Garrett Bradbury should be our 1st round pick

[Khyber53]

Centers are drafted less often in the first round because each team only needs one of them. Two tackles, two guards. Also, centers tend to have longer careers than other offensive linemen, requiring less replacements. Heck, Jeff Van Note played for the Atlanta Falcons for almost 187 years before he retired -- he'd just rest his head on the crossbars of his walker to get down in his stance.

In the past, teams also only used a center to hike the ball and hold the middle of the line. They didn't pull, they really didn't run block and could therefore use someone with lesser athletic ability. Today, centers are expected to do all that plus layout second level hits on screens, pitchouts and reverses (sound familiar to anyone's favorite team???). 

The best QBs in the league tend to have the best centers, as well. That partnership is important for more than just the snap (which is vitally important considering how much shotgun and pistol formations are being used today), but also because most good centers are making the line calls and adjustments prior to the snap. Those calls and adjustments are vital in a read-option heavy offense like ours.

So there's both the reasons why centers make up so few first round picks and why it SHOULD be our first round pick. It's math for the first part and the evolution of the game that dictates their current value.

[Sub Zero]

47 minutes ago, Khyber53 said:

Centers are drafted less often in the first round because each team only needs one of them. Two tackles, two guards. Also, centers tend to have longer careers than other offensive linemen, requiring less replacements. Heck, Jeff Van Note played for the Atlanta Falcons for almost 187 years before he retired -- he'd just rest his head on the crossbars of his walker to get down in his stance.

In the past, teams also only used a center to hike the ball and hold the middle of the line. They didn't pull, they really didn't run block and could therefore use someone with lesser athletic ability. Today, centers are expected to do all that plus layout second level hits on screens, pitchouts and reverses (sound familiar to anyone's favorite team???). 

The best QBs in the league tend to have the best centers, as well. That partnership is important for more than just the snap (which is vitally important considering how much shotgun and pistol formations are being used today), but also because most good centers are making the line calls and adjustments prior to the snap. Those calls and adjustments are vital in a read-option heavy offense like ours.

So there's both the reasons why centers make up so few first round picks and why it SHOULD be our first round pick. It's math for the first part and the evolution of the game that dictates their current value.

So why are centers paid less than tackles by 15 mil on avg. and guards by 10 to 8 mil on avg??

AGAIN!! Centers are important but it isn't a position that is usually valued as a 1st round need almost never a top 20 pick need.  And for a team with other major needs.. Its completely a bad value move... Ryan was great but he couldn't do poo to keep Von Miller and Demarcuse Ware from trashing Cam in the superbowl.. Everybody here would have traded Ryan for Larsen if we could have had competent Tackle play for that game.. Plain and simple it's better value to get the 4th rated OT than the 1st rated center if it comes down to it.  Picking a Center at 16 means we have taken care of our Tackle, pass rush , and secondary issues in FA.. Not likely to happen.. We will be just fine with a 2nd round or 3rd round center..

[MasterAwesome]

1 hour ago, Sub Zero said:

You didn't follow the context of the conversation or you decided to cherry  pick 1 thing I said and ran with it.. For future situations read the whole conversation not just a quote.. I brought the superbowl guys in to point out they weren't 1st round picks and usually on most Oline in the league the Center isn't a high round pick and usually has a fair contract because of that.. So there you go...taa. daa

I did follow the entire conversation, and you continued to push this nonsense question about “name the two starting centers in the Super Bowl without google?” like that was some “gotcha” moment that proved your point about how centers have less inherent value. You brought name recognition into this whole conversation and then you tried to steer away from it afterwards, and then instead focused on them not being 1st round picks. Why do you have to ask what their names are, to tie that to the round they were drafted in? That makes zero sense.

Fine, so just clarify at this point if you think name recognition is tied to positional value or not. Then we can move on.

[thefuzz]

If you are doing things like we always have in todays NFL, you are likely failing.

C's and G's were rarely if ever drafted in the 1st many moons ago, but that trend is changing....not quickly enough for my taste with the Panthers, but that's another story.

Grade the players, and take the best player at 16 that has some value to this team.  We do not need a MLB, QB, or RB at that draft slot...but almost every other position should be on the board there.

If the best/highest ranked player is a CB, pull the trigger.  If it's a T or a DE, pull the trigger.  If it's a C...pull the trigger.

Drafting the 4th best DE over the best C....you know because of positional value....is a way to get burnt.

[Toomers]

1 minute ago, thefuzz said:

If you are doing things like we always have in todays NFL, you are likely failing.

C's and G's were rarely if ever drafted in the 1st many moons ago, but that trend is changing....not quickly enough for my taste with the Panthers, but that's another story.

Grade the players, and take the best player at 16 that has some value to this team.  We do not need a MLB, QB, or RB at that draft slot...but almost every other position should be on the board there.

If the best/highest ranked player is a CB, pull the trigger.  If it's a T or a DE, pull the trigger.  If it's a C...pull the trigger.

Drafting the 4th best DE over the best C....you know because of positional value....is a way to get burnt.

And drafting an inferior player, just because he’s the top C,(if he even is) over a better player at a deeper position, will get you burnt just as quick.  

