MHS831

I am really looking forward to this draft--I thought, FU FItterer, but there is still some drama. Gonna be fun.

OK, I understand taking a draft pick away, but swapping with the Vikings is a move that also hurts the Giants. The Vikings already have 2 firsts, and the Giants who need a QB and are sitting at #6. That would be rewarding the Vikings 150 points. I think they should take the Falcons 79th pick (3rd) and give it to the Vikes--but this swapping thing has a victim or two (It could hurt Denver as well) in the first round.

Kool Aid could be a draft faller. Remember, he had a better CB playing across from him, so he was matched up on the #2 wr a lot--it seems. I think the draft is deep at CB and if you take one at 33, you are missing out on a player of greater need. However, I could be wrong--I was once wrong about a draft pick or two--but it was way back in 2023.

Trading down is usually not a good thing. You could argue that we traded down to get Jon Beason back in the day. That turned out alright, didn't it? The player we traded away? Revis Island. Having just thought of one example and applying it to every possible situation as some are prone to do, I will consider this if the following conditions occur: 1. Since the WR depth is deep, multiple WRs expected to be available at 33 will be available. 2. Any trade backs include a third rounder or higher this season or a first or second rounder in 2025 (I see this draft and laying the foundation, and if we can fill the gaps in the 2025 draft, it could be worth a drop.) OR 3. Any trade back includes a quality player at a need position in addition to swapping picks this season. It all depends on the board. For example, would you surrender Ladd McConkey if you could get Ricky Pearsall and Payton Wilson in return? This is a DEEP draft with a lot of first round grades---the Panthers have many needs and other teams know that and will want to move up. In my opinion, the picks 33-40 will include names that had been projected to go in round 1. After 40, the talent is pretty level until around pick 70. So if we could trade 33 for pick 42 and 70, for example, we would have 39, 42, 65, and 70. WR, C, LB, CB. However, any GM without a first rounder who enters a draft looking to fill 5 spots is a dreamer. We should really focus on our top 2 immediate needs ( WR, C or TE) and the rest are depth.

Both of these guys scare me---loved them at first, then I probably overthunk it.

*TH3*B3A$T*2024* for those who need to cut and paste. We should pin this thread.

good thread. I love seeing what others are thinking. We knew what you meant.

Next week: The guy who puts the equipment in lockers and how those new foam practice helmet shells have changed his life.

Ladd and Sanders would be great, and possible.

When people say "BPA" they need to be more clear. I think you need to consider the rarity of athletes coming out at the position. For example, Mel Kiper defended mocking JJ McCarthy at #5 in his mock, but he defended that decision by saying McCarthy was actually #14 on his board. If it is simply the player, he has no business in the first round--so by putting him at #14, you are including his position rarity. That is not an excuse to jump 10 spots later because QBs are rare. However, I would devise a formula that has a scale of points that add up to 100 (for example). Maybe 20% of the scale would be position rarity--how difficult is it to find a successful player at each position. Since QB is a tough position to fill, a QB would get all 20 points. A LT and edge might get 17 points. A Guard might only get 7. Other areas aligned with performance would not be related to position value. OK, now let's take a look at the menu--what positions are needs, what is their rarity value, and when are the best players expected to go in the draft? In this draft, LBs drop off pretty quickly around round 3. In my humble view, CBs of equal value can be found through round 4 into round 5. So if all things are equal during the draft, I take the LB and get the CB next time around. I know this is common sense, but when you say BPA it does not make it more simple-still have to navigate the draft.

33. Trade back to about pick 50---I think there will be enough value on the board to get our second rounder back in 2025. Since, in my view, we have to consider the 2025 draft as a fall back if we do not draft a QB in 2024, I think there is enough value later in the round to minimize the sting of trading back. If we trade back from 33, that should put us in the area where the ILBs will start being picked. 39. A. McConkey B. R. Wilson, C. Pearsall, D. Corley (all WRs that fit the scheme) 50: A. Edge Cooper (ILB) B. J'Tavion Sanders (TE) C. Rakestraw or Tampa (CB)

I thought we were drafting Herbert and we'd jump a few spots. When he was not picked at #6, we just sat there. (that is how I remember it.)

I honestly believe that if Ron Rivera and the GMs had not put so much on Cam (pourous OL, making him run so much, etc) he might still be playing. Ron did not preserve Cam--he drove him into the ground for his career. With Cam, RR did not have 2 consecutive winning seasons--think about that. Cam is so much more of a leader now than he was--I wish he had spoken up then too.

I honestly do better than he does every year. I just don't have that alien/1954 hair.

