Rams Offering Two (Future) Firsts for Burns

[TheMaulClaw]

You do the deal.  3 #1's and 3 #2's in two seasons with a boatload of cap space coming in 2024. 

Not doing the the deal would be like a kid getting one present and forgoing Christmas.

[ForJimmy]

16 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

what does Cousins have to do with this?

Also the Vikings are looking pretty legit with him right now...

[TheCasillas]

Just now, Panthering said:

Prob similar to the money now > money later approach in finance. Also I suppose it makes sense to view it as the worst possible outcome to keep it conservative but still.... first round picks are first round picks. Blue chip talent in there if you approach it the right way. 

There is a huge drop in talent around picks 12-14 in the NFL draft. Front office experts refer to it as the "talent shelf." Sometimes you get lucky and a guy you had as a top 10 slips late (Burns) other times you get left with what is there (Kadrius Toney)... If you can't land in the top 14 range... then your pick isnt as valuabel as you hoped.... mathmaticaly. 

[TheCasillas]

Just now, ForJimmy said:

Also the Vikings are looking pretty legit with him right now...

Agreed. This is wrong season to knock Cousins. 

[TheCasillas]

1 minute ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Yes vs the value of the picks right now, not in the future and that is what we are discussing and its not math its how things are valued on a chart

you dont plan for the future of a franchise with "well it could be better next year, so lets make the trade" ... you plan based of the floor potential and not the ceiling. Then it's a bonus at that point. This is probably the exact reason why there is no deal in place with the Rams.... if they are talking... then its for more picks to recoup any loss from the "floor"

[*FreeFua*]

 

Edited November 1, 2022 by *FreeFua*

[kungfoodude]

This is a tough one, TBH. Burns is bordering on being an elite pass rusher but by the same token is also isn't yet an elite pass rusher. He is coming up on his deal but we also have the franchise tag that we can use to keep him around if necessary.

So, this is really a bet on what we think of Burns, what we think the Rams will be in 2024/2025 and that Burns will always fit in our defensive scheme.

It's not as simple as "fug YEAH, TRADE HIM" or "fug NO, NOT ENOUGH!"

[NorthTryon]

9 minutes ago, pantherj said:

You thought I wouldn't respond to your complaining? No one in this thread wants to hear you complain, it's annoying, so get back on topic. You're the kind of dude who complains a lot and it's a burden.

I'm not complaining, I just know how it is when you have someone too hype about NFL stuff and ultimately have no real say in how it goes. I'm excited for where the Panthers are headed. I am also realistic and also know how NFL teams operate. You don't trade character guys that are good in their prime as a starting point for whatever the plans are going forward. Just be open for debate when the trade doesn't happen. 

[frankw]

5 minutes ago, stbugs said:

One plays offense? Didn’t realize only offense loses games. We also gave up 37 points to Mariota and only one plays defense. 

So have you gotten your Niners jersey yet or what?

[TheCasillas]

9 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

You didn't post anything but Burns from what I saw.

 

BRB

Ill post again. here you go:

Brian Burns with 9 games to go and Burns averaging .7 sacks per game, which would end him at 11.3 sacks on the year and a total of 37 sacks. Conservative estimate. 

Khalil Mack

40.5 total sacks his first 4 years. 

Game started difference is in Mack's favor heavily.... and games played will be one in BB's favor if he plays the rest of the year.

[grimesgoat]

I'd do the deal.

We're probably picking 3rd. Stroud and Young will likely be gone.

So instead of picking Levis/Hooker way too early, we grab Anderson or Murphy.  Instant Burns replacement on a rookie deal.

Then we can see if Corral is any good, keep developing PJ, and have a ton of ammo for a QB in 2024. 

 

[FugginPoo]

The Super Bowl champs don’t value draft picks

[mrcompletely11]

^^^ His tackles and tfl blow burns away

[Catsfan69]

16 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

i already posted the data in this thread because another person challenged it. You wont have to look far.

You didn't post anything but Burns from what I saw.

 

BRB

 

So I looked and it seems Mack had 2.5 more sacks per year which is huge by itself. 

But in year 2 he had 15 and year three 11.

Burns has never had a double digit year.