Draft 2 players-get better at 4 positions?

[MHS831]

A different way of looking at the draft:  Yes, DE might be our biggest need if you ask the majority of fans, but here is an argument for going a different direction--IF we can find starters at two positions in the draft (LT and FS), we improve at FOUR positions. This is the reason we should draft a LT in round 1 and a FS in round 2. 

The case for drafting LT in round 1:    If we draft the LT of the future, either Moton or Williams goes to G.  Would a rookie LT be better than the Clark/Newhouse tandem last season?  YUP.  Does moving either Moton or Williams to LG upgrade Van Roten--prolly.   we get better at LG and LT by adding one starting LT.  I like Ford--he would be a stud LG, but he has some athleticism and could beat out Moton and Williams for LT. He simply gives us more options--if Dillard is there, we probably would take him, however.  Expect J. Taylor and J Williams to be gone.

The case for taking a FS in the round 2: The second round should be loaded with FS options--Savage, Thornhill, Rapp, Abrams--there are literally about 6 potential starting FSs that should be there in round 2.  If we draft a starting FS and move Reid to SS, we become instantly better at 2 positions.  Reid sucked a lot at FS last year, but he is a stud SS--better than Adams.  If we add a Rapp or a Thornhill or Savage---for example, we get better at FS and Reid upgrades SS.

"But MHS, you idiot, what about the pass rush?":  I am in agreement--about the pass rush part.  However, in the first round, it is only reasonable to think that Burns or Ferrell will be there.  If  Burns is  there, you probably take him.  Sweat is dropping and we cannot afford to gamble (heart condition?) on one position and not get better at 2 on the OL.   But let's say you decide to go another route--take a DE in the third round.  Crazy?  Not really.  Of course, You could package the third rounders and move up into the second round and take a S then, if there is a DE there in round 2, but there is a ton of logic that says you grab a FS in round 2--somehow.

Panthers drafted Charles Johnson in the third.  Greg Hardy in the fifth.   Regardless, unless you are taking Julius Peppers, the DE/Edge position takes some time to develop. Johnson and Hardy each took 3 seasons to get good.  Most Edge rushers/DEs are developmental.  Would a rookie be that much of an upgrade if we go 3-4? 

The current roster:  Irvin and Addison are oldish and we should consider them one fairly effective rush package.  Aside from that, we have Obada (27 and still coming of age), Haynes (the draft pick nobody  is talking about because it happened last year), and Cox, who is getting better each year and could be better as a 3-4 DE.  And what about Shaq Thompson as a hybrid OLB/Edge rusher?  Shaq had 3.5 sacks last season and did not rush the passer every down.  I am guessing here, but there is a loud din of absolute silence about Haynes and Thompson in Panther circles-what roles will each play?  Do we need a DE/edge rusher as much as we think?  Will the new defense fix the pressure problems? 
Because we have some players who could step up in a 3-4 ,  maybe the new front is our answer to the lack of pressure?

Just another perspective--if I were a GM, I am looking to get better every year, and if drafting 2 players makes me better at 4 positions, I would probably do it. 

[heel31ok]

13 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

A different way of looking at the draft:  Yes, DE might be our biggest need if you ask the majority of fans, but here is an argument for going a different direction--IF we can find starters at two positions in the draft (LT and FS), we improve at FOUR positions. This is the reason we should draft a LT in round 1 and a FS in round 2. 

The case for drafting LT in round 1:    If we draft the LT of the future, either Moton or Williams goes to G.  Would a rookie LT be better than the Clark/Newhouse tandem last season?  YUP.  Does moving either Moton or Williams to LG upgrade Van Roten--prolly.   we get better at LG and LT by adding one starting LT.  I like Ford--he would be a stud LG, but he has some athleticism and could beat out Moton and Williams for LT. He simply gives us more options--if Dillard is there, we probably would take him, however.  Expect J. Taylor and J Williams to be gone.

The case for taking a FS in the round 2: The second round should be loaded with FS options--Savage, Thornhill, Rapp, Abrams--there are literally about 6 potential starting FSs that should be there in round 2.  If we draft a starting FS and move Reid to SS, we become instantly better at 2 positions.  Reid sucked a lot at FS last year, but he is a stud SS--better than Adams.  If we add a Rapp or a Thornhill or Savage---for example, we get better at FS and Reid upgrades SS.

"But MHS, you idiot, what about the pass rush?":  I am in agreement--about the pass rush part.  However, in the first round, it is only reasonable to think that Burns or Ferrell will be there.  If  Burns is  there, you probably take him.  Sweat is dropping and we cannot afford to gamble (heart condition?) on one position and not get better at 2 on the OL.   But let's say you decide to go another route--take a DE in the third round.  Crazy?  Not really.  Of course, You could package the third rounders and move up into the second round and take a S then, if there is a DE there in round 2, but there is a ton of logic that says you grab a FS in round 2--somehow.

Panthers drafted Charles Johnson in the third.  Greg Hardy in the fifth.   Regardless, unless you are taking Julius Peppers, the DE/Edge position takes some time to develop. Johnson and Hardy each took 3 seasons to get good.  Most Edge rushers/DEs are developmental.  Would a rookie be that much of an upgrade if we go 3-4? 

