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!

     

Ian Rapoport on Bryce: "Everyone had Bryce Young #1"


Icege
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, ForJimmy said:

The trade was for pick 1. Stroud was an option then. The Bears wanted Burns, Brown, or DJ. The trade itself wasn’t a crazy one IMO. We just messed it up by the options we picked for the trade and pick. My point was it was a decent year to make it and a manageable trade. 
I’m fairly certain when we made it a lot of people on here were happy about the actual trade. 

That's like saying russian roulette isn't crazy as long as the bullet isn't in the chamber.  It's a crazy move to trade that much for a #1 pick.  You take the prospects out of the equation, and its stupid from a risk management perspective.  A coin flip is better odds than landing a franchise QB #1 overall.  Would you bet everything on a coin flip?  Would you bet everything on worse odds than that?  It's gambling addict stuff.

Edited by PNW_PantherMan
risky to crazy/ better word
  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

That's like saying russian roulette isn't crazy as long as the bullet isn't in the chamber.  It's a crazy move to trade that much for a #1 pick.  You take the prospects out of the equation, and its stupid from a risk management perspective.  A coin flip is better odds than landing a franchise QB #1 overall.  Would you bet everything on a coin flip?  Would you bet everything on worse odds than that?  It's gambling addict stuff.

The value they wanted for the top pick wasn’t as crazy as other years because there wasn’t a Burrow/Lawrence/Luck. I guess that’s what I’m trying to say. How we maneuvered it was dumb. Giving up our only weapon and drafting a QB that was an outlier with the pick made it more of a gamble. 
If I’m the GM and I’m convinced a player is my next franchise QB, two firsts, a player and a second isn’t that crazy to secure him. If we all felt confident Young was our future, we wouldn’t be upset about that trade. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was crying, begging and pleading not to take him or trade up. I have the reprimands to prove it. 

And fug all of you pretending to be against the pick. I had so many poo emojis  when I wrote what a huge fuging mistake this was going to be. You guys piled on me. I never gave in stuck to my guns.  Go back and read my posts. 

 

Mic drop.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

The value they wanted for the top pick wasn’t as crazy as other years because there wasn’t a Burrow/Lawrence/Luck. I guess that’s what I’m trying to say. How we maneuvered it was dumb. Giving up our only weapon and drafting a QB that was an outlier with the pick made it more of a gamble. 
If I’m the GM and I’m convinced a player is my next franchise QB, two firsts, a player and a second isn’t that crazy to secure him. If we all felt confident Young was our future, we wouldn’t be upset about that trade. 

2 seconds

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mrcompletely11 said:

2 seconds

Regardless SF just traded 3 firsts for the QB3 of a draft a couple years prior. The only  thing we would be missing this coming draft would be our 2nd (which we have one now). That makes it easier to move on if needed IMO. You eventually have to take that shot for your guy. Maybe we missed, maybe we didn’t, but if you hit it’s 100% worth it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

Regardless SF just traded 3 firsts for the QB3 of a draft a couple years prior. The only  thing we would be missing this coming draft would be our 2nd (which we have one now). That makes it easier to move on if needed IMO. You eventually have to take that shot for your guy. Maybe we missed, maybe we didn’t, but if you hit it’s 100% worth it. 

You are sort of downplaying that it was compounded by the 2024 pick we traded being The One. I understand if we hadn’t have traded we’d not have had the first pick probably but it was gonna be high. 

After watching Stroud last year, we may see a repeat outcome with Williams. They say he is looking great. 

What a folly.

I was right there with the people saying the play was just too risky. Young was and is a long shot you don’t do that for a long shot. I always came back to when it looks like a can’t miss generational player (the kind worth trading for), people don’t trade that. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

Regardless SF just traded 3 firsts for the QB3 of a draft a couple years prior. The only  thing we would be missing this coming draft would be our 2nd (which we have one now). That makes it easier to move on if needed IMO. You eventually have to take that shot for your guy. Maybe we missed, maybe we didn’t, but if you hit it’s 100% worth it. 

Yea but you don't need to trade multiple 1st round picks to move up.  We could have easily lost more games by letting Rhule continue.  We should have taken on the chin and drafted someone at 9.  The trade is ridiculous.  Giving up all of that to roll the dice on a QB is insane, because there's another QB dice roll built into the return we gave up.  We could have easily secured the #1 selection without Bryce last season.

The 49ers did what they did because they have a stacked roster that's got a limited window.  That's a different situation.  We have no window.  The frame isn't even up.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

Yea but you don't need to trade multiple 1st round picks to move up.  We could have easily lost more games by letting Rhule continue.  We should have taken on the chin and drafted someone at 9.  The trade is ridiculous.  Giving up all of that to roll the dice on a QB is insane, because there's another QB dice roll built into the return we gave up.  We could have easily secured the #1 selection without Bryce last season.

The 49ers did what they did because they have a stacked roster that's got a limited window.  That's a different situation.  We have no window.  The frame isn't even up.

I am cured of ever thinking of trading a future 1st round draft pick. I was already there before 2023 happened, it was hard to take. Especially after I watched some film and the wave of support 'went there'. 

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

    • It all sounds great. The only unknowns are injuries and how they will need to be addressed. Horn has a history as does the newly added Jaelen Phillips and Cooker has yet to play an entire season as well. And then there are the Ikey's - totally unexpecteded injuries that put a major wrench in your plans. I do think its a great plan though.
    • 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.          
×
×
  • Create New...