"We should have traded Burns" - a rebuttal

[carpanfan96]

It's not easy to replace 12 sacks.  

 

8 players have 12 sacks or more this season. 

[Toomers]

13 minutes ago, frankw said:

Is it? If it's super easy to replace him why did a team that just won the Super Bowl offer us a haul everyone is still angry we declined?

Absolute desperation. His salary and position made him a target and their window was slamming shut. A coach who’s ready to bail out. Donald thinking about retirement. Stafford hurt. OL got bad fast. McVay was looking for one last ride. 

  Yet the Panthers couldn’t accept the gift and had to turn down a winning lottery ticket. 

[frankw]

7 minutes ago, Toomers said:

I’m saying you are downplaying his value with those statements. Which is what their intention was. Right? 
 

 You remove one DE(Burns) and there’s enough money to get a pass rush specialist like Reddick, Smith Judon…etc AND a solid 3 down DE on the other side. What are you putting over there with a 27M/yr Burns? Still the same hole to fill with less money and 3 less quality picks. 
 

  Would Reddick have stayed to play for his college coach who gave him the chance in 2021 that no one else would. Who knows? It’s irrelevant. There are many others that have signed similar deals in the last two seasons. Reddick is an example of a player similar to Burns. Except no one wants to pay him 25M for …..reasons. 

  The only hypothetical scenario tied in knots here is the “we should overpay him because” theory that somehow believes Burns should be paid like Bosa, Watt and Garrett. And turning down 3 quality picks is the price to pay him. 

I said his numbers would look different with less help and they would how much is where the debate begins and ends. Even if we did sign Reddick early in the year I would have to look back at our cap space to see how that works out you still have to convince him of your plan after you pull the rug out from under him by trading away Burns mid season. And why are you worried about what you perceive to be downplaying Reddick when the entire basis of your position on this rests on the fact you think Burns is average at best? Again. Knots. I'm perplexed why a Steelers fan is even posted up here wasting keystrokes on Brian Burns. Shouldn't you be somewhere hyping Kenny Pickett? Thanks for the banter.

[Aussie Tank]

10 minutes ago, carpanfan96 said:

It's not easy to replace 12 sacks.  

 

8 players have 12 sacks or more this season. 

I’d rather 8 sacks if the man could stop the run a lot more often 

[mrcompletely11]

Just now, Aussie Tank said:

I’d rather 8 sacks if the man could stop the run a lot more often 

That’s what nobody is acknowledging.   Sure burns can rush the passer but he sucks ass at stopping the run 

[Martin]

31 minutes ago, frankw said:

Is it? If it's super easy to replace him why did a team that just won the Super Bowl offer us a haul everyone is still angry we declined?

I was trying to be super sarcastic in my post. In real life it is very hard to replace him.

[Toomers]

Just now, frankw said:

I said his numbers would look different with less help and they would how much is where the debate begins and ends. Even if we did sign Reddick early in the year I would have to look back at our cap space to see how that works out you still have to convince him of your plan after you pull the rug out from under him by trading away Burns mid season. And why are you worried about what you perceive to be downplaying Reddick when the entire basis of your position on this rests on the fact you think Burns is average at best? Again. Knots. I'm perplexed why a Steelers fan is even posted up here wasting keystrokes on Brian Burns. Shouldn't you be somewhere hyping Kenny Pickett? Thanks for the banter.

There it is. Like clockwork. Any dissenting opinion brings the “why are you here” whining. 
 

And who said Burns is average. Saying he deserves 16-18M/yr instead of 25M doesn’t scream average. It’s just where he fits with other top pass rush specialists. No one I’ve compared Burns to is average. And as I stated, Reddick is an EXAMPLE. There are many others who have signed similar deals to what Burns should get. 
 

  Now stop deflecting and tell me why overpaying Burns is better than 25-30M/yr and two 1sts and 37th pick this year. Those Steelers found a replacement for Bud Dupree pretty quick with the 102nd pick. And he’s better than Burns already. 

[Basbear]

How about this- Burns has 12.5 sacks in 951 snaps.

reddick has been mentioned, what about a player on the panthers roster right now?

Marquis Haynes has 5 sacks in 432 snaps.

So bad mathz, if haynes was given Burns snaps he'd have at least 11+ sacks....... 

Quote

Marquis Haynes signed a 2 year, $5,500,000 contract 

Both haynes and burns have nearly the same success against the run. 

