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!

     

How realistic a chance at Sewell?

Mr. Scot

By Mr. Scot,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Actionman0z Veteran

Actionman0z

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

Just saw this from Joe Person...

There's also been word that Joe Burrow is lobbying the team to take a receiver like Ja'Marr Chase.

(someone snapped you like a twig last year dude, but you be you) 😕

Most mocks previously had Penei Sewell going to the Bengals, but some draftniks are changing their mind now. I've even seen one that had him going to the Broncos at pick nine.

So my question would be this: How realistic a chance do you think the Panthers have of getting Sewell at pick eight?

For that matter, if he fell to pick six or seven, would you consider trading up?

1/8

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AU-panther Mentor

AU-panther

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

Just saw this from Joe Person...

There's also been word that Joe Burrow is lobbying the team to take a receiver like Ja'Marr Chase.

(someone snapped you like a twig last year dude, but you be you) 😕

Most mocks previously had Penei Sewell going to the Bengals, but some draftniks are changing their mind now. I've even seen one that had him going to the Broncos at pick nine.

So my question would be this: How realistic a chance do you think the Panthers have of getting Sewell at pick eight?

For that matter, if he fell to pick six or seven, would you consider trading up?

Lets say Atlanta or another team in front of us trades down with a team looking for a QB

That means 4 picks will be used on QBs.

That leaves 3 non QBs to be drafted before us.

A team could easily choose Chase over Sewell.

Seems to be a lot of chatter about Pitts being one of the top 3 non-QBs so a team could go Pitts.

That leaves one team to not pick Sewell, maybe they have bigger needs such as WR (Waddle, Smith) or CB (Surtain).  Also it only take one team to have Slater rated higher if that is the team picking.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CanadianCat Veteran

CanadianCat

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Insert complaint about winning the Washington game here.

Im not in the 'we should lose games' camp at all. I think even if the FO wants that to happen there is a team full of players fighting for bonus money and roster positions to make that happen. 

I would fall into the 'winning culture' group people like to bitch about. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Basbear Grand Master

Basbear

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Varking said:

I would 100% take Sewell over Lance for sure. I’m leaning 50% that I’d take him over Fields. Id 100% take him over Pitts. 
 

The main guys I wanted for us going into the draft process was Fields, Pitts and Sewell with Sewell and Fields likely being gone before 8. 

Im about here with the QB names reversed......just dont let anyone on the lance spaceship that Im driving......

Ive been saying for years about its harder to find a quality LT than QB. IF Sewell is right there, beat the jordan gross ticket turn in time and take him!!

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mickeye76 Experienced

mickeye76

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, SOJA said:

1- Lawrence

2- Wilson

3- Lance

4- Pitts

5- Chase

6- D. Smith?

7- Jaylen Waddle?/Sewell/Slater?/Parson?

8- Fields

 

1. Lawrence it's a given.

2. Wilson has been successfully hyped. 

3. Fields is the best QB after Lawrence. 

4. Lance cause despite Pitts talent. Planning for a team after Ryan is a thing 

5. Sewell cause if they want a wr they can get one in the second.  Marshall, Moore and Bateman could be there.  Tackles in the second are.... 

6. Chase the dream.  Giving Hurts a star WR will help him develop.

7. Pitts cause this is his prime spot.  Not too high not too low.  Giving the QB this target is gonna make him look better.  The trade needs to be seen as a win.  

8.  Here we are.  Lots of options when you take QB off the table.  My likely unpopular choices are Jaycee Horn and Christian Darrisaw.   Horn could become the star corner of the draft over even Surtain.  Darrisaw reminds me of Moton.  Overlooked solid player that brings his lunchpail.  The drop off at corner and tackle is steep.  I like Leatherwood, Eichenberg and others but the ability to draft them falls as others can reach and get them at a bargain.  Waiting could cause us to miss.  Same situation with corner the group is deep but the top three are much better than the next five.  Corners and tackles ( especially tackles capable of playing on the left and corners that can play on the outside ) will be in high demand.  So... Likely the choice is a calculated risk in the first and a full on all in gamble in the second at these prime positions.  Unfortunately we may have to wait on a QB.  

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, mickeye76 said:

1. Lawrence it's a given.

2. Wilson has been successfully hyped. 

3. Fields is the best QB after Lawrence. 

4. Lance cause despite Pitts talent. Planning for a team after Ryan is a thing 

5. Sewell cause if they want a wr they can get one in the second.  Marshall, Moore and Bateman could be there.  Tackles in the second are.... 

6. Chase the dream.  Giving Hurts a star WR will help him develop.

7. Pitts cause this is his prime spot.  Not too high not too low.  Giving the QB this target is gonna make him look better.  The trade needs to be seen as a win.  

8.  Here we are.  Lots of options when you take QB off the table.  My likely unpopular choices are Jaycee Horn and Christian Darrisaw.   Horn could become the star corner of the draft over even Surtain.  Darrisaw reminds me of Moton.  Overlooked solid player that brings his lunchpail.  The drop off at corner and tackle is steep.  I like Leatherwood, Eichenberg and others but the ability to draft them falls as others can reach and get them at a bargain.  Waiting could cause us to miss.  Same situation with corner the group is deep but the top three are much better than the next five.  Corners and tackles ( especially tackles capable of playing on the left and corners that can play on the outside ) will be in high demand.  So... Likely the choice is a calculated risk in the first and a full on all in gamble in the second at these prime positions.  Unfortunately we may have to wait on a QB.  

No mention of Slater?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mickeye76 Experienced

mickeye76

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

No mention of Slater?

Sorry I worry Slater's average height and length will make him a guard in the NFL.   He obviously proved himself at left tackle in college but that was at Northwestern.  Given the choice between Darrisaw, Eichenberg and Leatherwood or Slater I am taking one of the guys who played against the elites passrushers.  It's the same reason Dillon Radunz is not high on my radar.  Sorry I know they have talent and could transcend the lower level of competition but the learning curve could also be too steep.  Chinn did the same last year proving he belonged but for every Chinn there are so many examples of big fish in little ponds who encounter the sharks of the NFL and are devoured.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • tukafan21
      With the first pick, don't draft a QB? Draft a DE? C'mon!

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
    • CamWhoaaCam
      With the first pick, don't draft a QB? Draft a DE? C'mon!

      By CamWhoaaCam · Posted

      Sanders is with Tom Brady brand and that's his mentor. The Raiders owner was with Sanders taking pics at a Vegas game together.   It doesn't take much to connect the dots that Vegas will be interested in Sanders as their franchise QB. Oh yeah and guess who hasa small ownership stake in the Raiders Tom Brady.   I guess this is just another made up Madden idea by me huh?
    • CamWhoaaCam
      With the first pick, don't draft a QB? Draft a DE? C'mon!

      By CamWhoaaCam · Posted

      Bro I don't mind debating you, but did you really have to write all that to get your point across.   This isn't Madden. If you have the #1 pick you literally control your own destiny. If nobody wants to trade which I have a hard time believing they won't then you obviously take the best QB.   I think we will have suitors. If that's Madden then so be it.
×
×
  • Create New...