Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Panthers want Star


  • Please log in to reply
106 replies to this topic

#31 Panthersguru14

Panthersguru14

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 24 April 2013 - 09:32 AM

Would anyone be upset with a trade up ? Say, Jets' 9 for Star.

I would love to trade up as long as we keep out second rounder id be fine to go DT then WR

#32 MadHatter

MadHatter

    The Only Voice of Reason

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,958 posts
  • LocationDark Side of the Moon

Posted 24 April 2013 - 09:33 AM

Offense is not an issue because we put up good numbers in some of the games???

We faced two really god defensive fronts (Denver and NY) and guess what, they killed us. This does not mean we have to spend the first rounder on offense, but lets not kid ourselves and pretend that we don´t have holes on both sides of the ball.


the bigger issue in the Denver and NY games were the fact that the OLine could not protect Cam...nor open holes.

So, if you want to improve the offense.....a pick at OT or OG would be more beneficial than a slot WR.

#33 csx

csx

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,765 posts

Posted 24 April 2013 - 09:37 AM

Breaking fuging news here. I mean, really? This had to be reported.


Yes, yes it did.

#34 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 36,710 posts
  • LocationSC

Posted 24 April 2013 - 09:37 AM

I would love to trade up as long as we keep out second rounder id be fine to go DT then WR


With only five picks in the entire draft, trading up is not a realistic scenario.

#35 ARSEN

ARSEN

    Banned

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,192 posts

Posted 24 April 2013 - 09:39 AM

To MH:

Yes, u r right. He's Wes Welker type of player. New England runs vertical down the field attacking offense that causes many single and zone coverages on Welker. That's what I meant. In vertical attacks many times safeties will play deep and that's when good slot WR will eat you up. Jets don't run the same offense, means safeties will be near the box. Austin will not be as productive.

#36 Jackofalltrades

Jackofalltrades

    OWN the Line of Scrimmage

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,397 posts
  • LocationNC

Posted 24 April 2013 - 09:41 AM

Would anyone be upset with a trade up ? Say, Jets' 9 for Star.


This is the ONLY scenario where I'd be ok with trading up, but only a few spots.

#37 Panthersguru14

Panthersguru14

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 24 April 2013 - 09:48 AM

With only five picks in the entire draft, trading up is not a realistic scenario.

Probably not but depending on which picks we have to give up we might want quality over quantity

#38 Proudiddy

Proudiddy

    The Thread Killer (Since 2004)

  • Moderators
  • 14,626 posts

Posted 24 April 2013 - 09:50 AM

Would Sylvester Williams be considered a reach at our pick?

#39 Kuech the Sneak

Kuech the Sneak

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,382 posts

Posted 24 April 2013 - 09:55 AM

If we get star and he's as good as he's supposed to be, then we instantly have one of the best front sevens in the nfl. Please drop star

#40 PantherBrew

PantherBrew

    Educated White Trash

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,032 posts

Posted 24 April 2013 - 09:57 AM

Would Sylvester Williams be considered a reach at our pick?


Maybe a tad, I have seen him as high as 15 in some mocks.

#41 MadHatter

MadHatter

    The Only Voice of Reason

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,958 posts
  • LocationDark Side of the Moon

Posted 24 April 2013 - 09:57 AM

To MH:

Yes, u r right. He's Wes Welker type of player. New England runs vertical down the field attacking offense that causes many single and zone coverages on Welker. That's what I meant. In vertical attacks many times safeties will play deep and that's when good slot WR will eat you up. Jets don't run the same offense, means safeties will be near the box. Austin will not be as productive.


New England gets the majority of its production out of Welker and the TE's. Their down the field targets are more to just try and keep the defense honest and open up the short game.

That is different than a true vertical passing game....but I do understand what you are getting at.

#42 h0llywood

h0llywood

    I HATE LUKE KUECHLY!

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,927 posts
  • LocationPasadena, CA

Posted 24 April 2013 - 10:04 AM

How many points did we average in our 9 losses? Fwiw, we were in the bottom half of the leage in points scored last year, despite getting to play New Orleans twice.

I am not saying that we should necessarily pick a receiver and fwiw, I don't really like any of the potential picks at receiver. But getting a number 1 receiver is something we are going to have to address either thru the draft or free agency this year or next, because Steve Smith isn't getting any younger.


A lot of those numbers are attributed to a crappy first half of the season and questionable play calling by Chud(too much damn read option):

First 8 games
18 ppg - 2w - 6L

Last 8 games
26 ppg - 5w - 3L

Your point is valid and cannot refute the fact that they couldn't score early on. I'm just being an optimist and saying that our offense will play more like the second half of the season than they did the first.

#43 h0llywood

h0llywood

    I HATE LUKE KUECHLY!

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,927 posts
  • LocationPasadena, CA

Posted 24 April 2013 - 10:11 AM

Offense is not an issue because we put up good numbers in some of the games???

We faced two really god defensive fronts (Denver and NY) and guess what, they killed us. This does not mean we have to spend the first rounder on offense, but lets not kid ourselves and pretend that we don´t have holes on both sides of the ball.


Against Atlanta (28), Chicago (22), Tampa Bay (22) and Kansas City (21), the offense was able to go north of 21 points. All these games were losses.

The team only failed to reach 21 points 5 times and those were early in the season. As the season progressed, so did the offense.There's no question that there are holes on both sides (I don't even know when or who ever said there wasn't?) of the ball but i think it's fairly obvious that DT is the most glaring position to be filled.

#44 top dawg

top dawg

    The Creative Cat

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,680 posts
  • LocationWITHIN MY MIND'S EYE

Posted 24 April 2013 - 10:24 AM

Would anyone be upset with a trade up ? Say, Jets' 9 for Star.


If he's there at 9, I would definitely think about it. But with only five picks, I don't know. I'd only be willing to give up the 6 or 7 (5?), and I don't think they'd take it.

#45 SOJA

SOJA

    King McNutt 2016

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,157 posts

Posted 24 April 2013 - 10:27 AM

It's going to be a long waiting period. He might go as early to the Raiders at 3.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.