MHS831

exactly---draft some bookends. I would not mind trading up to get him at the end of the first round....You know he would be an upgrade to moton and you would get him on a five-year deal---saving you about $20m per year on average over the next 4 years--I think we can trade Moton too, and prolly get a high pick for him in 2022. Slater and Jenkins? Shhhoooooooot yeah.

Some folks are going to be sick in about 2-3 years when these guys they over-analyzed are lighting it up. And others will be trading their picks for a sixth this year and a second and fourth next year.

Nice way of looking at it.

All in on Tackle. Watch the Tevan Jenkins video in the draft thread. I wish he were a LT, and wonder if he will be tried there. Arms shorter than 33"

thanks. Watching it now. We know we are going to get a good player. I was not happy when we drafted Kuechly or CMC. I hated the Beason pick. I was not a Cam supporter for the same reasons they are questioning Fields. So I am going to keep my ego in check because, "If you can't be with the one you love, love the one you're with." I just made that up.

Nice. Did he give the driver a contract?

I know---If Mac Jones goes at three--and I would not be surprised to see the Bungles take Chase--Atlanta will probably trade back--but some team always shocks everyone with some crazy pick--I see Surtain, Darrisaw, or Parsons possibly rocking the boat--who knows? Miami? Detroit? They are wild cards.

You have faith in Fields, and I see why---I can't get past the Ohio St curse that goes back to Art Schichter or whatever his name was. He is definitely a stud.

Is Jones a lock? I hope so. I am seeing Fields mocked to SF a lot. And this is a big board, so including all players is interesting. For example, if you rate Sewell ahead of Jones and Wilson, it gives more perspective than if you automatically put 3 QBs at 1, 2, 3. I do not have Jones or Lance in my top 8, for example.

Yes, I agree. I suppose the context here is they want a game changer--a threat--a super talent--and not just a player to develop who could step into a key role. And I am in the OT camp as well. I think there are 4 good ones, but 1 is a RT who could possible play LT--Tevin Jenkins OKSt.

And a beast. Can he play LT?

So it is time to nail down your thoughts. If you would not draft a player in the top 8, do not include him--not player rankings--it is your shopping list. At the end, include a number where you think the talent level significantly drops. That should be your trade back limit. If you want to add players up to that number, go for it. I will start: 1. QB Lawrence (if he falls to 8, he is a panther. I stake my rep on it) 2. LT Sewell (maybe Slater is a better fit, but dang...) 3. QB Wilson (I think he is going to be good) 4. TE Pitts (more than a TE should be allowed to be) 5. QB Fields (You really can't leave him there, but you might trade back and use him as bait) 6. LT/G Slater (Spidey Senses tingling that this might be the pick) 7. WR Chase (Really good at getting open, catching the ball, and taking it to the house) 8. WR Waddle (he is that good, folks. Did not watch tape until Verge said he is on the list--I could handle it. Spidey senses tingling--I have 2 spiders) ---- I see the talent drop off around 8. I am not sure I would trade back, unless I was assured to get one of these players. I might take some future picks and a first rounder to move back, but not sure that I would.

Great point. You know, this thread "Meanwhile, in Washington" should probably be pinned and kept year round.

In high school, I was the long snapper and punter. I was fast back then. Seriously, I was the emergency long snapper and emergency punter. Coach used to tell me, you better hope they both don't get hurt. Har Har I never want RB on day 1 or 2. I hope we stop doing that.

I see Denver as a move up candidate as well.

Maybe this is the secret for having intelligent Huddle discussions that are open minded and backed by intelligence. Maybe I need to get up at 6 am and post every day---before the trolls and aholes wake up.

I hope you are right. I am just going through the Matt Kalil, Byron Bell, Melvin Tuten, Clarence Jones, Jeno James flashbacks. We have been in worse shape at LT than we are this year, with Scott, Erving, Daley, and Greggy on paper to play LT. If they do not like him, why a 2-year deal in the morning of the first day of tampering? I can't understand it---it scares me.

I agree, and it is a luxury. T where I would go, but they must think either they can get one later or the T is already on the team. Yikes.

Oh, and yes, If it were me, I might take Slater for one reason--he can play G at an elite level. So if for some reason he does not work out at T, he could be all pro inside. And I think his awareness of the game (demonstrated by his incredibly precise angles on the second level) suggest a very high football IQ. Northwestern is not for dummies as well. Some people try to discredit Verge when a bit of info does not materialize, but she is on point with a lot of stuff before it hits the press. She says that she knows that Waddle, Slater, and Pitts are on the Panthers round 1 board--not sure about any others.

I think Sewell is the guy if he is on the board, and we could take Slater if Sewell is gone or not--not sure--but there are a few factors that opened my eyes, Dave. And I am with you--I want a LT. However, Verge has some inside info--a scout (or something) for a team that is fairly in step with what Carolina is thinking--they have a pretty reliable grapevine, I would imagine. She says Carolina wants a weapon. And (see Unicar post) Moore and Anderson could be on the final years of contracts--we shall see how we like them. However, I think they see Waddle as the KR/PR/Slot that can break games open....I did not have WRs on my Panther board in the first round. I think it was Aussie who said we could get R. Moore in the second round after the T in the first. Good points. And finally, I think THEY THINK they have addressed the OL---we shall see.

I think that we take Sewell if he is there.

According to Verge, there is a strong possibility we draft a WR--Waddle is the name she mentions repeatedly--And I agree with the OL comment--but here is how they might be looking at it: We have addressed it by signing Scott and Erv at LT, Elfein at LG, Miller at RG, Tagging Moton. I do not like Erv and Elf, but they seem to or they would not have offered multi-year contracts on the first day of tampering at about 8:30 AM

I think we will take Pitts or a WR and not a T, but I want a T.

I think it is funny how foreign an idea is that does not fit into our mindsets--so when I hear Verge mention Waddle, I want to correct her and explain why this is not possible. What does a LT do? Keep a defender off your QB. What does a slot WR with Moore and Anderson do? Keep a potential blitzer off your qb. he gives your QB a clearer pre snap read. He finds the third DB and makes (at times) a LB cover your TE. Notice I have not mentioned catching passes yet? Last year, the problem was not LT as much as it was the LT/LG combination. While I do not think we are done, I think we think we addressed that on the first day of the free agent tampering period. Erving and Elfein were targeted by us--why? We also re-signed Scott. Could Erving be the LG, Elfein the C? Who knows where this goes, but I think we have NOT really addressed slot WR--We have #1, #2, and #4. And don't get me started in the return game. So yes, I see Waddle's value. Are there WR weapons at 39? Not on that level.

So we let Samuel go for big money and we upgrade with the first rounder. From the sounds of the big board, the Panthers do not seem too interested in trading back---of course, all of us have our price. Mine is a box of hot Krispy Kremes and a Meatloaf CD with a half a tank of gas and nowhere to really go.