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!

     

Realistic off-season trade scenarios

BigBeezy

By BigBeezy,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

BigBeezy Newbie

BigBeezy

Posted
Posted

Although you rarely see a lot of trades in the NFL, what are some realistic trades you wouldn't mind seeing the Panthers make this offseason?

Here are a couple I wouldn't mind seeing:

Trade #1: Jon Beason for Giants WR Hakeem Nicks

Reasoning: It's no secret Beason would prefer to stay in the middle and he probably won't get that opportunity here. The Giants are in desperate need of a middle linebacker and Beason is one of the best middle linebackers in the game, when healthy. Nicks is one of the best young WR in the league, who is often injured but still produces at a high level. Nicks is going into a contract year and both he and Cruz will want #1 WR money (think Antonio Brown, VJax contracts), which may make Nicks expendable. Might even be willing to include a late round pick to get this deal done because of the players' current contracts.

Trade #2: Deangelo Williams for Packers CB Tramon Williams

Reasoning: The Panthers could definitely use some help in the secondary, especially with Gamble likely being cut, and Tramon Williams is one of the better corners in the game. But the Packers have some young talented CB in Casey Hayward and Sam Shields, which could make Williams expendable. This trade would also give the Packers a legit starter at RB, which they've desperately seeking for quite some time.

These trades may never happen but neither is out of the realm of possibility. Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Marguide Newbie

Marguide

Posted
Posted

I think you are way overvaluing Beason/DWill.

It wouldn't be terribly surprising to see Gamble given a chance to test the waters, or at least tell his agent that you would entertain trade offers because he wasn't in our future plans. If Chris was willing to sign a new deal with a potential new team, he would have some value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BigBeezy Newbie

BigBeezy

Posted
  • Author
Posted

#2 is definitely out of the realm of possibility, I think

#1 is probably out of the realm of possibility.

Why do you say that?

There's been rumblings that the Giants may be willing to part ways with Nicks. I agree, the Packers may not want to get rid of Williams, but they definitely want some better talent at RB and also have younger, cheaper options at CB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JawnyBlaze Grand Master

JawnyBlaze

Posted
Posted

Yea, the Packers definitely need a RB, but they can get one in the draft. One that's young and doesn't have a top 10 contract. If they did want Deangelo, we wouldn't get an outstanding CB in return.

I haven't heard these rumblings about Nicks, but even if they did we'd have to sweeten the pot. As much as I love Beason (and Deangelo), no team is going to trade a young blue chip #1 WR for a MLB coming off two early season ending injuries with a top 10 contract.

It's just a matter of value. WR has more value in today's NFL than MLB and CB has more value than RB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Frizzy350 Apprentice

Frizzy350

Posted
Posted

Ok your scenarios make sense but the value just is not on point. Beason has been on IR the past two seasons and has an extremely high cap number to go with it. Nicks may be expendable but he's a big, fast young receiver, they could get a much better offer than Beason.

I don't think the Packers have any intentions of bringing in a very talented running back. People look at their offense and say, oh well they NEED a runningback, because their running game stinks. I have a funny feeling that the Packers really don't give a damn about their running game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BigBeezy Newbie

BigBeezy

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Yea, the Packers definitely need a RB, but they can get one in the draft. One that's young and doesn't have a top 10 contract. If they did want Deangelo, we wouldn't get an outstanding CB in return.

I haven't heard these rumblings about Nicks, but even if they did we'd have to sweeten the pot. As much as I love Beason (and Deangelo), no team is going to trade a young blue chip #1 WR for a MLB coming off two early season ending injuries with a top 10 contract.

It's just a matter of value. WR has more value in today's NFL than MLB and CB has more value than RB.

Fair enough. I did mention adding a late round pick in the Beason/Nicks deal to make it work, which I wouldn't mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Swaggasaurus Experienced

Swaggasaurus

Posted
Posted

James Anderson for a 5th...we are stuck like glue with 52....Dwill for a 4th maybe. Those are the two trades that could possibly happen. If we have any player for player trades you guys will be like who??? Aging big time players don't get traded for other aging big time players in the NFL....just does not happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BigBeezy Newbie

BigBeezy

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Ok your scenarios make sense but the value just is not on point. Beason has been on IR the past two seasons and has an extremely high cap number to go with it. Nicks may be expendable but he's a big, fast young receiver, they could get a much better offer than Beason.

I don't think the Packers have any intentions of bringing in a very talented running back. People look at their offense and say, oh well they NEED a runningback, because their running game stinks. I have a funny feeling that the Packers really don't give a damn about their running game.

There are definitely teams that may give up more for Nicks i.e. Dolphins and like I mentioned before I would be willing to include a pick, if needed. Nicks numbers were down a bit this season and he battles with injuries, so that could bring down his value a bit as well.

I think the Packers definitely want to strengthen their running game. It would make their offense more balanced. It would also limit some of the hits on Rodgers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BigBeezy Newbie

BigBeezy

Posted
  • Author
Posted

James Anderson for a 5th...we are stuck like glue with 52....Dwill for a 4th maybe. Those are the two trades that could possibly happen. If we have any player for player trades you guys will be like who??? Aging big time players don't get traded for other aging big time players in the NFL....just does not happen.

I agree, you don't usually see a lot of player for player trades but I thought this was a little more interesting than the player for pick scenarios that you typically see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • cranky
      2027: Sharing my thoughts on the cap without a lotta research

      By cranky · Posted

      Rico walking is no big deal. I'll take a healthy 2024 Hubbard over Rico any time and losing Mays is, again, no a big deal.  Young is signed for what, $35M for the next two years? Say he wants $50M but the FO doesn't. If they put the franchise tag on him, that would be around $55? So basically they are getting Young for the next 3 years for an average of $30M per year. Putting the franchise tag on him wouldn't be my first choice but it gives them an option that wouldn't be locking him into a long term, $50M contract. I'm not suggestion they do that. Just that the option will be there should they get to that point. Hunt is on a 5 year deal which is done in 28 so he either restructures or is gone anyway. Moton will be 35 by then and will either be gone or have diminished playing time. Neither of those players has anything to do with getting Young a contract. The O line is way overpaid anyway. Hopefully by the time they are gone, Freeling and Hecht will be developed and Ickey will be healthy. Young was benched his second year and only got his job back because Dalton was injured. Not sure how you can call that entitled. And I would NOT say putting a rookie QB on a team with no receivers, tight ends or O lineman and then being put with a coach who never wanted you and is fired mid season, is a definition of luck. As far as competition, no team is going to bring in competition for a QB picked first overall - especially given the capital that was given up to get him.  
    • bythenbrs
      OFFICIAL 2026 Undrafted Free Agent Thread

      By bythenbrs · Posted

      With apologies to Lady Cowboy fan, any day we can screw over the Cowboys is a GOOD day…
    • Daeavorn
      The Carolina Huddle

      By Daeavorn · Posted

      Been here since 2014ish. Good times. Its a shame Zod wont sell, it wouldnt take that much effort to get this place back into shape.
×
×
  • Create New...