The current roster:  Irvin and Addison are oldish and we should consider them one fairly effective rush package.  Aside from that, we have Obada (27 and still coming of age), Haynes (the draft pick nobody  is talking about because it happened last year), and Cox, who is getting better each year and could be better as a 3-4 DE.  And what about Shaq Thompson as a hybrid OLB/Edge rusher?  Shaq had 3.5 sacks last season and did not rush the passer every down.  I am guessing here, but there is a loud din of absolute silence about Haynes and Thompson in Panther circles-what roles will each play?  Do we need a DE/edge rusher as much as we think?  Will the new defense fix the pressure problems? 
Because we have some players who could step up in a 3-4 ,  maybe the new front is our answer to the lack of pressure?

Just another perspective--if I were a GM, I am looking to get better every year, and if drafting 2 players makes me better at 4 positions, I would probably do it. 

Sounds right to me...

[LinvilleGorge]

My concern with not addressing edge rusher and doing it early is because the only two proven edge rushers on the roster are Addison and Irvin and they're both over 30 and on one year deals. As badly as we need edge rushers at the moment, we could be absolutely desperate for them next year.

[Panthero]

j/k did read......and i love you. 

[trueblade]

13 minutes ago, Michaelinraleigh said:

You're wrong about edge. 1st rounders produce immediately. 

Just because the Panthers have sucked at drafting 5 techniques doesn't help your argument. 

The right guys have 10 sacks plus as rookies but more importantly bring hurries.

Didn't it take a little while for Davenport (NO) to start producing?

[Growl]

I'm way more concerned about upgrading the pass rush than I am about any potential benefit of improving the LG position.

The Panthers will not win the super bowl next season without an improved pass rush.

They got championship caliber LG play last season. Frankly every team in the league did.

[mc52beast]

Can’t pass up on a first round DE if he grades out higher than the OL available. Too much talent there this year and it could be awhile before we see a DL draft class like this. 

I agree that we have to go safety in round 2 , secondary instantly becomes a strength.

Really don’t know what to do about OL, maybe go with Moton at LT and draft a project in a later round.

[JARROD]

38 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

A different way of looking at the draft:  Yes, DE might be our biggest need if you ask the majority of fans, but here is an argument for going a different direction--IF we can find starters at two positions in the draft (LT and FS), we improve at FOUR positions. This is the reason we should draft a LT in round 1 and a FS in round 2. 

The case for drafting LT in round 1:    If we draft the LT of the future, either Moton or Williams goes to G.  Would a rookie LT be better than the Clark/Newhouse tandem last season?  YUP.  Does moving either Moton or Williams to LG upgrade Van Roten--prolly.   we get better at LG and LT by adding one starting LT.  I like Ford--he would be a stud LG, but he has some athleticism and could beat out Moton and Williams for LT. He simply gives us more options--if Dillard is there, we probably would take him, however.  Expect J. Taylor and J Williams to be gone.

The case for taking a FS in the round 2: The second round should be loaded with FS options--Savage, Thornhill, Rapp, Abrams--there are literally about 6 potential starting FSs that should be there in round 2.  If we draft a starting FS and move Reid to SS, we become instantly better at 2 positions.  Reid sucked a lot at FS last year, but he is a stud SS--better than Adams.  If we add a Rapp or a Thornhill or Savage---for example, we get better at FS and Reid upgrades SS.

"But MHS, you idiot, what about the pass rush?":  I am in agreement--about the pass rush part.  However, in the first round, it is only reasonable to think that Burns or Ferrell will be there.  If  Burns is  there, you probably take him.  Sweat is dropping and we cannot afford to gamble (heart condition?) on one position and not get better at 2 on the OL.   But let's say you decide to go another route--take a DE in the third round.  Crazy?  Not really.  Of course, You could package the third rounders and move up into the second round and take a S then, if there is a DE there in round 2, but there is a ton of logic that says you grab a FS in round 2--somehow.

Panthers drafted Charles Johnson in the third.  Greg Hardy in the fifth.   Regardless, unless you are taking Julius Peppers, the DE/Edge position takes some time to develop. Johnson and Hardy each took 3 seasons to get good.  Most Edge rushers/DEs are developmental.  Would a rookie be that much of an upgrade if we go 3-4? 

The current roster:  Irvin and Addison are oldish and we should consider them one fairly effective rush package.  Aside from that, we have Obada (27 and still coming of age), Haynes (the draft pick nobody  is talking about because it happened last year), and Cox, who is getting better each year and could be better as a 3-4 DE.  And what about Shaq Thompson as a hybrid OLB/Edge rusher?  Shaq had 3.5 sacks last season and did not rush the passer every down.  I am guessing here, but there is a loud din of absolute silence about Haynes and Thompson in Panther circles-what roles will each play?  Do we need a DE/edge rusher as much as we think?  Will the new defense fix the pressure problems? 
Because we have some players who could step up in a 3-4 ,  maybe the new front is our answer to the lack of pressure?

Just another perspective--if I were a GM, I am looking to get better every year, and if drafting 2 players makes me better at 4 positions, I would probably do it. 