[Sub Zero]

7 minutes ago, MasterAwesome said:

I did follow the entire conversation, and you continued to push this nonsense question about “name the two starting centers in the Super Bowl without google?” like that was some “gotcha” moment that proved your point about how centers have less inherent value. You brought name recognition into this whole conversation and then you tried to steer away from it afterwards, and then instead focused on them not being 1st round picks. Why do you have to ask what their names are, to tie that to the round they were drafted in? That makes zero sense.

Fine, so just clarify at this point if you think name recognition is tied to positional value or not. Then we can move on.

No.. Name recognition is to show ppl that they really don't know poo about centers and are just excited for a kid from NC State.. If Bradberry was from Colorado.. You wouldn't want him in the 1st round or care who he is just like the 2 centers in the superbowl nobody knew or cared about before I asked..

 

[Navy_football]

2 minutes ago, thefuzz said:

If you are doing things like we always have in todays NFL, you are likely failing.

C's and G's were rarely if ever drafted in the 1st many moons ago, but that trend is changing....not quickly enough for my taste with the Panthers, but that's another story.

Grade the players, and take the best player at 16 that has some value to this team.  We do not need a MLB, QB, or RB at that draft slot...but almost every other position should be on the board there.

If the best/highest ranked player is a CB, pull the trigger.  If it's a T or a DE, pull the trigger.  If it's a C...pull the trigger.

Drafting the 4th best DE over the best C....you know because of positional value....is a way to get burnt.

Agreed. And that's generally Hurney's approach early, which is why he usually hits big on 1st rounders. Everything after round 1 is a crap shoot though, particularly in the second where he tries to fill a need. Picking Jackson was a good move last season though, so I think he's learned his lesson and will actually take BPA throughout and address needs via FA. 

[thefuzz]

5 minutes ago, Toomers said:

And drafting an inferior player, just because he’s the top C,(if he even is) over a better player at a deeper position, will get you burnt just as quick.  

Not drafting a better graded player because of antiquated "positional value" is stupid.

Like I said, grade the players, then take the top graded player at 16 that isn't a RB, QB, or MLB.  It's not that hard to understand.

Stop worrying about a CB being worth more than a S or a OLB, and take the best player...not the one with the most "value" due to position.

[Toomers]

4 minutes ago, thefuzz said:

Not drafting a better graded player because of antiquated "positional value" is stupid.

Like I said, grade the players, then take the top graded player at 16 that isn't a RB, QB, or MLB.  It's not that hard to understand.

Stop worrying about a CB being worth more than a S or a OLB, and take the best player...not the one with the most "value" due to position.

And in this case, Bradberry is not worth taking with a pick higher than any center in memory. We are saying the same thing. Is Bradberry a top 15 player IYO? 

[Sub Zero]

6 minutes ago, thefuzz said:

If you are doing things like we always have in todays NFL, you are likely failing.

C's and G's were rarely if ever drafted in the 1st many moons ago, but that trend is changing....not quickly enough for my taste with the Panthers, but that's another story.

Grade the players, and take the best player at 16 that has some value to this team.  We do not need a MLB, QB, or RB at that draft slot...but almost every other position should be on the board there.

If the best/highest ranked player is a CB, pull the trigger.  If it's a T or a DE, pull the trigger.  If it's a C...pull the trigger.

Drafting the 4th best DE over the best C....you know because of positional value....is a way to get burnt.

Is it?? Centers and Guards are still considered later round needs.. When has that changed??  Og and centers want a base tag for Olinemen so when  tagged they can be paid like tackles.. Owners said hell no... Nobody wants to pay Guards and Centers like OT.  Just nobody wants to pay TE like WR's.  Its called a positional value chart..

No I will grade by financial value and position.. A Pass rush DE has more value (and if good) will blow the bank out.. If I can get that for 5 years for cheap that's what you do.. I can find a center  in a lower round who can play for 10 years at a reasonable price.. IF I draft that in the 1st he is already pretty close to top of the money value at that position and you end up paying more for a position not as highly valued as others.. And that always hurts your cap situation...

[MillionDollarCam]

Bradbury very well could become a great center but he primarily seems to be a zone blocking center.

For comparison’s sake, Billy Price was also categorized as primarily a zone blocking center and he was ass last year.

Linemen who are limited to a specific scheme seem to be struggling mightily in today’s NFL.

[Toomers]

1 minute ago, Sub Zero said:

Is it?? Centers and Guards are still considered later round needs.. When has that changed??  Og and centers want a base tag for Olinemen so when  tagged they can be paid like tackles.. Owners said hell no... Nobody wants to pay Guards and Centers like OT.  Just nobody wants to pay TE like WR's.  Its called a positional value chart..

No I will grade by financial value and position.. A Pass rush DE has more value (and if good) will blow the bank out.. If I can get that for 5 years for cheap that's what you do.. I can find a center  in a lower round who can play for 10 years at a reasonable price.. IF I draft that in the 1st he is already pretty close to top of the money value at that position and you end up paying more for a position not as highly valued as others.. And that always hurts your cap situation...

There is only ONE tag for all OL. Not separate ones for G, C, or OT. 

[Sub Zero]

2 minutes ago, Toomers said:

There is only ONE tag for all OL. Not separate ones for G, C, or OT. 

I thought the league fought that.. So the Tackle tag is the same as OG and Centers now?? 

If this is true wow I'm wrong then fug it draft 1st centers in the top 5 than..

[Toomers]

Just now, Sub Zero said:

I thought the league fought that.. So the Tackle tag is the same as OG and Centers??

Yes