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!

     

When has a blockbuster NFL trade worked out for the team who gives up everything?


Happy Panther
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Moo Daeng said:

Faulk was acquired for a second and fifth. That's not even on the fringe of the cusp of beginning to discuss blockbuster trade. 

You know nothing is comparable to a 25 year old all pro QB being traded right? It’s never been done before. If it has to be multiple 1st round picks AND the team has to win it all then no it hasn’t happened before... Closest thing would be Chiefs giving up two first round picks to select Mahomes and winning a Super Bowk with him.

Edited by ForJimmy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Shocker said:

The answer is never.  This kinda trade has never happened outside of maybe Walker.

I'd say there are two trades that compare. Walker is one. The Bears trade for Jay Cutler is the second.

Other examples may have been for great players but didn't involve the kind of compensation package that's being discussed for this trade.

For reference, the Walker trade was in 1989, more than thirty years ago, yet people still talk about how huge a mistake it was.

Blow a trade of this proportion, and people will be using you as the cautionary tale up through  2051 and beyond.

  • Pie 3
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'd say there are two trades that compare. Walker is one. The Bears trade for Jay Cutler is the second.

Other examples may have been for great players but didn't involve the kind of compensation package that's being discussed for this trade.

For reference, the Walker trade was in 1989, more than thirty years ago, yet people still talk about how huge a mistake it was.

Blow a trade of this proportion, and people will be using you as the cautionary tale up through  2051 and beyond.

Cutler - 2 first, 3rd, Orton

Mack - 2 first, 3rd, 6th

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

7 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

No other trades involve an established franchise quarterback in his prime.

real question is can a team survive and improve despite  the cost of a major acquisition IMO. 

and in recent times we have seen teams do legit blockbuster mega trades for less important positions (Mack, Ramsey) and it work out well for them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, CRA said:

real question is can a team survive and improve despite  the cost of a major acquisition IMO. 

and in recent times we have seen teams do legit blockbuster mega trades for less important positions (Mack, Ramsey) and it work out well for them. 

Did the Rams or the Bears need to invest in players to protect Khalil Mack or Jalen Ramsey?

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Did the Rams or the Bears need to invest in players to protect Khalil Mack or Jalen Ramsey?

no but the better the QB, the better the OL talent looks. 

but the point I was making is, is the mega deal crippling.  Clearly not.   Rams still have to invest in offense regardless.  QB.  OL.  WRs.  They have to invest on the defensive front that playing in front of Ramsey. After that mega deal.....they went right out and made another mega deal. 

If the player gives you the impact you want or not is what makes the deal good or bad.  That's really all that matter.  Mega trade is like a draft pick.  Hitting on the player determines if it was good or bad.  We can reference all the trades we want.  All trades are bad when the player doesn't give you what you expected. 

if Watson delivered, he would be worth it.  If he doesn't? It would be a horrific trade other teams talk about.   That's how it goes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, CRA said:

no but the better the QB, the better the OL talent looks. 

but the point I was making is, is the mega deal crippling.  Clearly not.   Rams still have to invest in offense regardless.  QB.  OL.  WRs.  They have to invest on the defensive front that playing in front of Ramsey. After that mega deal.....they went right out and made another mega deal. 

If the player gives you the impact you want or not is what makes the deal good or bad.  That's really all that matter.  Mega trade is like a draft pick.  Hitting on the player determines if it was good or bad.  We can reference all the trades we want.  All trades are bad when the player doesn't give you what you expected. 

The kinds of deals that King and Schrager are suggesting are ridiculous. Jonathan Stewart recognized that.

In the same vein as Stewart, if we did something like one of those proposals, here's how I picture Watson's arrival at the facilities:

"Welcome to the Panthers, Deshaun!"

"Yeah, I'm happy to be here. Can't wait to start working with the guys. It's gonna be great to have Christian McCaffrey in the backfield with me. Can I meet with him?"

"Ummm...yeah. Sorry to tell you but we had to trade McCaffrey in order to acquire you."

"Oh, bummer. I understand though. How about Robbie Anderson? Is he around?

"Well see, we kind of had to...you know..."

"Ah. Okay, I get it. What about  Brian Burns? He reminds me a lot of JJ Watt. Is he in the building?"

"..."

*I see...  Well at the very least, I should say hi to the guys that are gonna be blocking for me. Can I meet some of them?"

"Sure, but I should probably let you know we really only have two starters under contract. We're kind of trying to rebuild the offensive line right now."

"Understood, But at least you've got some draft picks and some cap space you can use to get some new guys, right?"

"We should probably talk."

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

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

The kinds of deals that King and Schrager are suggesting are ridiculous. Jonathan Stewart recognized that.

In the same vein as Stewart, if we did something like one of those proposals, here's how I picture Watson's arrival at the facilities:

"Welcome to the Panthers, Deshaun!"

"Yeah, I'm happy to be here. Can't wait to start working with the guys. It's gonna be great to have Christian McCaffrey in the backfield with me. Can I meet with him?"

"Ummm...yeah. Sorry to tell you but we had to trade McCaffrey in order to acquire you."

"Oh, bummer. I understand though. How about Robbie Anderson? Is he around?

"Well see, we kind of had to...you know..."

"Ah. Okay, I get it. What about  Brian Burns? He reminds me a lot of JJ Watt. Is he in the building?"

"..."

*I see...  Well at the very least, I should say hi to the guys that are gonna be blocking for me. Can I meet some of them?"

"Sure, but I should probably let you know we really only have two starters under contract. We're kind of trying to rebuild the offensive line right now."

"Understood, But at least you've got some draft picks and some cap space you can use to get some new guys, right?"

"We should probably talk."

well, the Rams should be a deserted island I guess by that logic...that makes Uncle Phil's empty home look like a rave party.

Draft picks are worth a legit stud QB.   IMO.  Question is would Watson actually deliver and be that dude.  That is the great debate.  Could he deliver.   If you knew for a fact he would be that, it wouldn't be a debate IMO.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CRA said:

well, the Rams should be a deserted island I guess by that logic...that makes Uncle Phil's empty home look like a rave party.

Draft picks are worth a legit stud QB.   IMO.  Question is would Watson actually deliver and be that dude.  That is the great debate.  Could he deliver.   If you knew for a fact he would be that, it wouldn't be a debate IMO.  

If the trade proposals we were seeing only involved draft picks, this'd be a different conversation.

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 think i go in the opposite direction of most. my ideal retirement is living in some old downtown area in a flat above some shop or something.  life out in the country was just something i got real tired of. My kids actually miss some of living out there, which i understand. that was where they grew up for the most part. 40 acres with a 2.5 acre pond. it was beautiful, but also way too much (and too expensive) for me to keep up with. 
    • FLASHBACK: I remember back when ESPN was just starting--he was their anchor.  They used to show stuff like Rodeo and field hockey--I remember laughing when he went to a commercial mocking a cycling competition in Utah (or something similar--I made that up) and I laughed.  I told my dad, "We may have us a new anchor when we get back from commercial."  When they came back from commercial, Berman was looking very serious and he said, "Any comments by me do not reflect the views of ESPN....The men and women who cycle are dedicated athletes and we are honored to shine light on their sport." (Paraphrasing).  Dad laughed hysterically. My first memory of him--and that was like 1980.
    • Might not have a team without them. Although that probably applies to the Panthers, too.
×
×
  • Create New...