Christian McCaffrey calls trade to 49ers “the best thing that ever happened to me”

[csx]

The typical response.....chip on shoulder -> best thing that happened to me.  It's all BS that doesn't matter.

[RJK]

The biggest issue with CMC other than injury was the offense was designed to get him the ball. It got predictable. The offense is much better served by spreading the ball around and not paying stupid money to one of the easiest positions to fill. 

[Mr. Scot]

3 hours ago, AggieLean said:

Fan boys argue on behalf of their guys.

I say that as someone who was a fan boy of our last franchise QB.

Not a fanboy thing. I agreed with the trade.

It's simple logic that better players make better teams.

Unfortunately for us, a sh-tty coaching staff can negate the effect.

[Eric4280]

Yeah cool. Can’t wait for Bryce to lead the organization to relevance.

[Eric4280]

5 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

Well the difference between him playing and not playing had pretty limited impact on W/L during his entire Panthers career. I have posted that stat multiple times.

That's kind of the point about elite RB's, though. They rarely have a remarkable W/L impact on any modern NFL franchise.

Denying that is kind of silly.

Which is why I praise caution to Falcons fans getting overly excited about wins. Nothing changes until ya actually change the QB position, which they seem disinterested in doing.

[WhoKnows]

5 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

Putting that on him (or any individual player) is invalid, especially under Rhule.

And it’s very misleading. When he played 3 games in 2020 we were 0-3 and when he was hurt we were 5-8, but that doesn’t tell it all. 2 of the 3 we lost with CMC were against the teams who made the SB and the other was the 8-8 Raiders. Lost by 2 to KC, 4 to the Raiders and got to down 7 against Tampa with 2 minutes but failed an onside kick.

2021 was a bigger sample size and we were 4-3 with CMC and 1-9 without him.

So in those 10 games, we were 4-6 and 5 of the 6 losses were to teams .500 or better and 2 were SB teams. Without CMC we were 6-17.

[WhoKnows]

5 hours ago, poundaway said:

LOL

That 2nd was more than 10% of the trade value. Apparently you do not  understand that future picks are worth LESS than current picks due to uncertainty and the value of time.  You have to subtract a round for each out year.  Most people believe DJ Moore saved us a 2025 1st, which would be equiv to a 3rd rounder this year, the 24 1st is worth a 2nd this year.  The 25 2nd is worth a 4th this year. 

So in order to swap 1sts this year, the Bears charged us draft points worth  two 2nds, a 3rd and 4th this year.  CMC's second was not 10% by any stretch.

I do agree we could have given up Mingo to do the trade, but we didn't.  We used CMC's second.

Picks don’t just drop a round dude. Not to a team like Chicago that is rebuilding. It’s not reality. They see that 2024 pick as a 1st rounder that could be high considering we have a rookie QB. The player they pick in the 1st is not going to be equivalent talent wise to a 2nd rounder this year. Yes, teams discount future picks but it’s laughable that you would equate the 2023 2nd we gave them to our 2024 1st. You’ve got to be crazy to think the Bears think they are close to the same, especially with 5th year options and potential huge difference in talent. Same with the 2025 2nd. That’s likely a starter level talent to them versus a 2023 day 3 long shot at starting talent. The Bears aren’t making the SB in 2023/2024 so they can take better talent picks that they’d rather have than lower talent picks this year.

The team making the trade has to give up enough to make the other team give up that pick and usually the team getting the haul is rebuilding. Did you notice the Bears didn’t ask us for our 2023 4th instead of the 2025 2nd and didn’t ask us for another 2023 2nd instead of the 2024 1st? I sure hope you’ve noticed that the teams trading down tend to take future 1sts over current 2nds or later.

Also, #1 pick is worth 3000 points in draft trade value charts. Pick 56 is 340 points. Sorry, 11%, I was rounding.

Edited May 18, 2023 by WhoKnows

[Stuart Smith]

1 hour ago, RJK said:

The biggest issue with CMC other than injury was the offense was designed to get him the ball. It got predictable. The offense is much better served by spreading the ball around and not paying stupid money to one of the easiest positions to fill. 

I think that was obvious to anyone who was paying attention when he was injured for the better part of a season and we had several 1,000 yard receivers with Teddy Ywo gloves as quarterback. The offense was more diversified. 

