MHS831

I am not sure about the TE or CB in round 1, but the rest is spot on.   Wonder why he did not mention S?  Does he think we are set there with Scott?  Wonder why he did not mention DE?  Does he think Wharton and D Brown got it? 

Personally, I do not think Walker prevents us from drafting an OT no more that M. Jackson and Horn suggest that we draft a CB.  I would understand it, but with Walker on a 1-year deal and Ickey a question mark (average when healthy), and Moton starting to get SS checks...

I think we HAVE to go DT and OT in rounds 1 and 2.  That is right.  I said it.  

5 hours ago, BeenPounding said:

Here is my perfect mock draft...I have no idea why McDonald fell so far, but I would supplement him with Domonique "Big Citrus" Orange in real life.  This draft would cook!!!!

5 hours ago, BeenPounding said:

Here is my perfect mock draft...I have no idea why McDonald fell so far, but I would supplement him with Domonique "Big Citrus" Orange in real life.  This draft would cook!!!!

I like this.  Really like the Stanford TE, McDonald, and Iheanachor -- 

9 hours ago, Basbear said:

Surprised CB is that low. 

19th is odd spot. For many recent drafts, teams only felt there were around 14 first round players. 

So to many 19 is just an early second and doesn't hold the value of a first. 

If you go off- the smart path of LT, QB, edge, WR, CB, etc. Whatever your OG, Safety, ILB, etc needs to be a difference maker, that's the key point. I've said the 8th best edge is better than the 1st safety. Same for QB and even WRs.

You should 100% factor in position value. 

MHS you've been wanting a FS, let me tell you its super difficult to be a difference making FS. You're just sooo farrrr away from the action and the end result most times. If you're in the play, defense made mistakes in order. Now to talk out of both sides, maaaaaann that white boy from Oregon....I thought he crushed the combine and honestly that alone made me rethink "is he worth 19 now?!?!" he's now in the discussion for me, but still below others. 

 

Plus I feel TE is vastly underrated in value terms. But looking at the last 20 years of TEs in the first, its down right bad. You're better like X10 better drafting one in 4th or 5th.  

this made me re-thing a lot of stuff.  the S issue is one of them.

2 hours ago, Panthers Fan 69 said:

App state boy!

then this is likely his last job.

(Kidding--long story about ASU and me--still not over it)  He was very good last year.

Pricey for a punter.  1 year deal?

Just now, Joe Bear said:

Rae wasn't a good enough player to get away with it.

I literally do not remember anything about him

26 minutes ago, Joe Bear said:

Frankly I'm surprised he's still a color guy on the preseason broadcasts. It was like nothing happened. Kinda like December 2002.

Rae Carruth was not available at the time.

26 minutes ago, frankw said:

You can add the TE we seek but opposing defenses still have to believe the QB can deliver him the ball at a high level particularly over the middle which is where the really good TE's thrive and that hasn't exactly been an area of the field our passing O has thrown to at a high % the last 3 years we've had a whole thread on that already. You can bet opposing defenses with nearly 50 games of tape will certainly be licking their chops waiting to see us try.

I think Bryce's first pick was over the middle. I wondered then about his ability to see the field in that area.  

12 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Not what I said. They know within the building why we aren't utilizing TEs more. If the rumors were true that we were seriously pursuing a couple of decent receiving TEs that strongly points toward a lack of quality receiving TEs currently on the roster. Does that mean we consider drafting one at 19? I don't know, but it wouldn't shock me and if we did there's only one guy it would be. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see TE drafting somewhere in the first three rounds. 

We also have to consider cause and effect.  Maybe the reason we don't target TEs is not by design, it is due to personnel.  If we are going to use 12 (2 TEs) and 13 (3 TEs) sets to improve the run game, we need some TE options.  It is ridiculous to think we can do that without TEs who can run the seams and move the chains in the pass game.  I think that is the plan folks.  We ran 3 TEs about 1 in 12 plays last year, and we did not have the TE personnel to do that as effectively as needed.  If we had better TEs, we might run 3 TE sets more--say 10%, and 2 TE sets 20% of the time.  You always need the pass option when you do this, and frankly, nobody was scared with Tremble, Evans, and Sanders out there.  It is an area they are likely to address. 

15 hours ago, 45catfan said:

 

Conspiracy theory:  They only spoke to one TE (based on the list I saw) and it was Joly.  They are telling us:  If we draft a TE, it will be day 3, and it will be Joly or we will stay with what we have.  

THE WALKER BACKGROUND

Here is where this gets weird.  Walker is a serviceable LT who could benefit from Gilbert's experience and coaching.  However, he is known for below-average run blocking and frequent penalties.  As you know, a penalty from a LT is a drive killer. A former 7th round pick, Walker has outperformed expectations, but he still ranks around the middle of the pack when compared to other tackles.  Having said that, it seems as if the Panthers are banking on Walker for a year and will then make a decision on Ickey. 

