Panthers' Tight End Conundrum: Could a Bold Trade for Dawson Knox Be the Answer?
Share- Nishadil
- October 02, 2025
- 0 Comments
- 3 minutes read
- 2 Views

The Carolina Panthers' tight end situation has been a recurring storyline, often for the wrong reasons. After a 2023 season where the position group collectively struggled, the anticipation around rookie Ja'Tavion Sanders was palpable. However, a recent foot injury during OTAs, though reportedly not serious, has cast a fresh spotlight on the unit, prompting bold "what if" scenarios from around the league.
One such scenario, conjured by Pro Football Focus (PFF), throws a compelling trade proposal into the mix: the Buffalo Bills send veteran tight end Dawson Knox to the Panthers in exchange for a 2025 fourth-round pick.
On the surface, it's a move designed to address immediate needs, injecting proven talent into a room that desperately craves consistency.
Let's rewind to the 2023 season. The Panthers' tight ends — Tommy Tremble, Ian Thomas, and Stephen Sullivan — combined for a paltry 52 receptions, 452 yards, and 4 touchdowns.
These numbers placed them among the least productive tight end groups in the entire NFL. This stark reality underscores the team's urgent need for a reliable pass-catching threat from the position, a vacuum that rookie Sanders was drafted to fill.
Sanders, a highly touted prospect, brings a dynamic receiving skillset that was sorely missed last year.
His arrival was met with optimism, signaling a potential turning point for the unit. But his recent, minor foot injury, even if temporary, serves as a stark reminder of the fragile nature of NFL rosters and the importance of depth.
Enter Dawson Knox. The 27-year-old tight end has been a reliable, albeit sometimes overshadowed, target for Josh Allen in Buffalo.
He boasts a career-high of 8 touchdowns in 2021 and has consistently provided a red-zone threat and a safety blanket in crucial moments. For a young quarterback like Bryce Young, a veteran presence like Knox, who understands how to get open and make contested catches, could be invaluable. He offers an immediate upgrade in pass-catching prowess, potentially alleviating some of the pressure on Young and opening up other elements of the offense.
However, no trade is without its complexities.
Knox's contract is substantial, and while his production is solid, he wouldn't be a long-term solution, already being 27. The Panthers would be trading a valuable 2025 fourth-round pick for what might be a two or three-year rental, at best. This raises the critical question: is a temporary boost worth sacrificing future draft capital, especially for a team in a rebuilding phase?
The calculus shifts significantly when considering Ja'Tavion Sanders' injury.
If Sanders' foot issue were severe and long-term, the case for acquiring Knox would strengthen considerably. A multi-week or season-long absence from their promising rookie would create an undeniable void that a veteran like Knox could fill immediately. But with reports indicating Sanders' injury is not serious, and he's expected back without significant delay, the urgency diminishes.
The Panthers' front office faces a fascinating dilemma.
Do they gamble on the rapid development of Sanders, coupled with the existing, albeit inconsistent, talent of Tremble and Thomas? Or do they make a bold move for a proven commodity like Knox, potentially sacrificing a future asset for immediate stability? Given the current optimistic outlook on Sanders' recovery, and the team's long-term strategy, it seems more probable that the Panthers will trust their current tight end room to develop, rather than pay a premium for a veteran who doesn't align perfectly with their future vision.
While the PFF proposal offers an intriguing solution to a historical problem, the short-term nature of Sanders' injury likely makes this an enticing, yet ultimately improbable, scenario for Carolina.
.Disclaimer: This article was generated in part using artificial intelligence and may contain errors or omissions. The content is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute professional advice. We makes no representations or warranties regarding its accuracy, completeness, or reliability. Readers are advised to verify the information independently before relying on