Brian Burns Franchise Tagged

[PleaseCutStewart]

I think going beyond the price it would cost for his contract, I would argue a better question to ask is will we be a contender by the end of his contract. I am pretty confident in saying we will be a bottom 5 team the next 2 seasons with how void of talent we are (with or without Burns). If we aren't relevant until the last year of his deal, will that deal truly have been worth it?

I am in the house of we just need to tear everything down and start anew. I am fine with building the defense around Brown, Luvu (seems like he wants to still be here and hopefully a team friendly contract), and Horn (I still say to extend Horn now while we can get him cheap and hope the injury bugaboo the last 2 seasons goes away) while trying to figure out some type of offensive identify. Try and get rid of any bad cap contracts (off to a good start with that), build our cap up, and look at making our splash signings when we get a new QB.

[Peon Awesome]

On 3/5/2024 at 11:52 AM, WhoKnows said:

Only the “you aren’t an NFL GM” or “how can we possibly replace Burns” idiots couldn’t see the fleecing we could have done to the Rams. Heck, we’d probably have a better 1st. They found a solid starting G at 36. We might have messed up their entire draft.

Honestly it's a moot point but I think you're way off on this point. The Rams could easily find a serviceable free agent guard. Letting Burns feast next to Aaron Donald would have likely made them super bowl contenders. They barely lost to Detroit with a substandard pass rush. I could see Burns easily having 15+ sacks with Donald commanding triple teams. 

Don't get me wrong; even if the Rams won the super bowl every year with Burns, it'd still be good value for the Panthers so its definitely a big mistake that we turned it down. But people here kept saying the Rams would have been giving us top 10 picks. They already showed how wrong they were this year with the Rams making the playoffs and that's even without Burns impact.

[WhoKnows]

2 hours ago, Peon Awesome said:

Honestly it's a moot point but I think you're way off on this point. The Rams could easily find a serviceable free agent guard. Letting Burns feast next to Aaron Donald would have likely made them super bowl contenders. They barely lost to Detroit with a substandard pass rush. I could see Burns easily having 15+ sacks with Donald commanding triple teams. 

Don't get me wrong; even if the Rams won the super bowl every year with Burns, it'd still be good value for the Panthers so its definitely a big mistake that we turned it down. But people here kept saying the Rams would have been giving us top 10 picks. They already showed how wrong they were this year with the Rams making the playoffs and that's even without Burns impact.

Huh? The Burns impact wouldn’t have made them Super Bowl contenders in 2022. They finished worse than us. They also rolled over $450k in cap to 2023. They would have had to make changes as Burns’ 5th year option was more than their 2023 space.

I think McVay might have hung them up as well. Considering their poor 2022 season and the fact that they’d be missing their 1st and 2nd in 2023 and both 2024 and 2025 1sts, he might have decided not to come back.

The 2023 draft the Rams had was fantastic. They got 4 above average starters. I don’t think I’m wrong to say that not having any cap space and not having pick 36 could have easily changed their draft from fantastic to decent. If the Rams didn’t have that draft because of the Burns trade, they easily would have been a non-playoff team. Burns absolutely would have had less impact on their team than 4 plus starters, two of whom had as many or more sacks than Burns in 2023.

[top dawg]

This is the way that many NFL types think of Brian Burns, not what some Huddlers are trying to throw out there. 

[Peon Awesome]

4 hours ago, WhoKnows said:

Huh? The Burns impact wouldn’t have made them Super Bowl contenders in 2022. They finished worse than us. They also rolled over $450k in cap to 2023. They would have had to make changes as Burns’ 5th year option was more than their 2023 space.

I think McVay might have hung them up as well. Considering their poor 2022 season and the fact that they’d be missing their 1st and 2nd in 2023 and both 2024 and 2025 1sts, he might have decided not to come back.

The 2023 draft the Rams had was fantastic. They got 4 above average starters. I don’t think I’m wrong to say that not having any cap space and not having pick 36 could have easily changed their draft from fantastic to decent. If the Rams didn’t have that draft because of the Burns trade, they easily would have been a non-playoff team. Burns absolutely would have had less impact on their team than 4 plus starters, two of whom had as many or more sacks than Burns in 2023.

