Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Stop with the tank for Trevor Bull(ish)!


top dawg

Recommended Posts

It's been said, but it's about time for its own thread! 

Trevor Lawrence is the next iteration of the next big thing in the minds of many. There are good reasons for that! Some quarterbacks just have the "it" factor. He is in the mold of what many an NFL fan's fantasy consists of when thinking of the perfect QB. He has size, pocket awareness and presence, arm talent for all throws, decent decision-making, and is all that and a bag of chips. I get it! Of the top quarterbacks, he is the safest, most surest pick! But, that doesn't mean that he'll be the best QB of the 2021 draft class.

There are other worthy quarterbacks in the class. And, believe it or not, when it's all said and done, they could end up the best QB in the class. 

Justin Fields looked pretty good last year. And Trey Lance is somewhat of a talented magnetic enigma. Both have less of a body of work than Lawrence, and seemingly a lot more to work on and prove, but they all have a lot to prove as it pertains to the pros. 

Sure, Joe Burrow has looked the part in his first couple of starts, and is showing plenty of promise. But Herbert looked pretty damned good yesterday also. Really good for a first start! Moreover, guys like one guy that recently signed almost a half billion dollar contract, and another Super Bowl winner who was apparently too short to be a first rounder, but now playing in a stadium named for a second-rate cable company, should make you think.

All that being said, at least wait until the Panthers effectively play themselves out of contention for one of the top quarterbacks before you commit to the crazy talk of tanking, because tanking isn't going to happen artificially; tanking was always going to happen naturally. With things going the way they are, we'll likely be in the position to get one of the top guys. I will be happy to take Lawrence, but I'm not going to be crying in the slightest if Lance is there for the taking! Pictures of flowing Fields aren't bad either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Yeah, he definitely could prove to not be the best of the bunch in the NFL. But, I'd rather be sitting in the driver's seat to have our pick of the bunch. Honestly, if that turned out not to be Trevor, fine. But it better be a fuggin QB.

LOL I can see this board if we have the number 1 pick and choose Lance or Fields.  This place would blow up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jfra78 said:

LOL I can see this board if we have the number 1 pick and choose Lance or Fields.  This place would blow up.

That would never happen.  Trevor Lawrence would have been the number 1 pick 2 years ago, last year and he will be the Number 1 pick this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, joemac said:

That would never happen.  Trevor Lawrence would have been the number 1 pick 2 years ago, last year and he will be the Number 1 pick this year.

An injury like Tua's (god forbid) could make that a harder decision for whatever team is making it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Even limited as he was I still don't think they have replaced his production, and not just the sack stats. The games Clowney missed it was very obvious what his value still was. Risky move but whatever. They only had 32 sacks last year and if that drops then it's going to get ugly. I see the improvement in run stopping but not in pass protect in any way.  
    • I have zero issues with this.  
    • Sorta related.  I just looked up a stat:  Success rates for NFL draft's second rounders.  I was surprised that it is 49%.  The success rate for first rounders is 58%.   Here success does not mean those that did not bust, it means that roughly half of the players selected in the second round become full-time starters at some point in their careers.  Busts do that too.  However, considering the fact that a first round talent is worth up to 1800 points (first overall pick) more than the first pick of the second round and as low as 350 points (last pick in first round) higher than the last pick in round 2, it seems there could be cases in which it would be to your advantage to trade out of round 1 and draft two or three second rounders for the value.  Of course, the elite players are likely to be gone, and some positions overwhelmingly suck after round 1 (traditionally, like QB or LT, for example), but if you need to find starters at positions like DT, G, LB, S, C, TE, RB, etc, there could be a time when you trade back for more starters.  I was surprised that the margin between rounds 1 and 2 was only 9%.    While I realize that some of you sofa scholars are thinking, "Well duh?  Trading back gives you more players." as you wipe the Cheetos off your shirt.  Not the point.  The point is you have to consider the draft,the needs (and the number of them), and you need to scout the second and third rounds like you do the first, the cap, and the long-term impact.  If you can find 2 players with a 49% chance of becoming a starter, are you better off than drafting one player who has a 58% chance in the long term? So if I traded away my first rounder for two second rounders (a trade most teams would make) regularly, when I got 10 second rounders (by trading 5 first rounders), 5 would be starters.  If I did not trade and kept my 5 first rounders, 3 would be starters.  Furthermore, their rookie contracts would be much cheaper than the 5 first rounders. 
×
×
  • Create New...