He’s younger and better at DE than Frank Clark was. He’s a great compliment, style-wise and contract-wise for Karlaftis.
Those 1sts will likely not get us players in Burns’ stratosphere.
He’s so young and ascending that the 100m contract you’re giving him will be for future production, not present or past production.
DE is the second biggest position of need behind OT on this team and the hardest to acquire given the resources we have. Burns/Karlaftis gives us a ridiculous ceiling at the position.
I know the scars are fresh from Frank Clark, but you have to keep swinging. You simply need great DE talent to win Super Bowls, and we don’t have that right now.
The Chiefs still have 17 picks over the next two drafts without the 1st round picks.
I know that Clark Hunt doesn’t want us to trade the 1st. But I think he wants Super Bowls more, and I think Burns helps blow open your window over the life of his contract. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
TJ Watt averages - AVERAGES - 13 sacks a season and that includes his rookie year and this year where he's been hurt.
Brian Burns <<< TJ Watt
Watt's 2nd year in the league was his 24 year old season, where this is Burns this year. Burns is on pace for a 12 sack season in his 24th year old season, which is about right on pace of where Watt was at that age.
So you'd theoretically be getting Burns right at the beginning of his prime.
Burns came into the league at 21, which also shows how much of an advantage it is going forward to look at the younger guys in the draft. [Reply]
Absolutely no to 2 1sts. Draft twice, trade back and draft 3 for hell's sake and get a Hughes. We're going to need to hit on some pass rush in the draft for cap reasons. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Direckshun:
Let me put a couple more offers out there for you guys that are less than the 2 1sts. Tell me which ones you’d make the deal for, if any.
* a 2023 2nd and a 2024 1st
* a 2023 2nd and LB Willie Gay * a 2023 2nd and a 2024 2nd
* a 2023 1st
Keep in mind you’re paying Burns 100m once you acquire him.
Originally Posted by Gravedigger:
Teams don't like our firsts, they're seconds. Hard to trade with so many second round picks.
Teams like the Panthers need a QB. To trade up for one....they need as much ammo as possible. Even if that 1st or 2nd round pick is at the end of the round....it adds up. [Reply]
I'm not doing this 'give up a significant trade asset AND burn a shitload of cap space' nonsense anymore.
The most I'm giving for a player that needs a new contract is a 2nd or some equivalent thereof.
We don't need a QB and literally every other position has a degree of volatility I'm simply unwilling to accept. The elite of the elite, even at WR, can fall off at any time.
The only guys I'd be willing to really give up a significant asset haul for AND the contract price are HoF level guys. And Brian Burns is nothing close to a HoF level guy. [Reply]
Oh, and by the way, he is NOT significantly younger than Clark was at the time we traded for him (1 year) and he is not better than Clark was. In many ways, they are/were extremely similar players.
Burns has been asked to do one thing - rush the passer. That's what Clark was asked to do as well. He's been schemed up in a way that allows him to focus on that one thing, just as Clark was.
Seahawks Clark and Panthers Burns are far more alike than they are different. [Reply]
I don't know that I'd do two 1sts, but I'd do a 2nd & 4th this year and a 1st next year and see if the Panthers would bite on that, or something similar. Or a 1st this year and a 2nd next year.
The only reason I want to make a move on Burns is because this defense is miles ahead of where I expected. You get a guy like Burns in here along with the young players we have under contract for a while, you have the makings for a top 10 defense for a few seasons going forward. It's not "sacrificing the future" like so many people say because it gives you a complete unit on D for the foreseeable future.
With the secondary and LB's we have, we need to get a legit edge rusher to truly take the next step. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
But you give away two 1st rd picks and pay this guy a shit load of money…then what?
Well you guys wanna give up on OBJ. Without a 1st that makes it a bit sticky to find a replacement.
You also want to keep other players but if you pay OBJ and Burns a lot, you maybe keep Sneed and have to draft the others?
Basically you’re giving up way more leverage for a position that hurts us all together.
Unfortunately there is no Von Miller in FA bc if there was I’d be ok board paying him and keeping the draft picks
I'm fine paying the pass rusher and LT and letting the off ball LB and CB walk. I've seen this regime be able to mine the latter two in the mid rounds consistently and not be able to get the first two there.
We all agree that this regime has been great from the 2nd round on, hitting on alot of guys at differnet spots. Well, you make a trade like this, you still are able to do that. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
I'm fine paying the pass rusher and LT and letting the off ball LB and CB walk. I've seen this regime be able to mine the latter two in the mid rounds consistently and not be able to get the first two there.
We all agree that this regime has been great from the 2nd round on, hitting on alot of guys at differnet spots. Well, you make a trade like this, you still are able to do that.
We saw this regime not spend a first rd pick on defensive player in years and…yikes.
Those are really damn valuable if you pick the right guy. [Reply]