Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Davante Adams growing "frustrated" in diminished role, per Schefter....


electro's horse
 Share

Recommended Posts

The ability to rush the quarterback in this league is more valuable than a receiver.  Skill players are great, but line play wins and loses ball games.  All the shiny pieces will not take the place of the guys in the trenches.  We have larger needs than WR imo.  We need to be able to run the ball on the offense.  When we had success early running Sunday, they passing game was much better.  We need burns or someone comparable on the defense to pressure the opposing QB so I would not trade Burns for Adams, who apparently is more concerned about his personal stats than winning.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

But at what cost?  1st rounder which we don't have and a chunk of our salary cap in a roster full of holes.  I'm not saying he wouldn't help us, but our resources are better spent on other resources.  

The cost would be burns who it seems like we are not going to resign anyway. If we were going to pay him, it would be a top 2-3 of the market deal which would be a chunk of the salary cap too. I’m more confident in our FO to find a pass rusher again than I am a bonafide #1 WR. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Barney said:

The ability to rush the quarterback in this league is more valuable than a receiver.   We need burns or someone comparable on the defense to pressure the opposing QB so I would not trade Burns for Adams, who apparently is more concerned about his personal stats than winning.  

I'm starting to disagree that rushing the passer is more important than finding a WR that can score in today's pass happy league. Burns hasn't been able to rush a passer so he hasn't contributed. Having a Tyreek Hill impact player is more important that having a Bosa/Parsons player. You may be able to sack a QB 5 times, but if they a QB throws 5 TDs that matters more! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, X-Clown said:

The cost would be burns who it seems like we are not going to resign anyway. If we were going to pay him, it would be a top 2-3 of the market deal which would be a chunk of the salary cap too. I’m more confident in our FO to find a pass rusher again than I am a bonafide #1 WR. 

If we trade Burns it will probably for done draft picks IMO. We need that 1st rounder back plus some hopefully. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

If we trade Burns it will probably for done draft picks IMO. We need that 1st rounder back plus some hopefully. 

Chances are whoever would give up a first for Burns is going to be picking late in the first round anyway, and we may be picking early in the second round with our own pick. There's a 95% chance that whoever you take there would not be able to contribute to the level that Davante Adams would be able to at any point in his career, much less right away when a weapon like that can help Bryce;s development now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, CarolinaRideorDie said:

This just proves that he cares more about his stats and role than winning. They won in New England and he still got upset that he only got 2 catches! He'll come to Carolina to pad his stats and get paid. He left a good situation in GB because he wanted to get paid! 

They are 7-16 with him - he left Green Bay because he grew up a Raiders fan and wanted to play with his college QB Derek Carr and thought he'd have a better shot to win there over the next few years. He also knew that Rodgers would play the will he or won't he come back game that Favre played every year and probably didn't want to have to deal with that. I'm guessing he sees that with McDaniels and co that organization isn't going anywhere. I don't blame him for wanting out - the real question is whether he'd actually want to come here (I'm guessing not).

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, X-Clown said:

Chances are whoever would give up a first for Burns is going to be picking late in the first round anyway, and we may be picking early in the second round with our own pick. There's a 95% chance that whoever you take there would not be able to contribute to the level that Davante Adams would be able to at any point in his career, much less right away when a weapon like that can help Bryce;s development now. 

You have a lot of great points, but to me the picks make the most sense.  Example we trade Burns to the Ravens for their 1st and 3rd possibly a low tier player as well.  So now we have a first and third in the draft to build around Bryce plus the extra cap space we save by not having to pay the Adams contract which is $17 million next year then jumps to $35 million a year the next two years when he is 32/33 years old.  You could add 3 solid players for that kind of money.  So now you have 3 vet players to fill roster spots, plus a 1st, plus a 3rd (so 5 possible starters) vs Adams (who won't be happy hear if he isn't happy in LV).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adams was picked in the 2nd round at the 53rd pick...

There are always WRs around in the draft, Fritterer just likes to draft ones that don't play well. Not too many people still wanting to see him employed here much longer. Get a new GM and let him build a real roster the right way and not more waste like this. 

  • Pie 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Did I mention that he was on worse teams?  Yes.  Do QBs alone win games?  No.  Did Cam, on a much better team with some awesome defenses ever have 2 consecutive winning seasons?  No.  So now you are cherry picking,  If the overall stats are similar, you take a look at him.   I told you that you look at his skill set---but you wanted to tell me that he sucks and mentioned performance.  I just presented performance--and his numbers are very similar to Cam Newton's numbers--a player most call the best Panther QB ever--and I agree.  By the way, Fumbles are evidence of how bad his OL has been--so you are saying that a QB in a situation worse than Cam's who has stats and physical abilities very similar to Cam's should not be given a look when you have Bryce Young at QB?  You are going with that story because you simply talked your way into a corner and now you are trying to save face.  No good GM would do what you suggest because "he sucks."  Sorry, but the facts do not support you.  But no matter what eye-opening details I provide, there are some who are going to go their Google machines to try to find some reason to support an ignorant approach to developing the QB position.  You ignored the similarities to Cam and went cherry picking.  I know what you are doing--but I am only suggesting (as I have stated before) that we bring him in as one of three approaches to resolving the QB issue. Compete with Bryce and draft a QB. Basically, I am suggesting that Jones has the potential to replace Dalton and compete with Young.  He is a battered stock that could get better in a better situation--that is human nature.  Instead, I am called a Daniel Jones lover and superfan.  That is good debate--But a real sign of mature thinking is the inability to LOGICALLY consider alternative perspectives--which is actually a characteristic of intelligence.  Just so you know, I critique and perform research in my job.  I am often amazed at how the numbers do not support my suppositions.  I learned that my impression is often wrong until I look at the data.  In this case, I have considered all the important variables and he should get a shot.  Numbers don't lie--and when you and others resort to twisted name calling directed toward the poster--it verifies my position.  
    • I don’t get this, I know that is the popular thought process but I just don’t think it’s true.  For instance head to head last year the ACC had a winning record against the SEC.  The SEC had a losing record in bowl games. This year so far the head to head is 2-3 SEC and that’s with a fluke Vandy win in week one.  I see the ACC taking another head to head winning season after next week.  The SEC is mostly hype with 3 good teams, in my opinion.  But to say any ACC team would get exposed I believe is a stretch 
    • What the hell?  How is presenting Cam's stats hating him?  The point is not to hate Cam, it is to show you how similar Jones is to him and why you take a look at him.  I mentioned Jones has the skill set to take a look--the response is, "look at his 5 years of performance."  So I compare him to the greatest QB in franchise history, and the stats are similar--while Jones was in a worse situation.  Now that is "hating?"  Come on.  This is a meritless, ignorant, personal attack because you are wrong.  Just stop it.  You all attack the poster when you have nothing.  So saying "we should consider a guy with similar stats and size to Cam Newton" is now hating Cam and making me a Jones super fan- that is just stupid.  
×
×
  • Create New...