REPORT: Panthers and Brian Burns not at all close to extension

[Icege]

1 hour ago, Ricky Prickles said:

I think if he shows well in this system this season I would have no problem paying him his market value. Im hoping he is ridiculously successful and we have to pay him well as that means we have a great piece of the puzzle and can focus on adding from there. Someone on the other side who can get pressure to sure would be awesome

Would be huge if another guy on the line or one of the other pass rushers steps up this season. Brown, Burns, and that player would make things a lot easier for the secondary.

Though I do have my eye on Kris Jenkins out of Michigan this season in college ball. His pops was fun to watch as a Panther. 

[PantherPhann89]

2 hours ago, pantherclaw said:

When building a team, you don't take a unit of strength, and make it a glaring weakness. There is no amount of justification to do so. 

Thus is also why pass rushers get more.money than receivers. Not all positions are created equal. 

Every talent evaluator in the league understands the value of Burns to us, I would say they understand it immensely better than most Panther fans, who want to say anything to justify their perception.  

Then understanding his value to us knowing that's he's untradeable, is too seperate things. It's he important, yes.

[kungfoodude]

4 hours ago, Toomers said:

What about the the 25-30M/year you can spend on replacement(s). You can believe whatever you want about the Rams but there was always a good possibility they were in decline and nothing since has changed that. 
 

   So for the privilege of overpaying an Edge worth around 20M/yr, they turned down two top half 1sts, pick 36, and the one great or two very good players they could have signed  with the same money. And this was a good idea? This is close to the Teddys contract is team friendly BS. 

Unfortunately for Burns, he basically has to be a top 3 DE in the NFL for that deal to not look like a complete disaster. He'd have to be Peppers 2.0 to make it look like a wise decision. 

That's the reality of the market.

[Gerry Green]

The Rams think Burns is worth a 2nd and 2 1st rounders. The Huddle? Not so much. smh

[Gerry Green]

1 minute ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

The Huddle thinks pass rushers fall off trees.

 

The Huddle after we trade Burns for the 2 1st round picks. "Guys we really need to double down on pass rushers with those 2 1st round picks we have no pass rush".

 

Huddle Shenanigans...

 

The Huddle is an enigma. Most have pie in the sky dreams. But don't believe any of them will come true.

[TheMaulClaw]

Personally I think Burns needs to have a prove it year.

[Gerry Green]

The Huddle right up til our first preseason game were all pie in the sky happy. Then we looked like poo after being told we'd be looking like poo.

 

The Huddle reaction? All of a sudden, the team sux. The Huddle and patience go together like talking Politics and free Liquor.

[Gerry Green]

7 minutes ago, TheMaulClaw said:

Personally I think Burns needs to have a prove it year.

 

What does he need to do to have a prove it year? 

 

The dude is near the top in both sacks and pressures since he's been here.

[Gerry Green]

6 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

lmao

 

The sad part is you're dead serious. He proved in preseason not playing a single down that he is our entire pass rush.

 

Prove what!

 

See what I mean? The Rams thought enough of Burns to offer 2 1s and a 2. Yet we have Huddlers who think he still needs to have a prove it year. Nobody disrespects Panther players like Panther fans.

[tukafan21]

5 hours ago, Toomers said:

The last 20+M/yr deal to an edge was Max Crosby an 23.75M/yr. Crosby is every bit as good a pass rusher and instead of being a liability on 40% of his snaps, he one of the best run defenders in the NFL. So how is Burns close to that value. The Steelers just gave Alex Highsmith 17M/year. After 14.5 sacks and a better run defender than Burns. So again, what is this magical value he holds at any price? 

The theory you put out here, about Burns' worth because of his run defense should be less than those guys, is just a fallacy based in non-reality about how free agency works in the NFL.

What you are saying makes sense if there are regularly available elite players every year in free agency, particularly pass rushers.

The problem with your theory is that it couldn't be further from the truth, pass rushers of Burns ability rarely, if ever, hit the open FA market.

Even if for the sake of argument, you say that Burns is the exact equivalent to Crosby or Highsmith as a pass rusher, but lacks in the run defense, it doesn't mean that we should be trying to pay Burns less than them because of it.  If there were a half dozen elite pass rushers available in free agency every year, and we could then pay one of them more than we want to pay Burns, it would make more sense, but it doesn't work that way.

Take run defense out of the equation, solely look at pass rushing ability, players of Burns' ability just don't become available in free agency, they sign long term deals before it gets to that point.  Because of that, if by some miracle a player of Burns' pass rushing ability does hit free agency, then some team out there in desperate need of pass rushing will pay him a monster contract to get him, rush defense aside.

So in the end, it comes down to........

Are you really going to try and hold Burns' feet to the fire over a few million dollars per season because you don't feel he's an elite run defender?

If we don't re-sign him this year and we don't franchise tag him (because c'mon, players on franchise tag rarely works out for the team in the long run), one of 3 things happen next off season.....

1.  He balls out, gets 15+ sacks and to keep him from someone stealing him, we have to make him the highest paid defensive player in league history and overpay him more than we would have to right now.

2.  He balls out, gets 15+ sacks and we refuse to make him the highest paid defender and someone else does, we just lose him and likely end up not even getting a comp pick for him because we'll be flush with FA money that will be spent elsewhere and thus negate getting a comp pick in return.

