Re-picking the drafts of the past 3 years... Who's still here, who is replaced? A Bye week reflection...

[TheRumGone]

1 hour ago, thefuzz said:

@Bronn

I agree with tiger here...maybe use a better word vs. bust.  Red, myself, and some other poster were back and forth about that the other day.  They were saying that if a top drafted player doesn't get a 2nd contract with the team that drafted him, he's a bust...and I don't agree with that notion at all.

Keeping Gano and releasing Butker was a really really bad move...keeping them both on the opening day roster was even dumber.  That's a really bad move by Hurney, but Butker is certainly not a bust.

Yeah red tried to tell me Star was a bad pick because we didn’t resign him. 

 

[JARROD]

On 9/26/2018 at 4:33 PM, *FreeFua* said:

Good post.

I wanted JuJu really bad in the 2nd last year and hated the fact we went with Samuel.

 

That was mine too,.. Juju,.. was like What the Fork when we took Samuel but then was cautiously optimistic,... what the fork works now,..

[AU-panther]

Most fans have unrealistic expectations for a draft.  Over time all teams "miss" more than they "hit".

I tend to try and look at the process also.  I was never a fan of all of the trading up that DG did. 

Here is a response I had to the 2017 draft right after it happened.  Remember that we actually traded 98 and 115 for 77 to draft Hall.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Flawlessly? maybe if we would have got a TE and/or a Safety.

Based on our visit list I think we were interested in both, especially TE.  We drafted one last year, a lot of discussion about how we were close to drafting Henry, there was talk about Shula really wanted one, and we have added several to the roster the past few years.

Moving up for Hall ruined our chances at Butt, Kittle, or Leggett, if we were interested in them

Not even just Lawson.

Instead of Hall at 77 we could have had at 98:

Trey Hendrickson drafted at103

Carl Lawson drafted at 116

Deatrich Wise drafted at 131

 

and then at 115 choices of TEs:

Michael Roberts drafted at 127

Jake Butt drafted at 145

George Kittle drafted a146

Leggett drafted at 150

We could have traded down 15 spots with both our 3rd round pick and fourth round pick and still had

at 113 Lawson or Wise

at 130 Butt, Kittle, or Leggett

Those two trades downs would have get you about 75 points of draft capital which is equal to a early 4th.  That capital could have been used for a safety or maybe move up in the 7th and pick Zane Gonzalez.

Either way I think moving up for Hall was actually a pivotal point in the draft.  I guess in a few years we will find out if it was worth it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sometimes you are better off not getting the player you want.

[Icege]

2016 is nowhere near as bad as the 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011 drafts were.

Only worthwhile picks from each were JStew, Munnerlyn, Hardy, and Newton respectfully. Some would argue that Newton alone makes 2011 great, but hitting on the #1 overall and then whiffing on x2 3rds (#65, #97), a 4th (#98), 5th (#132), x2 6ths (#166, #203), and a 7th (#244) is atrocious. Without Newton, Hardy, JStew, and Munnerlyn you're looking at the following picks:

2008: OT Otah, DB Godfrey, LB Connor, TE Barnidge, DT Hayden, DL Taylor, OL Schwartz, OL Bernadeau

2009: EDGE Brown, DB Martin, RB Goodson, FB Fiametta, OL Robinson

2010: QB Clausen, WR LaFell, WR Edwards, LB Norwood, WR Gettis, DB Pugh, QB Pike, DB Stanford, DB McClain

2011: DT McClain, DT Fua, CB Hogan, WR Pilares, LB Wilson, OL Williams, OL Ziemba

[Woodie]

On ‎9‎/‎28‎/‎2018 at 7:56 AM, tiger7_88 said:

A proven player approaching his first veteran (non-rookie) contract is

NOT

GOING

TO

SIGN

A

ONE

YEAR

"PROVE

IT".

Please, people... UNDERSTAND THIS. 

Carolina either re-signs him to a deal paying him significant money and rolls the dice on his knee *or* he'll sign somewhere else for more than Carolina is willing to pay him.  OR the team can put the franchise tag on him but if you're going to do that, you might as well just give him significant money on a longer contract.

But his health is not proven.  Two separate injuries to the same knee within weeks is a concern for any team.  And other than doctor's reports, Williams will not have the opportunity to prove he is 100% healthy when FA starts next year.  And while some team may give him a decent contract, he may see his value as being much higher the next year if he plays on a one year contract to prove that his knee is healthy and has not negatively impacted his play.  So, maybe the phrase "prove it" may not be perfect, but the general sentiment is accurate.  