In Green Bay, Walker was the starter, but the Packers weren't exactly sold on him. While most people think the oft-injured David Bakhtiari retired in 2023, he really wanted to keep playing.  He was released on March, 11, 2024.  Walker stepped in and took the reserve LT job from Nijman in that 2023 season, but they were close--probably because Nijman was more of a swing OT.  However, Nijman was a free agent in 2024, so the Panthers signed him just a week after Bakhtiari was released, leaving the Packers only Walker to play LT.  A month later, the Packers drafted a LT in the first round, Jordan Morgan out of Arizona.  Most Packer fans believe that Morgan would have beat out Walker for the LT job in 2024, but he had some shoulder injuries and went to IR after 6 games. In 2025, when the Packers had an injury at G during the season, instead of putting Morgan in at LT for Walker as planned, they played Morgan to guard because Walker can only play 1 position.  The Packers currently project Morgan back to LT for 2026, which is probably why they did not seek to retain Walker, at least in part.

Based on this history, it is safe to say this: Walker is better than Nijman. We have the benefit of them being on the same team in a direct competition to help us see that. Walker is probably closer to Ickey, except for the penalties.  That bothers me a lot.  Bryce sucks when we get behind the sticks, and a run-first offense with a poor run-blocking LT is not ideal.  

Regardless, I think Ickey and the Panthers find themselves in limbo right now, so the Walker deal comes at a perfect time for the GM.  Gilbert, perhaps, can work on the penalties and maybe a TE like Tremble can help offset the run blocking issues, so maybe we can actually stay the course at OT.  Maybe we do not draft a LT--maybe we draft a RT to groom behind Moton.  Maybe we draft a C.  At LT, the Panthers do not want to overreact, especially if Ickey returns to form or Walker demonstrates improvement.  Depth is certainly a concern, but a solid RT can be that depth.  

I doubt the Panthers draft a LT in rounds one or maybe two.  It seems we have bigger needs at Will LB, DT, TE, and maybe S.  

5 minutes ago, Carolina Cajun said:

This was a super interesting analysis....and I will say I dont think it prevents us from looking at Safety in the draft. IF Ransom takes a step up and outplays Moehrig, there is an out for them after the year as a potential cap cut.  EVEN if not, if you are right and Simmons shows some promise as a Big nickel and Moehrig gets  injured and Ransom looks good (or even if Moehrig looks bad) I could see him being a cap casualty in 2027 as long as we feel we have enough talent there as starting potential.  Lotta football to play and Lotta injuries to happen.  Im hopeful because his measurables are through the roof, but unless they translate you still gotta go with what you got.

I agree.  Some situations are all we should ask--shadow the qb (someone suggested that) or cover a TE, or blitz from the big nickel position.  Forget S, edge, CB,LB--

1 minute ago, csx said:

He's just not a great football player given his measurables. He's become a good special teams player so he must have gotten over the contact issu. I suppose he doesn't have the will or the aptitude to excel with the X's and O's

I work with social emotional learning and I don't know why a player with all the tools (to Snow's point) sucks when he was a top 10 player in college.  It is not talent, and it is usually not due to some learning disability-.  It comes down to dispositions or emotions in a lot of cases.

The reason I pointed out Simmons in particular is because he was drafted to be a DC's new weapon.  I have friends who played in the NFL and they talk about the amount they throw at you--and those were guys who played 1 position.  Simmons shows his ability on special teams--where you are a bit more turned loose than scripted or forced to read blocking schemes or pass routes, etc.  See ball, get ball.  Simmons has been tried at CB, nickel, S , LB edge and he has had 5 different coordinators if you do not count the STs guy.  This would overwhelm most people.  Nobody knows what it does to your confidence and motivation to go from the best player on your team and a top college player to getting cut.  

I just think that players like this can be saved.  To say, "He just isn't good" is not to answer the question, "Why was this not noticed during the interviews?  game film?  Combine?  References?  etc.  No, there has to be something more to it than that.  I think Isaiah needs one job and that job should be aligned with a strength.  If he fails then, fine.  Maybe he lost his mojo.  Maybe he never had it.  But to understand what he has been through is to give the guy the benefit of the doubt.  If you played in high school, you got a happy meal version of what it is like in college.  College was an appetizer when compared to pros.  We shall see.  But I am more optimistic about Simmons than I am XL.  Simmons was asked to things most NFL players cannot do.  XL just needs to catch the damn ball in bounds.   Middle schoolers do it every day.

15 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Justin Joly in the 3rd.  

I had him as a hopeful 4th rounder, but he might not be there.

10 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Justin Joly in the 3rd.  