3.  He doesn't ball out because he struggles with the new scheme and we lose him because someone who runs a 4-3 will still give him a massive contract and then we still lose him for nothing.

I don't know about you guys, but none of those options look great to me, I'd much prefer one of the following two options.........

1.  We re-sign him now for above his current market value, he balls out and gets 15+ sacks, then when new monster defensive deals are signed in the next 2 off seasons, he falls from being one of the top 3 paid defenders to being borderline top 10 and we have a bargain contract for him.

2.  We re-sign him now for above current market value, he struggles in the new scheme and it's proven that he should be in a 4-3 system.  So we decide to eat the cap hit and trade him like the Raiders did with Khalil Mack and get 2 Firsts and potentially a few more middle round picks for him.

[Toomers]

17 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

The Huddle thinks pass rushers fall off trees.

 

The Huddle after we trade Burns for the 2 1st round picks. "Guys we really need to double down on pass rushers with those 2 1st round picks we have no pass rush".

 

Huddle Shenanigans...

Or they could spend the saved 25-30M on a more “complete” EDGE. Use those top 10 picks to trade for one. 4-5 high quality players. 3 on rookie deals. I asked already. Why should he get as much as Crosby. Or why more than Highsmith? Why should his name even be mentioned with Watt? 

[Tr3ach]

35 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

The Huddle thinks pass rushers fall off trees.

 

The Huddle after we trade Burns for the 2 1st round picks. "Guys we really need to double down on pass rushers with those 2 1st round picks we have no pass rush".

 

Huddle Shenanigans...

To be fair then you have two pass rushers instead of one and they are both on cheap rookie deals for a long time.

[Toomers]

13 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

The theory you put out here, about Burns' worth because of his run defense should be less than those guys, is just a fallacy based in non-reality about how free agency works in the NFL.

What you are saying makes sense if there are regularly available elite players every year in free agency, particularly pass rushers.

The problem with your theory is that it couldn't be further from the truth, pass rushers of Burns ability rarely, if ever, hit the open FA market.

Even if for the sake of argument, you say that Burns is the exact equivalent to Crosby or Highsmith as a pass rusher, but lacks in the run defense, it doesn't mean that we should be trying to pay Burns less than them because of it.  If there were a half dozen elite pass rushers available in free agency every year, and we could then pay one of them more than we want to pay Burns, it would make more sense, but it doesn't work that way.

Take run defense out of the equation, solely look at pass rushing ability, players of Burns' ability just don't become available in free agency, they sign long term deals before it gets to that point.  Because of that, if by some miracle a player of Burns' pass rushing ability does hit free agency, then some team out there in desperate need of pass rushing will pay him a monster contract to get him, rush defense aside.

So in the end, it comes down to........

Are you really going to try and hold Burns' feet to the fire over a few million dollars per season because you don't feel he's an elite run defender?

If we don't re-sign him this year and we don't franchise tag him (because c'mon, players on franchise tag rarely works out for the team in the long run), one of 3 things happen next off season.....

1.  He balls out, gets 15+ sacks and to keep him from someone stealing him, we have to make him the highest paid defensive player in league history and overpay him more than we would have to right now.

2.  He balls out, gets 15+ sacks and we refuse to make him the highest paid defender and someone else does, we just lose him and likely end up not even getting a comp pick for him because we'll be flush with FA money that will be spent elsewhere and thus negate getting a comp pick in return.

3.  He doesn't ball out because he struggles with the new scheme and we lose him because someone who runs a 4-3 will still give him a massive contract and then we still lose him for nothing.

I don't know about you guys, but none of those options look great to me, I'd much prefer one of the following two options.........

1.  We re-sign him now for above his current market value, he balls out and gets 15+ sacks, then when new monster defensive deals are signed in the next 2 off seasons, he falls from being one of the top 3 paid defenders to being borderline top 10 and we have a bargain contract for him.

2.  We re-sign him now for above current market value, he struggles in the new scheme and it's proven that he should be in a 4-3 system.  So we decide to eat the cap hit and trade him like the Raiders did with Khalil Mack and get 2 Firsts and potentially a few more middle round picks for him.

   That depends on what “level” you put Burns. Hendrickson, Riddick, Z. Smith, Judon have been available in past years. What has he done to be considered above that group Josh Uche has one less sack in 1/3 of the snaps. 

  And you can’t take 40% of the plays out of the equation. He’s not even average. He’s a liability and the first thing any OC will go after. If a LB couldn’t cover anyone, are you paying him elite money anyhow. 
 

And Burns will get a huge bonus and other guarantees. So you won’t get what Mack, who was already a DPOY and multiple AllPros, brought in trade. The 1M left of his salary was why the Rams offered so much. Now he’s 16M. Then they would have to eat a huge dead cap hit while trying to build around their rookie contract QB. 

[Toomers]

6 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

I don't care what he gets. That's not my business. I only care about him being on the field and helping this defense.

 

Just pay the man I don't care about his money. That's why he has an agent. That's why we are fans.

   Then Dont get involved in the discussion if you don’t care what he gets paid whether it hurts the team or not. This is salary cap issues. 
 

He’s not elite. And shouldn’t be paid like he is.