Panthers possibly trading Thielen?

[PleaseCutStewart]

7 hours ago, tukafan21 said:

Totally different situations, those teams were ready to move on from those players and were shopping them.

We aren't looking to trade Thielen, the Vikings are in serious need for a WR who can play a meaningful role Week 1 and have a significant connection with Thielen of course.

Honestly, if the Vikings were to announce to the league that they are trading their 3rd rounder for the best WR offered to them, how many better players than Thielen would they get offered?  

It's not like teams are usually trying to trade away startable WRs at this time of the year.  We just happen to also be in a unique situation where yea, Thielen is our starting slot WR, but Renfrow might just be more effective this year anyways and the hope is that either of them are our 4th best WR this year as well.

Thielen is the leader of our very young WR room, I'm not trying to trade that away for a fair value trade, you need to make it worth it to us, and a 4th rounder next year really isn't a ton of value, it's hopefully a backup player in 26 who might be able to carve out a role in 27.

I'm not saying he's worth a 3rd, I'm just saying that unless it's that high, I don't see the value in trading him for a draft pick.  But a LB or DB that will play meaningful snaps this year is still my preference, if we're giving up a player who will play meaningful snaps for them on offense, give us one on defense for him.

I don't understand why everyone keeps saying renfrow might be our starting slot when I would be shocked if it isn't Coker...

Agreed though. I might consider a 4th, would love a 3rd, and would turn down anything worse than a 4th

[PleaseCutStewart]

8 hours ago, carpanfan96 said:

Superstar receivers are only going for 3rds. I mean Pickens went for a 3rd, 5th and 6th. 

DK went for a 2nd, 6th and 7th. 

Adams was a third... Etc. 

 

Just cause Carolina fleeced Dallas and Baltimore for crappy WR doesn't mean AT is worth a 3rd all of a sudden. lol

I get your argument, but I think most of those higher level WRs either had a pretty big contract or wanted big bucks. Thielen isn't and you could easily get out of it unscathed if he did suck 

[kungfoodude]

27 minutes ago, PleaseCutStewart said:

I don't understand why everyone keeps saying renfrow might be our starting slot when I would be shocked if it isn't Coker...

Agreed though. I might consider a 4th, would love a 3rd, and would turn down anything worse than a 4th

If AT is gone, Coker will 100% be the guy that gets elevated. 

[CRA]

48 minutes ago, PleaseCutStewart said:

I don't understand why everyone keeps saying renfrow might be our starting slot when I would be shocked if it isn't Coker...

Agreed though. I might consider a 4th, would love a 3rd, and would turn down anything worse than a 4th

I think there is a difference between lining up in the slot and being a slot WR.   Renfrow is a slot WR.   You can line up TMac, XL or Coker in the slot. 

[Jay Roosevelt]

My take on this is basically this: why give up a quality player for the NFL equivalent of a half-empty bag of peanuts and a $1 scratch-off ticket? An aging player, yes. In a contract year? Yes. But still a quality player that can help us win.

If they come with a serious offer that provides good value for us then it should be considered, but 5th and 6th rounders are cut every day. Even 4th rounders are coin-flips most of the time.

Now, if we get closer to the trade deadline and are floundering and have little to no shot at the playoffs, then you have to consider even a lowball offer at that point, if for no other reason than giving a respected veteran player a chance to play meaningful football in what could be his last year. But right now? Teams that trade away starting WRs a week before opening day for crumbs aren't serious about competing, let alone winning.

We traded Christian McCaffrey for below market value; we were forced to trade Brian Burns for less than market value because Fitterer threw any leverage we had out the window when he turned down the Rams insane offer and then failed to get an extension done. This after we traded away D.J. Moore as part of the Bryce Young trade instead of Burns, who we'd end up trading for just a 2nd rounder anyway.

We've seen way too many talented starters traded away by this team over the last several years. Is Adam Thielen in the same category as McCaffrey, Burns and Moore? Obviously no, based on his age alone. But he's a good and dependable player who has been penciled in as a starting WR all offseason and if nothing else is a very good slot receiver.

Why give a player like that up for a late-round pick that will most likely end up being used a player who will end up being a backup at best?

Not only does it send a horrible message to the locker room, but it sends a message to the rest of the league: we'll trade our starters for peanuts. Give us your worst offer!

Edited 1 hour ago by Jay Roosevelt

[Candler Cat]

8 minutes ago, Jay Roosevelt said:

My take on this is basically this: why give up a quality player for the NFL equivalent of a half-empty bag of peanuts and a $1 scratch-off ticket? An aging player, yes. In a contract year? Yes. But still a quality player that can help us win.

