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!

     

McShay has us trading picks moving from 8th to 7th with Detroit to pick Lance

panthers55

By panthers55,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

panthers55 Grand Master

panthers55

Posted
Posted

https://www.derp/2021/4/1/22362214/carolina-panthers-trade-up-gamble-on-quarterback-trey-lance-nfl-mock-draft-todd-mcshay-espn

Maybe it is just me but why would we trade up from 8th to 7th with Detroit to pick a guy who will be there anyway. If they really wanted Lance they wouldn't make the trade and they likely won't go QB after trading for Goff. They need weapons around him like WRs.  If Detroit wanted a QB I could see us trading ahead of Detroit if we thought they wanted Lance but not with Detroit. Tell me where my thinking is flawed 

  • Pie 4
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shotgun Grand Master

Shotgun

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

https://www.derp/2021/4/1/22362214/carolina-panthers-trade-up-gamble-on-quarterback-trey-lance-nfl-mock-draft-todd-mcshay-espn

Maybe it is just me but why would we trade up from 8th to 7th with Detroit to pick a guy who will be there anyway. If they really wanted Lance they wouldn't make the trade and they likely won't go QB after trading for Goff. They need weapons around him like WRs.  If Detroit wanted a QB I could see us trading ahead of Detroit if we thought they wanted Lance but not with Detroit. Tell me where my thinking is flawed 

Because if we don't trade another team will, that's why. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Harbingers Grand Master

Harbingers

Posted
Posted

Why? That makes zero literal sense. If they aren’t going to take Lance at 7 why would we want to give up anything to move up a spot for nothing. If they do threaten to take lance in this scenario but just as a play to fleece us we already lost. Finally if they do want Lance why the Fug would they trade with us knowing we were gonna take their pick.
 

The only way this would make any sense is if they were to trade with someone else to take Lance before us. But I have a hard time believing a BPA for them that they want is not going to be on the board right there.

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Harbingers Grand Master

Harbingers

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, Shotgun said:

Because if we don't trade another team will, that's why. 

As I mentioned even that doesn’t make any sense because let’s say Lance is on the board. A team picking in the 9-12 range wants to move up. 
 

Detroit's BPA is on the board a BPA that we would probably take at 8 if the QBs are gone(in this armchair GM QB infatuated world). Maybe a 9 and 7 swap makes sense if they knew we weren’t going to take their guy but not much else. 
 

Honestly I’d say say a 19 to 7 swap for Micah Parsons would make more sense but that would leave Detroit way out of the mix. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shotgun Grand Master

Shotgun

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Harbingers said:

As I mentioned even that doesn’t make any sense because let’s say Lance is on the board. A team picking in the 9-12 range wants to move up. 
 

Detroit's BPA is on the board a BPA that we would probably take at 8 if the QBs are gone(in this armchair GM QB infatuated world). Maybe a 9 and 7 swap makes sense if they knew we weren’t going to take their guy but not much else. 
 

Honestly I’d say say a 19 to 7 swap for Micah Parsons would make more sense but that would leave Detroit way out of the mix. 

Well if they get considerably more compensation from another team, they might be willing to pass on their favorite player. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
panthers55 Grand Master

panthers55

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Shotgun said:

Well if they get considerably more compensation from another team, they might be willing to pass on their favorite player. 

But again unless you have Lance way over Fields you will get one or the other. Or we could trade down and let someone who loves Fields give us the farm to get him and we can get a vet like Darnold for a 4th and draft a guy in the second and still be way ahead of the game. Especially if it true that we don't love anyone except for Trevor or Fields 

Edited by panthers55
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shotgun Grand Master

Shotgun

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

But again unless you have Lance way over Fields you will get one or the other. Or if we could trade down and let someone who loves Fields give us the farm to get him and we can get a vet like Darnold for a 4th and draft a guy in the second and still be way ahead of the game. Especially if it true that we don't love anyone except for Trevor or Fields 

Sure if you don't care what player you get then none of it matters.

Edited by Shotgun
Link to comment
Share on other sites
panthers55 Grand Master

panthers55

Posted
  • Author
Posted
3 minutes ago, Shotgun said:

Sure if you don't care what player you get then none of it matters.

Not true at all. You do care who you get but again is Lance worth giving up 2 firsts over Fields which costs nothing or the other way around. We are talking the 4th or fifth best guy not the first or second. At what point are either such a slam dunk to get into a bidding war. 

  • 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

    • Joe Bear
      2026 World Cup Thread

      By Joe Bear · Posted

      Hello, soccer fans [crickets, tumbleweed flies by]. The World Cup kicks off in less than 2 weeks and, well, 🇺🇸USA USA USA🇺🇸 and all. We beat Senegal 3-2 yesterday in a tune-up friendly at BoA, with Christian Pulisic finally entering the scoring column.  How will we do in the World Cup once our tournament kicks off on the 12th? Well, there are 48 teams (assuming Iran is there) and it feels like one of two thing happens: we get grouped for the first time since '98, or we make it to the Round of 16 for the third time in the last four World Cups. I tried out the lottery for an Atlanta game and struck out, so yesterday was as World Cup as I'll get for in-person ($285/ticket for like Norway vs $39/ticket for USMNT right beforehand was a layup).  The U.S. has a travel-heavy schedule in group play, playing in LA, Seattle and LA. Real road warrior mentality being built. Glad the east coast gets worse kickoff times for a NA World Cup than a Qatar World Cup.
    • TD alt
      LWOS on the FO's error--my word--on X...traits, timelines, Brazzell, & indications of improvement.

      By TD alt · Posted

      Well, that's the thing. Drafting players only for their physical measurables as you are suggesting only really happened during 2024, and X unfortunately has become the poster child for that. To be clear, it's not necessarily about drafting RAS over skill, but RAS over NFL-readiness and/or a solid body of work. Lots of players show skill in college, but those skills don't necessarily translate to the NFL for a multitude of reasons. But, getting back to the main point, to be clear, I believe that our FO is still enamored with physical gifts (who wouldn't be?), but now they're letting Dr. Eric Eager's proprietary system--his "secret sauce" prioritize the players that the Panthers draft, and it seems like it weighs not only a solid body of work, relative to a college career of course, but consistent gradual improvement as evidenced by production pretty highly. 
    • rebelrouser
      LWOS on the FO's error--my word--on X...traits, timelines, Brazzell, & indications of improvement.

      By rebelrouser · Posted

      Its a good article about how pathetically bad our past drafts ('23 and '24) have been. Building the team in '23 since we weren't ready yet and taking your qb in '24 made so much more sense in hindsight. Ladd McConkey over XL is pretty much a given but not sure it does as much to change Bryce's trajectory as the author suggests.  As bad as '23 and '24 drafts were, the '25 and '26 really give me hope.  
×
×
  • Create New...