[WhoKnows]

9 minutes ago, Stuart Smith said:

I think that was obvious to anyone who was paying attention when he was injured for the better part of a season and we had several 1,000 yard receivers with Teddy Ywo gloves as quarterback. The offense was more diversified. 

So, we scored 26 a game when CMC played with Teddy including two games against SB teams and we scored 21 a game because it was more diversified? I’ll take the 26 a game. Also, interestingly enough we had over 300 passing yards in 3 of 16 games and 2 of those 3 were in CMC’s 3 games. We also scored 30+ in 3 of 16 games and again 2 of those 3 were in CMC’s 3 games. Weird how the passing game was more effective with CMC playing and we scored more. We only had 2 300+ passing yard games with 30+ points and those 2 games happened with CMC who agin played only 3 games.

Yep, the offense was much better off without CMC, SMH.

[WhoKnows]

44 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Not a fanboy thing. I agreed with the trade.

It's simple logic that better players make better teams.

Unfortunately for us, a sh-tty coaching staff can negate the effect.

Yeah, I was fine with the trade knowing we weren’t a SB contender last year or this year. Heck, I would have made that huge Burns deal as well. It’s just sad for people to act like CMC sucked and we are better off without him. The team traded him, he didn’t ask to be traded.

[WhoKnows]

7 hours ago, Sean Payton's Vicodin said:

People thinking San Fran is a good city to live in, even if rich, are stuck in the 1980s and 1990s. Place is a total shithole now.

Like yeah Charlotte is utterly mid but I'd rather live in Chernobyl than San Fran in 2023.

Seems like it’s getting worse. I read about an office building that just sold for around 25-30% of the price it sold for in 2020 ($67M versus $250M). I know work from home has made more vacancies but a 70-75% loss in value is a sign of something much bigger.

[poundaway]

2 hours ago, WhoKnows said:

Also, #1 pick is worth 3000 points in draft trade value charts. Pick 56 is 340 points. Sorry, 11%, I was rounding.

LOL.  You forgot to subtract the value of the 9 pick.  They didn't just give us the 1 outright.  We swapped ones.  And we had to make up the difference in with other picks.  The value we had to make up was 3000-1350=1650.  That's 20%.    You're just plain off dude.

The standard is to subtract a round for out years due to the uncertainty and time.  A 1st round pick in 2050 is NOT worth the same as today dude.  It just isn't.

https://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/la9tda/how_much_value_do_future_draft_picks_hold/

Your math sucks and you clearly have no clue how to value future picks.

Done wasting my time with you.

 

Edited May 18, 2023 by poundaway

[Stuart Smith]

1 hour ago, WhoKnows said:

So, we scored 26 a game when CMC played with Teddy including two games against SB teams and we scored 21 a game because it was more diversified? I’ll take the 26 a game. Also, interestingly enough we had over 300 passing yards in 3 of 16 games and 2 of those 3 were in CMC’s 3 games. We also scored 30+ in 3 of 16 games and again 2 of those 3 were in CMC’s 3 games. Weird how the passing game was more effective with CMC playing and we scored more. We only had 2 300+ passing yard games with 30+ points and those 2 games happened with CMC who agin played only 3 games.

Yep, the offense was much better off without CMC, SMH.

 

1 hour ago, WhoKnows said:

So, we scored 26 a game when CMC played with Teddy including two games against SB teams and we scored 21 a game because it was more diversified? I’ll take the 26 a game. Also, interestingly enough we had over 300 passing yards in 3 of 16 games and 2 of those 3 were in CMC’s 3 games. We also scored 30+ in 3 of 16 games and again 2 of those 3 were in CMC’s 3 games. Weird how the passing game was more effective with CMC playing and we scored more. We only had 2 300+ passing yard games with 30+ points and those 2 games happened with CMC who agin played only 3 games.

Yep, the offense was much better off without CMC, SMH.

I did not say it was better, more diversified out of necessity. There were a couple of games Teddy cost us with poor play that took points off the board. You read what you wanted to see. 

[TheWiz]

Please let this be last thread for some time that laments Panthers players and coaches from the past. We're in a NEW DAY. Lets start being present