You make a couple fair points. But there are some points of clarification. For one, I wasn't suggesting they'd be super bowl contenders in 2022 but 2023, considering they weren't that far without him. Although its fair to think they might have won an extra game or two with him and pick 36 could have been more like pick 42.

Also, Burns didn't have to have as big of an impact as 4 starters, just pick 36, since they only traded pick 36. So my point is they could have made the same draft picks in the other rounds and signed a free agent guard and been in the same position. Also, the Rams don't trade 2 1sts and a 2nd and not sign Burns to a long-term contract. They're not going to let him play on his 5th year contract. His 2023 hit would've been modest and they wouldn't have had to make much of any extra sacrifices to fit him in.

[Jackie Lee]

19 minutes ago, top dawg said:

This is the way that many NFL types think of Brian Burns, not what some Huddlers are trying to throw out there. 

I like the constant Tepper dissing lol. Prick vs prick

[WhoKnows]

1 hour ago, Peon Awesome said:

You make a couple fair points. But there are some points of clarification. For one, I wasn't suggesting they'd be super bowl contenders in 2022 but 2023, considering they weren't that far without him. Although its fair to think they might have won an extra game or two with him and pick 36 could have been more like pick 42.

Also, Burns didn't have to have as big of an impact as 4 starters, just pick 36, since they only traded pick 36. So my point is they could have made the same draft picks in the other rounds and signed a free agent guard and been in the same position. Also, the Rams don't trade 2 1sts and a 2nd and not sign Burns to a long-term contract. They're not going to let him play on his 5th year contract. His 2023 hit would've been modest and they wouldn't have had to make much of any extra sacrifices to fit him in.

All fair, it’s purely conjecture but we did change the Rams more than I think we realize by not trading Burns. I think my point still stands that they had an almost perfect draft considering they had no first and if they didn’t have 36, their draft could have gone a lot different. We don’t take Avila so maybe they trade up as he falls. Again, if Burns gets a new deal, you can’t make magic. He would have eaten up the last $6M or so even with bonuses to back load it.

Also, I don’t think we can just give them 1 or 2 more wins in 2023. Stafford was out and let’s be honest, Burns is not Donald. He’s never “won” a game for us. That said, if he did enough to win a tight one, all their picks are lower, increasing the chance that they don’t have an amazing draft.

Anyway, I think that Fitterer made a lot of friends at the Rams, 49ers, Jets and Bears. All those teams are considerably improved due to us.

[DeAngelo Beason]

Now trade the bum.

[Ricky Prickles]

18 hours ago, top dawg said:

This is the way that many NFL types think of Brian Burns, not what some Huddlers are trying to throw out there. 

He is a good player but not the kind of player worth 30 million a year

[Ricky Prickles]

Om betting we probably only get a second rounder for him at this point in any sort of trade. I would probably take it if he isnt in long term plans and he wants 30 million per year. Our pass rush will be an awful joke but would rather get something for him now than have one season with him with the team probably not going to compete for a super bowl next season anyhow.

Edited March 7 by Ricky Prickles

[DeeJay]

https://overthecap.com/salary-cap/carolina-panthers

2025 we have 125 million in cap space....

 

[PappyMay]

13 minutes ago, Ricky Prickles said:

Om betting we probably only get a second rounder for him at this point in any sort of trade. I would probably take it if he isnt in long term plans and he wants 30 million per year. Our pass rush will be an awful joke but would rather get something for him now than have one season with him with the team probably not going to compete for a super bowl next season anyhow.

unless its like a 2nd and 4th i wouldn't bother trading him. Just tell him hey. We will Tag you again. Only goes up to like 27 mil the next year i believe?

[MHS831]

11 minutes ago, PappyMay said:

unless its like a 2nd and 4th i wouldn't bother trading him. Just tell him hey. We will Tag you again. Only goes up to like 27 mil the next year i believe?

Yes, I mean, if you think of the tags, and you pay him $24 this time and let's say it goes up to $29m next season, that is an average of $26.5m per season (fully guaranteed) for 2 years.   That is basically the contract they offered him that he refused.  Think of it as a 2-year contract, and move on when he is 27. 

But I am not sure I would trade him for a 2nd and 4th. 
I would trade him for a future first rounder with a bad team and maybe a 3rd or 4th this year. 

The bad thing is you have no tag for Brown if needed.

Edited March 7 by MHS831

[Jackie Lee]

From two 1sts to a 3rd rounder lol.