Rams Offering Two (Future) Firsts for Burns

[Basbear]

Count me in the trade group if it was a 2022 2nd/3rd, future 1s, and akers.

Id change that if burns was willing to take around 21 per, but i doubt he/agents would take a hometown discount. 

Just the deal is burns "cheap" years are over and do you want to pay him 30per??  3-4 end that struggled with putting food on a fork along with his rush D issues and wide misses. Pros are hes just 24 years of age and panthers spent 4 years developing him. His pressures are in the top 5 as well and hes gotten slightly better each year.

[Wanderlai]

Do it. 

[Toomers]

17 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

I'm not saying the value is spot on, but future picks will always hold less value that current ones.  Yeah if the Eagles were offering us next year's first it would take MORE than that to get our first this year, even if we were picking at 32.  The Saints did it last year with the Eagles. The traded number 18 for 19 and 16 plus a 23 first, a current 7th, and a 24 2nd.  The 18 is higher than the 19 so right away (ignoring the 16th pick for now) the Eagles are winning that.  Now the 16th for next year's 1st isn't going to get the trade done (Even with the Eagles winning the first swap 18/19 part of the deal).  They had to include a current 3rd, current 7th, AND future 2nd to make it balance on top of the future 1st.  If future picks were equal it would have been pick 18 and a future 1st for 16 and 19, but no GM is making that trade...

 

I would imagine Fitt has a value for a 24 year old pro bowl pass rusher and 2 future firsts which would be less than this year's first and next year's (which is less than this year's) was less than that value.  

  And this is the perfect example of CTE flawed logic in devaluing future picks automatically. Moves like this made out of desperation almost always go poorly. The Saints has to have a cheap, quality  replacement for Armstead. And a lower first round salary is all they could afford. Now they are not only out next year’s 1st(top 10?) but all those other picks. The Eagles took advantage. The Panthers chose not to. 

[panthers55]

2 hours ago, CRA said:

we didn't look like a top 10 unit on Sunday in Atlanta. 

Beating the Bucs is our signature moment.  But given they have lost 5 of their last 6?  It isn't as impressive of a moment as we would have thought coming in to the season.  The Bucs and Rams also have no ability to run the football.   Atlanta did and the D couldn't stop anything they did as a byproduct of that. 

 Not sure I would say we are a top 10 unit

 

True we looked awesome in the first half but pretty poor in the second half.

[panthers55]

2 hours ago, grimesgoat said:

clarification - Burns was the 16th pick.

You are the second to mention it. Thanks. 

[panthers55]

2 hours ago, TheMostInterestingMan said:

No. This is stupid lmao. If em this were true, we would trade our 3rd for a future 1st two years from now every single year and in two years become the greatest dynasty in NFL history because we would have two 1st round picks every single season. You see how illogical this is? Lol

Again stupid logic.  First of all we didn't take the trade so this is all moot. But since we don't know what position any will be drafting in 2 years from now teams aren't going to make a bunch of trades for draft picks down the road. Most trades are for players for future picks or for the current draft where you know what you are getting. The future draft picks unless high ones are enticements to do the deal but not what teams are banking on unless they know you are drafting in the top 10. Too much uncertainty.  And tell me how Cleveland and all their number 1 picks have become a dynasty.

Edited November 1, 2022 by panthers55

[SOJA]

I am firmly in the "don't trade burns" camp. But the Rams might be BAD like REALLY BAD in those years. Those might end up being top three picks 

[TheMostInterestingMan]

2 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

Again stupid logic.  First of all we didn't take the trade so this is all moot. But since we don't know what position any will be drafting in 2 years from now teams aren't going to make a bunch of trades for draft picks down the road. Most trades are for players for future picks or for the current draft where you know what you are getting. The future draft picks unless high ones are enticements to do the deal but not what teams are banking on unless they know you are drafting in the top 10. Too much uncertainty. 

There are always holes you can fill and also having draft capital gives you cap flexibility. I’m done discussing this. Arguing future 1sts are = current 3rds is nonsense. There’s no way around it haha 

[panthers55]

1 minute ago, TheMostInterestingMan said:

There are always holes you can fill and also having draft capital gives you cap flexibility. I’m done discussing this. Arguing future 1sts are = current 3rds is nonsense. There’s no way around it haha 

Again no one said you should accept a third for a future 1st. Just that from a value point of view, future picks are devalued by GMs who do this every day. That is a reality. You can spin it how you want but that is how the system currently works. Glad you arent the GM apparently you have no clue how future picks are valued.

[Basbear]

I found this funny about the rams as well. They were the team in the RGknee trade for 3 1s.....one was the future #2 overall and the other all-milky way 99...... they flipped the system and gave up 1st 2s 3s etc etc for proven players.......it worked for the SB.

Plus the picks they do keep, les has been GREAT at getting them right. Plus hes done pretty great at UDFAs...so they remain somewhat young(not, but yea). Still you have a brillant league changing HC, best Dlman of the last 40 years, and one of best/was the best cover CB in ramsey. ALong with tripled crown winning WR Kupp....... f dem picks has worked, but it was look a little weak for the 24&25 years.....

would have taken it...

[Mr. Scot]

32 minutes ago, Wanderlai said:

Do it. 

 

50 minutes ago, Move the Panthers to Raleigh said:

 

A tad late, guys

Edited November 1, 2022 by Mr. Scot

[CPantherKing]

Deal. Incomplete DE, selfish hero mode, poor tackler. Not a true championship leader. He is a specialist piece for a playoff contender. You don't build around a player like Burns.

[Move the Panthers to Raleigh]

3 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

 

 

A tad late, guys

Yeah, I’m late to the party. This would have been epic though 

[TheMostInterestingMan]

7 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

Again no one said you should accept a third for a future 1st. Just that from a value point of view, future picks are devalued by GMs who do this every day. That is a reality. You can spin it how you want but that is how the system currently works. Glad you arent the GM apparently you have no clue how future picks are valued.

Champ I’m talking about fans on this board saying we should trade Burns because the future 1sts are equivalent to a mid round pick. Get a clue.