Possible DE Trade?

[CarolinaSamurai]

Some of you still are not getting that last year we were a defensive powerhouse with 5 defensive ends. Now we have 6 and pressing needs elsewhere.

I'm not so sure some of you realize there is a 53 player limit.

Sent from my SM-N900P using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

Don't you know everybody wants everyone on the team! Reality has no place in the Huddle! Lol

Sent from my iPhone using CarolinaHuddle

[Squirrel]

Gosh, this is like a few years ago when everyone wanted to keep and pay all the RB's.

 

Bottom like is, Zod is correct.

 

You have more DE's than will make the roster.

 

You can choose, get a quality OT and give the offense a chance to stay on the field, OR, keep all the DEs and rotate them......a lot.  Because they will be on the field forever.  3 and outs on our offense are going to be common place because of our OT's in my opinion.  One great veteran guy will help a great deal.

 

And further, i would trade Charles Johnson.  He is good enough to warrant a starting tackle and we can move some salary.  Win win

 

Trading Johnson would be my choice.  But i would want Hardy signed long term before doing it.  That way Hardy wont have ther leverage. 

 

[stirs]

Hardy's leverage is gone away until his trial is over.  League will look at him a bit differently is my guess.

[CatalystNX]

I think with Johnson's contract and Hardy's legal issues, trading away a guy like Horton who could potentially be needed next year would be a bad move. Unless we get good value in the trade, but of course it all depends on if it's a pick or player.

[DaveThePanther2008]

I don't know much about NFL trades and values and such, but would a team be willing to trade for a guy who has a high chance of being cut regardless? Especially when other ends will end up being made available around the league as well?

 

If the waiver wire is like other sports where last years record determines who gets first dibs on waiver pick ups.  And a DE could mean the difference between being mediocre and making the playoffs. 

 

You make that trade because

 

1. you have to be to 53 as well and if you have something we need you gain as well.

 

2. The last thing you want to see is your rival or someone else steal the player you needed to get you one step closer to your goal.

[pantherclaw]

I think if there is an OT worth trading for, that is available, then yes, ya get him.

I doubt that it would be a player for player trade

If were goung to cut a DE anyways, then you shop him around as teams do.

With cuts happenung soon, there isn't much incentive for teams to do so..

[tailg8or]

Trading Johnson would be my choice. But i would want Hardy signed long term before doing it. That way Hardy wont have ther leverage.

Johnsons contract may make that tough.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

[camtheone]

NO trade here.  GMAN likes the depth and wants to keep it, just testing to see if they should trade him because his skill level wasn't up to par, which it is at this point.  Back to Back NFC South Champs....KEEP POUNDING!

[AU-panther]

Some of you still are not getting that last year we were a defensive powerhouse with 5 defensive ends. Now we have 6 and pressing needs elsewhere.

I'm not so sure some of you realize there is a 53 player limit.

Sent from my SM-N900P using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

Logic is a dangerous thing.

I would guess that some of the same people that want us to keep 6 DEs also want us to keep 3 QBs and 6 receivers and .....

[ed bell]

It will be interesting to see how the NFL edict to get tougher on pass interference and illegal contact will have on teams that can't put pressure on the QB. It's a perfect storm for us. We are built to pressure the QB. I think it's going to get ridiculous how often flags fly when plays are extended.

[Seal (SmittyIsOurSavior)]

If the waiver wire is like other sports where last years record determines who gets first dibs on waiver pick ups.  And a DE could mean the difference between being mediocre and making the playoffs. 

 

You make that trade because

 

1. you have to be to 53 as well and if you have something we need you gain as well.

 

2. The last thing you want to see is your rival or someone else steal the player you needed to get you one step closer to your goal.

 

Totally didn't consider the waiver wire. Makes sense now

[MHS831]

Yes, we need a T, but we also need a S.  I am unsure about the quality and depth at both S positions.

[PntherPryd]

I don't think Horton or Alexander read the fuggin memo