Here is why I have been predicting a trade of pick #33: Everyone leaves day 1 and meets before day 2 begins. Someone will want that pick. If we can add a second rounder, it gives us the ability to trade up in the 2015 first round if needed. The Panthers are turning the corner in 2024, but they plan to hit the gas in 2025. The future is part of the equation. There is a pretty flat plateau of talent if you take away need. I think we will grab a WR and a LB in round 2, so the difference between 33 and 47 does not impact the LB market much. If Ladd were to fall from 33 to 39, it would be a win win. Just my opinion, but we need that second rounder to have some options next year should we need to move up for a QB, for example.

That is the one thing nobody is really talking about. There are 5 or 6 who should go in round 1 and another 5 in round 2--but the depth of "decent" developmental CBs is unreal.

As you said about Cam two years after he left?????? (Just kidding--might not have been you, but we still get the old, "Bring back Cam!" threads. Not dissing Cam--blaming Ron Rivera for using him like a tank.

Where did people go from "a strong running game" to "pass the ball as little as necessary?" That is a great example of someone twisting a point so that you can argue against it. Did the Saints have a good running game when Brees was there? Did they attempt to limit throwing? So yeah, this is correct but responds to something someone else said. A running game can help the passing game by keeping the DC honest. If he must worry about gap control, he is less likely to stunt. If he is worried about the run, he is less likely to blitz--that does not mean you run it all the time to keep your QB from throwing. Nobody said that. It means they have to respect the run. It is part of the balance. A team that throws the ball 70% of the time would still benefit from a strong running game.

I can say that the point here was, at least in part, to gauge the type of WR we may pursue. None of us can change the QB situation and it is doubtful the Panthers will in 2024. I can say that when Bryce planted his foot and stepped into the throw, he was money. That rarely happened.

Yeah, I am sure the torch and pitchfork mafia will be coming out of the woodwork (I have not read the thread yet) but if they were better at reading, nobody makes a statement here beyond a comparison to what others have done. If that triggers personal frustrations that folks cannot deal with, then they are quick to overreact. I get their pain, however, because it pissed me off a lot last year. However, I also know that "outside the box" thinking has produced some of the greatest innovations in sports...We used to have straight toed kickers and everybody had a fullback and took snaps under center.

You could be right--reading tea leaves here.

And he needs them as a backup plan and he can only really talk about Panthers and prospects. He can watch film and talk to people, but I hear ya.

I am not ready to tar and feather Bryce, but that could be based on my lack of interest in the trends and creative applications of Xs and Os. I can say that I have been listening to Canales, and I really love what I am hearing. Think about his history and how he has turned QBs around. Think of these comments (paraphrasing): 1. The QB will get rid of the ball in 2.7 seconds or less. 2. There will be a strong running game. 3. We will play to Bryce's strengths. Now think how difficult it was to sack Brees in New Orleans, and why he had 2 stud guards in front of him. He basically had the same setup. I am now going to connect these comments with the concept and scheme of the Oregon Ducks, which is similar to that of the Miami Dolphins (I think Tua and tunas went 11-6 in 2023). Here is what they said at Oregon concerning Nix and the resurrection of their offense. “Really, based out of a pro-style offense but with spread principles, RPOs, run-action pass, play-action pass. I like to think that we’re multiple in our personnel groupings and our formations,” Stein said. “We want to be an attacking offense that throws the ball down the field.” Nix transferred to Oregon in 2022, as Stein was implementing this offense. Before arriving at Oregon, Nix was a decent QB, but most considered him to be a bust. Notice the difference between his best year at Auburn and his years at Oregon. Of course, one must consider the shift from SEC to PAC 10, but this is impressive: You don't triple your TD production and double your yardage by switching DI conferences. His completion percentage increased 10% in his first year and 16.4% the following year. Meanwhile, at Oregon he threw 74 TDs vs. 10 interceptions. The Oregon system is similar to what Canales is describing here. I realize that college numbers and pro numbers are not really comparable, and I am not trying to do that--I am looking at this as a case study, where you have a guy who was basically run out of Auburn become a stud in this system. IMO, if Bryce is going to succeed, he needs to do what they are doing in Miami with Tua. This is pretty close to that. Miami has burners who are stars after the catch--that minimizes the need to throw the long ball. That feeds into Bryce's strength because he is smart--this will require pre-snap reads. He will take snap, plant foot, throw to his read and then to his check down. Next play.... I see us drafting Corley, Ladd, Washington, and/or one of the Oregon WRs. I think we have the deep threat. Bo is just the example I used because i noted the Oregon offense being similar to what Canales was describing. Similar to Miami in the NFL. I think he knows what he has to do.

Just lost himself a few million. I bet he does not go before the end of day 2

canales is going to play to Bryce's strengths. Look for YAC guys, not deep burners. They studied these QBs for 2 months last year and still missed it. You had a 50% chance to get it right if you didn't research them at all. I want Bryce to succeed, but damn, front office. Damn, Tepper. Is you stupid or somethin?