If they come with a serious offer that provides good value for us then it should be considered, but 5th and 6th rounders are cut every day. Even 4th rounders are coin-flips most of the time.

Now, if we get closer to the trade deadline and are floundering and have little to no shot at the playoffs, then you have to consider even a lowball offer at that point, if for no other reason than giving a respected veteran player a chance to play meaningful football in what could be his last year. But right now? Teams that trade away starting WRs a week before opening day for crumbs aren't serious about competing, let alone winning.

We traded Christian McCaffrey for below market value; we were forced to trade Brian Burns for less than market value because Fitterer threw any leverage we had out the window when he turned down the Rams insane offer and then failed to get an extension done. This after we traded away D.J. Moore as part of the Bryce Young trade instead of Burns, who we'd end up trading for just a 2nd rounder anyway.

We've seen way too many talented starters traded away by this team over the last several years. Is Adam Thielen in the same category as McCaffrey, Burns and Moore? Obviously no, based on his age alone. But he's a good and dependable player who has been penciled in as a starting WR all offseason and if nothing else is a very good slot receiver.

Why give a player like that up for a late-round pick that will most likely end up being used a player who will end up being a backup at best?

Not only does it send a horrible message to the locker room, but it sends a message to the rest of the league: we'll trade our starters for peanuts. Give us your worst offer!

Vikes looked at our trading history and thought they could clown us too

Can't really blame them tho

[carpanfan96]

14 minutes ago, Jay Roosevelt said:

My take on this is basically this: why give up a quality player for the NFL equivalent of a half-empty bag of peanuts and a $1 scratch-off ticket? An aging player, yes. In a contract year? Yes. But still a quality player that can help us win.

If they come with a serious offer that provides good value for us then it should be considered, but 5th and 6th rounders are cut every day. Even 4th rounders are coin-flips most of the time.

Now, if we get closer to the trade deadline and are floundering and have little to no shot at the playoffs, then you have to consider even a lowball offer at that point, if for no other reason than giving a respected veteran player a chance to play meaningful football in what could be his last year. But right now? Teams that trade away starting WRs a week before opening day for crumbs aren't serious about competing, let alone winning.

We traded Christian McCaffrey for below market value; we were forced to trade Brian Burns for less than market value because Fitterer threw any leverage we had out the window when he turned down the Rams insane offer and then failed to get an extension done. This after we traded away D.J. Moore as part of the Bryce Young trade instead of Burns, who we'd end up trading for just a 2nd rounder anyway.

We've seen way too many talented starters traded away by this team over the last several years. Is Adam Thielen in the same category as McCaffrey, Burns and Moore? Obviously no, based on his age alone. But he's a good and dependable player who has been penciled in as a starting WR all offseason and if nothing else is a very good slot receiver.

Why give a player like that up for a late-round pick that will most likely end up being used a player who will end up being a backup at best?

Not only does it send a horrible message to the locker room, but it sends a message to the rest of the league: we'll trade our starters for peanuts. Give us your worst offer!

Historically anything outside of the early first round is a coin flip. 

[PNW_PantherMan]

6 minutes ago, carpanfan96 said:

Historically anything outside of the early first round is a coin flip. 

Historically the 1st round is also a coin flip.  Its slightly over 50% that the player becomes a regular starter or better.

[frankw]

It's crazy the level of value the Panthers place on veterans like Thielen and Dalton. And folks look at our win percentage the last several years and can't figure out what's gone wrong.

[ThPantherFan]

On 8/22/2025 at 10:21 AM, OneBadCat said:

Don’t like the idea. Bryce needs that dude.

Ditto!

[CarolinaLivin]

Trade talks between the Panthers and Vikings are "ongoing" still regarding WR Adam Thielen, says @BenGoessling.

Goessling also noted that there's still "a lot of interest" in getting the trade done and Thielen is "excited" about the idea.

(Via: @AccessVikings)
 

https://x.com/tppskol/status/1959971660792021327?s=46

[Jay Roosevelt]

34 minutes ago, frankw said:

It's crazy the level of value the Panthers place on veterans like Thielen and Dalton. And folks look at our win percentage the last several years and can't figure out what's gone wrong.

Keeping good players surely isn't the problem. Neither is not having more late-round draft picks.

[frankw]

Just now, Jay Roosevelt said:

Keeping good players surely isn't the problem. Neither is not having more late-round draft picks.

You seem to have a very loose definition of good. Understandable being a Panthers fan.

But turning down draft compensation for aging veterans with no future is a move perpetual losing franchises make.