Will DJ Moore be active week one?

[jumpman910]

1 minute ago, KB_fan said:

I'm pretty sure he will be, especially since we open at home. Ron knows the fans will want to see our first round pick!

I'm guessing it will be at the expense of Byrd or Smith. Much will depend on ST and kick return.  If Barner can handle returns Byrd likely to be inactive.

Smith will start until further notice. This situation is better than the alternatives we usually have.

The team wasn't sure if we could draft a WR we like and didn't know about Samuel and Byrds health. They went out and got vet options to be backup plans, just so happens that we got the pick we wanted in Moore and Samuel looks to have taken another step into his progression. 

People want instant production and forget that the normal progression for a wr is 3 years. Instant WR1 production is more of the outlier for receivers than the norm 

[Proudiddy]

I'm not gonna lie, I was pretty disappointed in the lack of snaps he got against the Pats, and the one memorable snap he had with the first team offense was an ugly play in which he got mugged by Gilmore and coupdn't get out of his cut that ended up being an incompletion in the end zone and left him falling down awkwardly wxposing his crack to all of America.  It was arguably defensive holding, but they didn't call it.  Then I remember him returning a punt, it looked like he was slightlt injured on the tackle by how he reacted, but of course, our Panthers Broadcast team immediately cut away to commercial and didn't mention it.

But yeah, it appears we're going to use him in spots that are particularly advantageous to his skill set coming in, rather than being THE GUY early, as I expected...  i'm thinking like how the Chiefs used Hill early on...  Seeing as how he has been compared quite often to see Smitty, I can see his development following a similar path there as well, but I think DJ will be more productive offensively as a rookie.  We'll look to get him the ball in space this year, but we don't have to depend on him as a primary receiving threat.

[KB_fan]

I can imagine Torrey would be graceful about sitting week 1 if need be. 

Depending on how Moore progresses and the overall success of the offense, I wonder if there'd be some kind of alternation from week to week between Torrey and Moore as to who is inactive? 

I could see it. I imagine it might be determined by matchups with opponents.

[panther4life]

10000% believe he will be active. For reference Funchess,Benjamin, Samuel, Byrd and Shepard were active week 1 last year.

The one who may not be active, assuming he even makes the roster would be Byrd.

[Eazy-E]

1 minute ago, panther4life said:

10000% believe he will be active. For reference Funchess,Benjamin, Samuel, Byrd and Shepard were active week 1 last year.

The one who may not be active, assuming he even makes the roster would be Byrd.

Who is the return man? Do we keep Barner over cap for his return ablility, or go with Dj and cmc? A lot of interesting decisions to be made.

[jumpman910]

6 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

To be fair, Moore has also been spending a fair amount of time playing against guys who won't see the field on Sundays. He's played well into all three games.

Asking why he hasn't produced in those circumstances is a fair question.

Oh yeah absolutely. Not making any excuses for him at all. Moore has beat his man deep a few times and Gilbert didn't look his way. Both of Gilbert's tds being to Mose probably speaks more to them both getting alot of work together on the 3rd team. 

For example Case Keenum had a great connection with Thelien whereas Cousins throws to Diggs and Treadwell before he looks Thelien's way. 

[Mr. Scot]

10 minutes ago, jumpman910 said:

Smith will start until further notice. This situation is better than the alternatives we usually have.

The team wasn't sure if we could draft a WR we like and didn't know about Samuel and Byrds health. They went out and got vet options to be backup plans, just so happens that we got the pick we wanted in Moore and Samuel looks to have taken another step into his progression. 

People want instant production and forget that the normal progression for a wr is 3 years. Instant WR1 production is more of the outlier for receivers than the norm 

I agree with patience for Moore, but I'm not convinced Smith is going to be all that good.

[tondi]

He will be active if for no other reason than it would be an indictment of the entire organization if our #1 pick, at a perennial position of need, was a healthy scratch week one. 

[KB_fan]

7 minutes ago, jumpman910 said:

The team wasn't sure if we could draft a WR we like and didn't know about Samuel and Byrds health. They went out and got vet options to be backup plans, just so happens that we got the pick we wanted in Moore and Samuel looks to have taken another step into his progression. 

100% agree.

But Moore will need playing time to develop, so even if he is potentially our weakest WR, he'll get on the field some games.

Torrey is no dummy. He knows he was signed as insurance, especially with Samuel's status unclear back in the spring. I think he'll accept whatever is for the best of the team even if it means he's inactive some weeks.

One positive no one's mentioned. If we use a different WR rotation week to week, could that keep our opponents guessing, in that they don't know who to gameplan for?

Having 6 talented WRs and trying to divide up playing time and targets is a REALLY nice problem to have. I am not sure I'll really believe it until I see it. And if course the rosters not set yet.

[jumpman910]

6 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I agree with patience for Moore, but I'm not convinced Smith is going to be all that good.

It's not that I think Smith is good I just have a hard time seeing him not starting. 

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, jumpman910 said:

It's not that I think Smith is good I just have a hard time seeing him not starting. 

I can understand that.

3 minutes ago, tondi said:

He will be active if for no other reason than it would be an indictment of the entire organization if our #1 pick, at a perennial position of need, was a healthy scratch week one. 

Is that really a good reason to make a roster decision though?

I'll grant that decisions get made for reasons other than the player being the best choice. I just don't believe they should be.

[jumpman910]

3 minutes ago, tondi said:

He will be active if for no other reason than it would be an indictment of the entire organization if our #1 pick, at a perennial position of need, was a healthy scratch week one. 

Week one sure but he wouldn't be the first 1st round wr with a healthy scratch if it would happen sometime this season. 

[Dex]

42 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'd actually say it's a valid question.

I believe he will, but I don't really blame anybody for asking.

Unless he does something stupid again or absolutely sucks balls in practice or shows a lack of effort he will be active for the home opener. This is a business more than it is a sport and showing off your flashy first round pick for the home crowd is good business.

[KB_fan]

I know it's the other side of the ball and not as sexy a position, but does anyone remember whether we kept Shaq active every week his rookie season?

Obviously there were established guys ahead of him. We had the luxury of bringing him along slowly. Moore's situation is a bit similar given our current potential depth and talent at WR.

I could dig into 2015 gamebooks... I just don't remember if Shaq played every game.

Don't forget Norv's man crush on DJ. I would imagine he's got plays drawn up just for him...