a first next year, and 2 firsts in 2024. Along with our franchise QB (we'd hope).

The Ram’s first next year is worth a second, so we’d be offering a first and three seconds in value.  Not nearly enough

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Navy_football Grand Master

Navy_football

Posted
Posted
Just now, JawnyBlaze said:

The Ram’s first next year is worth a second, so we’d be offering a first and three seconds in value.  Not nearly enough

I agree. But that's what any team would offer, right? Unless some team with multiple firsts this year wanted to move up. Not sure about that, but generally speaking teams offer future first and second round picks. The Panthers would have had a ton of them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JawnyBlaze Grand Master

JawnyBlaze

Posted
Posted
Just now, Navy_football said:

I agree. But that's what any team would offer, right? Unless some team with multiple firsts this year wanted to move up. Not sure about that, but generally speaking teams offer future first and second round picks. The Panthers would have had a ton of them. 

Yea, I’m just saying it probably would have taken #9, our second this year and all the Rams picks. Maybe more. 

  • Beer 1
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

    • kungfoodude
      The Hurricanes are never getting over the hump untill they spend money in the net

      By kungfoodude · Posted

      I agree. Two holes FTW!
    • csx
      How long do you feel it takes for a head coach to turn a team around?

      By csx · Posted

      Canales has his msjor issue not doing the obvious regarding running Dowdle but with an average QB we would be in the playoffs with an average QB. 
    • kungfoodude
      How long do you feel it takes for a head coach to turn a team around?

      By kungfoodude · Posted

      1. fug TikTak, I ain't clicking that stupid poo. 2. This is really very situationally dependent. Coaching is a huge part but sometimes you step into a scenario where a lot of building needs to happen that is largely out of your control. Recent examples(Last season's hiring cycle): 1. Ben Johnson Johnson chose the OVERWHELMINGLY best open coaching job due to a combination of solid ownership, a solid front office and the most talented roster of the open jobs from that cycle. Negatives were, insanely stacked division. Results have so far indicated that this coaching change has been a massive boost. 2. Mike Vrabel Vrabel went a different direction. He went to a franchise that has solid ownership, a mediocre front office and one of the worst rosters in the NFL. However, he has a track record of NFL head coaching success AND lucked into one of the easiest schedules in NFL history(I believe 3rd easiest). Even with that caveat, a clear indicator that coaching has been a huge boost. 3. Pete Carroll Carroll chose one of the NFL's most volatile franchises. Notoriously bad ownership, very bad front office and a terrible roster. But, Carroll is a HOF caliber NFL HC with success at every stop. At the moment, coaching has not been able to overcome the apparent obstacles. In fact, it's been a complete disaster to the extent that Carroll has already fired multiple coaches. One could certainly argue that pethaps Pete has lost his touch but regardless, this coaching change didn't result in a turnaround and Carroll's future there seems in doubt. 4. Aaron Glenn Glenn's first HC opportunity was a doozy. Near worst ownership, a mediocre front office(at best) and a talented core group of players on an underwhelming roster. This experiment has been quite the ride to date. Glenn's personnel decisions have seemingly led to multiple close game losses(2-5 in games decided by one score or less) and the FO decided to have a roster firesale prior to the trade deadline for a wealth of draft capital. The question will be if Glenn will be given the time to actually see this future draft capital realized, now that a significant chunk of the talented core is not longer there. Coaching has not made a difference but is the franchise now setting him up to fail further? 5. Liam Coen Coen picked a mixed bag. Terrible ownership, a remade front office he essentially had a hand in selecting(or at the miminum influenced) and a middling roster. The early results show promise even if the roster shows significant flaws(and Coen shows visible frustration with his "franchise" QB every Sunday). Could be close to turning a 4 win team into a playoff berth. Coaching has mattered. 6. Brian Schottenheimer This was resoundingly viewed as a bad hire but it's also under challenging circumstances. Bad ownership in the sense that the ownership is also the front office, a future Tepper dream I assume. Very talented but very flawed roster. The initial results have been...interesting. A Cowboys team that was a bad 7-10 after a previous streak of three 12 win seasons is now....mediocre? Couple that with wild roster changes prior to the start of the season and up to the trade deadline and it makes for an incomplete picture. It's not much progress but it doesn’t appear to be regressing either. TBD. 6. Kellen Moore Moore chose the most challenging of all openings. The Saints are in the midst of a simulateous roster teardown and attempted rebuild. Decent ownership, a mixed bag in the front office(great at evaluating draft talent, less so in free agency and in salary cap management). The Saints have been awful but, they were expected to be awful. To that note, they were net sellers before the trade deadline. It was reported that Moore secured an agreement that this is long term building effort prior to taking the position so his status seems safe even while the team flounders week to week. Difficult to grade this now as the entire scenario seems to be a long term strategy. TBD.
×
×
  • Create New...