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!

     

How would you guys feels if we gave up two first rounders for a Top WR


thunderraiden
 Share

Recommended Posts

We need so much help I wouldn’t do it. If there is value or the BPA I don’t even mind skipping WR at 33 or 39 if it means we get a day 1 starter at another position. Roman Wilson , Jermaine Burton, Malik Washington, Malachi Corley, Jaylon Polk, Ricky Pearsal.  most these guys will still be there at 65. So if we wait til then I’m not mad. We just need to make sure we hit on it like a Tank Dell and not a TMJ.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, cookinbrak said:

Remember the Hornets? Get rid of good players, lie about the numbers, move the team.

Thats the thing though; the hornets always had good players, with the exception of like the George Zedic era or whatever. 
 

yeah it sucked when the LJ/Mourning team got blown up but that was due to, uh, private issues. Plus that team was just going to get slaughtered by the bulls in the second round every year  

two years before move the hornets a 2 game lead over the bucks and had a home game to go to the ECF. The hornets historically punched way over their weight. 
 

who is even the like PJ Brown on this panthers team? Or David Wesley?

current panthers are an entire team of Bobby Phils after his drag race. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

trade 2 first rounders for a top WR? no thanks.

trade 2 2nd rounders for a top WR? Also no...not this year. we need as many good player as we can get to fill out the ranks. we can worry about getting elite players later. plus, talent is so good and deep in this WR class that guys we could get in the 2nd and maybe even third round would have been selected a round earlier every other year. 

only trading i want on draft day is moving back to get more picks, but right now i'm digging having 2 2nds. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, electro's horse said:

The panthers need young, cheap players that can contribute on a football team. They need the in numbers. 
 

Quantity is the most important factor for the panthers at this point. 

No offense but I am in the opposite camp.  We need star players.  I am not onboard on trade up but we need best available at 33 and 39 IMO

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

    • I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
    • adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
    • You're really gonna pass up the opportunity to make a joke about skidmarks in underwear here?  Alright fine.
×
×
  • Create New...