[tiger7_88]

3 minutes ago, Woodie said:

But his health is not proven.  Two separate injuries to the same knee within weeks is a concern for any team. 

He had a knee injury in camp and then a Dallas Cowboy DT intentionally dove into his knee.

This is now an "injury problem" or a "history of injuries".

Just stop.

[Woodie]

On ‎9‎/‎28‎/‎2018 at 9:07 AM, tiger7_88 said:

Which is better?

A top kicker who is cheap?

Or a top kicker that is paid top dollar?

But the problem is that at the time the decision was made, Butker had not shown he is a top kicker.  He was very inconsistent in camp, and was clearly out kicked by Gano.  I think he had potential, but he hadn't shown what we saw in KC at that point.  

I agree it would be nice you have his youth and contract, but just imagine if we kept him over Gano and didn't develop into what he did at KC.  It would have been a nightmare around here.   

[tiger7_88]

1 minute ago, Woodie said:

But the problem is that at the time the decision was made, Butker had not shown he is a top kicker. 

Well, by that standard I guess Gano will be kicking for the Panthers until he's almost eligible for his Social Security retirement.

As was pointed out in the Butker threads last year, whatever he did or didn't show in "camp", he was able to perform ON THE FIELD in preseason successfully.

[Woodie]

1 minute ago, tiger7_88 said:

He had a knee injury in camp and then a Dallas Cowboy DT intentionally dove into his knee.

This is now an "injury problem" or a "history of injuries".

Just stop.

Who said anything about history?  I'm talking about actual health.  Williams will not have a chance to show his knee is 100% healthy and that his play will not be effected by the injuries before FA begins.  That will almost certainly be a concern for teams and likely impact his value.  So he may feel he can significantly improve that value by taking a short contract to show the knee is not a problem.  

[Woodie]

3 minutes ago, tiger7_88 said:

Well, by that standard I guess Gano will be kicking for the Panthers until he's almost eligible for his Social Security retirement.

As was pointed out in the Butker threads last year, whatever he did or didn't show in "camp", he was able to perform ON THE FIELD in preseason successfully.

He had two kicks in the preseason.  That was hardly enough to show anything.  But go back and read the reports from camp.  It Gano was outperforming Butker in practice, and it wasn't even close.  

[thefuzz]

On 9/29/2018 at 7:16 PM, Woodie said:

But the problem is that at the time the decision was made, Butker had not shown he is a top kicker.  He was very inconsistent in camp, and was clearly out kicked by Gano.  I think he had potential, but he hadn't shown what we saw in KC at that point.  

I agree it would be nice you have his youth and contract, but just imagine if we kept him over Gano and didn't develop into what he did at KC.  It would have been a nightmare around here.   

No it wouldn't.  The nightmare is if Gano goes back to his old ways...you know like most of his career %'s.

We could have cut Butker, and picked up any number of 1 year rentals out there, and likely paid him less per year than we are paying Gano now.  Hell, one of the most accurate K's in the history of the league was just signed off the couch a couple weeks ago.

Extending Gano and going with the "safe" kicker there was a mistake then, and it's a mistake now.

[My Goodness My Guinness]

On 9/29/2018 at 7:10 PM, Icege said:

2010: QB Clausen, WR LaFell, WR Edwards, LB Norwood, WR Gettis, DB Pugh, QB Pike, DB Stanford, DB McClain

This right here was the worst draft in panthers history. Gave me nausea just looking at it. 

[caatfan]

8 minutes ago, My Goodness My Guinness said:

This right here was the worst draft in panthers history. Gave me nausea just looking at it. 

LaFell was the crown jewel of that draft. On the current team I doubt he'd make the practice squad. 

[Woodie]

56 minutes ago, thefuzz said:

No it wouldn't.  The nightmare is if Gano goes back to his old ways...you know like most of his career %'s.

We could have cut Butker, and picked up any number of 1 year rentals out there, and likely paid him less per year than we are paying Gano now.  Hell, one of the most accurate K's in the history of the league was just signed off the couch a couple weeks ago.

Extending Gano and going with the "safe" kicker there was a mistake then, and it's a mistake now.

You've been around here long enough to know better than that.  If we had chosen Butker over Gano even though Gano significantly outkicked him, and Butker proceeded to have a mediocre season, the vitriol in this place would have been deafening.  

And any team that has Super Bowl aspirations (which we did) will not go out and take a one year rental on a random kicker just to jettison one that has proven to be reliable throughout his career (which despite popular opinion, he was/is) just because of one big miss and a bad game on a broken foot...not only is that not done, it would be irresponsible.  Don't look at this with hindsight, but look only at the information that was available at the time the decision had to be made.