Feels like there are plenty of options that show better value than what Burns will get......*still unknown*

Edited January 5, 2023 by Basbear

[frankw]

Just now, Toomers said:

There it is. Like clockwork. Any dissenting opinion brings the “why are you here” whining. 
 

And who said Burns is average. Saying he deserves 16-18M/yr instead of 25M doesn’t scream average. It’s just where he fits with other top pass rush specialists. No one I’ve compared Burns to is average. And as I stated, Reddick is an EXAMPLE. There are many others who have signed similar deals to what Burns should get. 
 

  Now stop deflecting and tell me why overpaying Burns is better than 25-30M/yr and two 1sts and 37th pick this year. Those Steelers found a replacement for Bud Dupree pretty quick with the 102nd pick. And he’s better than Burns already. 

Oh cmon. If I were on the Steelers boards telling them their business about their players surely someone would ask me the same thing. I'm not in favor of overpaying Burns I'm in favor of applying perspective in that his value remains high and there will still be options down the line if we deem his contractual demands beyond our comfort zone. We always have options.

[Toomers]

2 minutes ago, frankw said:

Oh cmon. If I were on the Steelers boards telling them their business about their players surely someone would ask me the same thing. I'm not in favor of overpaying Burns I'm in favor of applying perspective in that his value remains high and there will still be options down the line if we deem his contractual demands beyond our comfort zone. We always have options.

Maybe someone would. Wouldn’t be me. I’ve been here 4X as long as you and have predicted so many things about the Panthers, correctly, it’s almost scary. The evidence is all on here. Most from a time you didn’t exist. 
 

So you think that they will get a similar offer for Burns again. That is not happening. He’s a 16M DE now. Not a 4M one. Who is going to have to be signed to a huge extension. That extra first and second are gone. Best they will get is a first, and even that’s debatable. 

[carpanfan96]

5 hours ago, mrcompletely11 said:

I meant post some articles from gms and coaches about how they value future picks because I am not seeing it your way.   The only reason imo is they are concerned about their job and not the future of the franchise

The videos are from draft videos after drafts and not much time to go hunting for them right now. However we can use draft trades from multiple teams last draft. 

 

Panthers

137 to 94 (value difference is 86.5 points) 

4th round value difference for future 3rd pick. 

 

Colts

179 to 96th (value difference is 96.5 points) 

Top of the 4th round value for future 3rd

 

Vikings

156th to 118 (value difference is 29 points)

Late 5th value for future 4th. 

[mrcompletely11]

8 minutes ago, carpanfan96 said:

The videos are from draft videos after drafts and not much time to go hunting for them right now. However we can use draft trades from multiple teams last draft. 

 

Panthers

137 to 94 (value difference is 86.5 points) 

4th round value difference for future 3rd pick. 

 

Colts

179 to 96th (value difference is 96.5 points) 

Top of the 4th round value for future 3rd

 

Vikings

156th to 118 (value difference is 29 points)

Late 5th value for future 4th. 

so if thats the case why dont we see the reverse in trading?

[frankw]

11 minutes ago, Toomers said:

Maybe someone would. Wouldn’t be me. I’ve been here 4X as long as you and have predicted so many things about the Panthers, correctly, it’s almost scary. The evidence is all on here. Most from a time you didn’t exist. 
 

So you think that they will get a similar offer for Burns again. That is not happening. He’s a 16M DE now. Not a 4M one. Who is going to have to be signed to a huge extension. That extra first and second are gone. Best they will get is a first, and even that’s debatable. 

Congratulations on your many very big achievements here sir I should never have questioned your status. Back to Burns. If the Rams had a first in this years draft and that was included in the offer then Scott Fitterer probably pulls the trigger. That's what this always circles back to. What is the value on a first round pick one year two years or three years from now? Seems to be anything but settled opinion.

[mrcompletely11]

Just now, frankw said:

Congratulations on your many very big achievements here sir I should never have questioned your status. Back to Burns. If the Rams had a first in this years draft and that was included in the offer then Scott Fitterer probably pulls the trigger. That's what this always circles back to. What is the value on a first round pick one year two years or three years from now? Seems to be anything but settled opinion.

The value on a first round pick 2 or 3 years from now is a first round pick to a franchise, its probably not worth that much to a gm on the hotseat.  Thats where the disconnect is