To the best of my knowledge, he is the only one we have talked to...he can run the full route tree.  They showed us their "type" of TE when they showed interest in Njoku.  I think they would rather have a veteran.  Over the past 2 years, they have done some "bottom fishing" for a gem on day 3 (Sanders, Evans)

41 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

Tools. If I hear that term used one more time I'm going to lose my damn mind.  "Tools" are meaningless if they cannot use them already. Stop looking for "tools" and find productive football players. Stop looking for combine freaks and look for guys that have produced at a high level already. Tools my ass.

I hear you and I have said the same thing at times, but blanket statements are accurate part of the time at best.  I have also coached kids who had the "tools" but they were slow and unproductive on the field--and a few adjustments to the scheme or teaching techniques, and the light comes on.  We call them "late bloomers."  Based on my limited experience, it should be called "coaching."  As a former coach, if you gave me kids with the tools and I could not get them to perform at the level of their ability, then I have failed.  The coaches know this, so their timetables to win may be shorter than the time they have to develop a player--I think a lot of talent goes down the disposal, which is why the success rate for drafted players is so low.

In my view, based on my career as a professor and researcher, my job is to produce successful people for the workplace.   I use data to identify central problems and I use my relationships with my students to strengthen weaknesses.  I have a limited amount of time to do this before a decision is made about their development.  In this case, I would look at the variables (data and the situational influences unique to this individual that may have stunted growth) and not the ineffective player as the center of the problem.  The team has already interviewed him, talked to his college coaches, measured him, etc. So I would minimize the assumption that the kid is the problem and look at his system of support and teaching strategies.  Nobody wants to admit THEY might be the problem.  To blame a first-rounder for failing, you have to admit either you did not properly identify the prospect's potential (which is your job) or you were unable to prepare that prospect (with all the tools that got him the job) to succeed (also your job).  So are we going to blame the 24-year-old kid with all the tools to succeed for sucking or are we going to take responsibility for his success as his mentors and teachers?

10 minutes ago, chknwing said:

my thread wasnt good enough for you?  lol

 

I am sorry.  I must have missed it.  I did not recall seeing one (I was very swamped the first week of March) and I did not search to see if it had been shared.  I always appreciate your contributions.  I would have simply added this spreadsheet to your thread.  Either way, thanks to you, we now have a cornucopia of tracked visit intel.  We are blessed with knowledge and insight!!

Sorted by Position

The following is an abbreviated list of the prospects the Panthers have met with. The complete spreadsheet, including the locations and frequency of known meetings can be found in the spreadsheet linked below:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/138yxXgpawL2Fogx5M9OmXTdv2LJvlrya-mgM2YgBOb0/edit?gid=0#gid=0

1 hour ago, Swaggasaurus said:

Kayden McDonald was 5th on the Buckeyes with 65 tackles. His ability to take on blocks and locate the football is elite for the position 

For a DT on THAT defense, that is unreal.

2 hours ago, CmC2k said:

I really like Caleb Banks physical tools, but those foot injuries are a cause for concern. If he were to drop to our pick in the 2nd round, I'd be more open to taking that risk. 

Yeah, and people are starting to mock him to us at 19.  

11 minutes ago, TD alt said:

I kinda see it as the same as any other position of arguable need. The thing is, I don't see any DT that may be available as the BPA at 19, but you never know.

One could fall, but doubtful.  I am thinking a free agent who can't find a home or a player who is cut after the draft--something like that.  The draft is not deep at DT.  I do like the rookie I posted who could be a third round option.  I love high motor DTs who can pressure the passer.

After reading your post, I went to 2 mocks (Walter Football and Tankathon) to see how the DTs were falling--both had us drafting a DT at 19.)  

1 minute ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Elite athlete who just isn't that good of a football player. But we may have found his sweet spot as a special teamer. No thinking, no having to read the offense and make adjustments, etc. Just take your big jumbo athlete ass and go cause a car crash.

that is it--a great athlete who has never really had to apply himself in things like preparation or developing a football I Q.  just has always been way better than everyone else.  There is a point and time when everyone around you is a great athlete.   The point here is to take the thinking away from him.  I image all the DCs who have had him have tried to "Swiss Army knife" him into a state of confusion.  A confused (as opposed to reactive) player is not running 4.39.  They get slower.  He does not have the background or acumen to be a Swiss Army knife--like you say, he needs to "see the ball, get the ball."  The point here is just that.  Give him one thing to do in some situations, and he will get faster.  I am not willing to take an athlete like that and say "he sucks" when there is a way to get the most out of him.  That is what good coaches do.  Until then, we should not label him.  That is what bad coaches do.

1 minute ago, The Huddler said:

hes a scrub

 

theres my analysis

Brilliant!  You should have a podcast.