Great post and I approve this message. Ha

we do need 2 DE or DE and OLB but there’s a lot of 2nd- 4th round choices for them. Chase Winovich and Christian Miller or Polite, Jalen Jelks— I think he’s seriously underrated...there’s options outside of Burns for them— 

a badass FS would really make us better and really help the passrush— they go hand in hand folks. Another CB would too.

you also help your defense by scoring touchdowns. Making the Oline like Dallas really helps.

Anyway, great post but be prepared for the stones

[MHS831]

55 minutes ago, Michaelinraleigh said:

You're wrong about edge. 1st rounders produce immediately. 

Just because the Panthers have sucked at drafting 5 techniques doesn't help your argument. 

The right guys have 10 sacks plus as rookies but more importantly bring hurries.

Historically, DEs here in Charlotte, have taken 3 years to develop, a point I made.  The larger point--that drafting an OT has a broader impact-The thread was listed as an alternative point of view--it is basically an exercise in divergent thinking skills--seeing an issue from multiple perspectives before drawing conclusions is directly associated with levels of intelligence--so I was not "wrong" unless you live in a world where there is only one possible answer. 

[MHS831]

34 minutes ago, trueblade said:

Didn't it take a little while for Davenport (NO) to start producing?

Yes, and he is considered that draft's #2 rookie edge rusher.  Had 4.5 sacks.  Would you take Davenport over the chance to upgrade 2 positions on the OL?  This was simply an alternative perspective, and there are always some who will pick it apart to find some area of conflict--the whole point is the decision you have to make and do not assume an edge rusher is the best option. 

[MHS831]

16 minutes ago, JARROD said:

Great post and I approve this message. Ha

we do need 2 DE or DE and OLB but there’s a lot of 2nd- 4th round choices for them. Chase Winovich and Christian Miller or Polite, Jalen Jelks— I think he’s seriously underrated...there’s options outside of Burns for them— 

a badass FS would really make us better and really help the passrush— they go hand in hand folks. Another CB would too.

you also help your defense by scoring touchdowns. Making the Oline like Dallas really helps.

Anyway, great post but be prepared for the stones

I agree--there  are literally 100 ways to go--we have to be careful about locking in.  I agree with you about Jelks--in January, I was thinking he might be a potential first/second rounder. He has he skills.  

I just threw this out there to give us some pre-draft controversy--makes it more fun.  Thanks for taking the high road. 

 

[JARROD]

8 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

Historically, DEs here in Charlotte, have taken 3 years to develop, a point I made.  The larger point--that drafting an OT has a broader impact-- is what you should focus on--not the details about the impact you think an edge rusher will make-Marcus Davenport had 4.5 sacks last year and was considered the second highest impact rookie edge rusher last season by PFF--and there are more first round busts that disappoint than those who produce instantly-I  would argue with you but this is so  far from the immediate point.  Let's focus on that for a minute-- Do you not take the picks that upgrade 2 positions, even if the edge rusher is what you really want?  The thread was listed as an alternative point of view--it requires some .  By the way, if someone shares an alternative perspective, it does not mean that is their case--it is simply an exercise in divergent thinking skills--seeing an issue from multiple perspectives before drawing conclusions is directly associated with levels of intelligence--so I was not "wrong" unless you live in a world where there is only one possible answer. 

Personally I also think that good DT can produce much faster than DE. You just see that much more often I think, less busts that I see. 

Star and Short really helped our defense(of course our corners were so terrible that year that we couldn’t stop anybody)

so Wilkins for me is on that list too.

[ncfan]

44 minutes ago, trueblade said:

Didn't it take a little while for Davenport (NO) to start producing?

Davenport was a lot more raw than these guys and actually people have him ranked lower coming out than the Sweats and Burns 

Plus Davenport still made a impact early.  While he wasnt get sacks for the stat book.  He was avle to getbin the backfield and provide pressure sometimes resulting in other getting the sacks 

 

People here like to use, "well it topk charles Johnson and Hardys 3 years to develop". Your comparing a top 15 guy to a 3rd and 5th.  I can flip that script and say dont draft a OT early because it took Williams 2-3 years and Moton 2 years to produce. 

 

And heck "2 years to produce".  You know who our Edge guys signed beyond this year?

Marquis Haynes........and no one else.  So we ingnore it.  We're going to have Haynes, a scrub FA and a Draft pick from a weaker class in their rookie season

 

[MHS831]

2 minutes ago, JARROD said:

Personally I also think that good DT can produce much faster than DE. You just see that much more often I think, less busts that I see. 

Star and Short really helped our defense(of course our corners were so terrible that year that we couldn’t stop anybody)

so Wilkins for me is on that list too.

Wilkins is a very high character guy  that could easily be the pick.  He might be my favorite player in the draft--if you consider the whole person---and I would love to have him here.  DT is the biggest question mark in my little brain about how well we might convert to whatever form of 3-4 hybrid etc, so I have ignored it, but it is a concern.  If you fail to address it properly, season over.  If you can't stop the run and put some middle pressure on Brees and Ryan, you are going to have a long season.