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!

     

Additional motivation behind the Darnold trade?

Peon Awesome

By Peon Awesome,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

tukafan21 Grand Master

tukafan21

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Peon Awesome said:

Additional point: Let's say Carolina is all in on Darnold and not enthused by the rookie qbs. And the draft plays out so that all but one of the highly regarded qbs has been picked by 8, which seems increasingly likely. Denver looks like a prime candidate to take the final one which ups the value of pick 8 tremendously. Let's say New England wants to move up. We would almost certainly get pick 15 plus next year's first and maybe a later round pick. So we'd more than recoup the value of trading for Darnold with moving back a bit in the 1st. 

If we move back from 8 to 15, I want a hell of a lot more than NE's first next year (which is likely to be in the second half of the first round) and a late round pick.

With how this draft is shaping up, the 7 picks before us will be at least 3 QB's, potentially 4 or 5, and at least 1 if not 2 or even 3, of the WR's/Pitts.

Which means at 8 we're essentially guaranteed to be able to get Sewell, Slater, or the staff's favorite DB in the draft.

If we move back to 15, we lose out on every one of those options, and there is no bigger need on this team than an elite LT and a shut down DB.  If we're moving back that many picks and losing out on a player like one of those, I want 15, their 2nd rounder this year, and their 1st next year.  Anything less than that and I'm taking one of the LT's and if there somehow both gone, I'm taking the top DB.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MHS831 Grand Master

MHS831

Posted
Posted

We will upgrade QB if and when we get a chance.  We are more likely to wait until after the draft and sign an aging veteran to hold a clipboard and mentor Darnold, until he shows us what he can do here.

But I think they weighed it this way:

  • Sam Darnold:  A young QB with some redeeming qualities who can be developed.  He has cost us the equivalent of a third, a fifth, and a sixth rounder.  That comes to about 300 trade value points.
  • Trey Lance:  A young QB with some redeeming qualities who can be developed, but he might not be there at 8, so trading down to #5 or #6 (and that would likely cost us a second round pick, in addition to our first round pick).  Lance would cost us between 1700 and 1900 trade value points.
  • Mac Jones:  A young QB with some redeeming qualities who can be developed, but is probably close to his ceiling athletically.  He is likely to be there at 8, but not guaranteed.  (He would cost us our first round pick, obviously).  Jones would cost us 1400 trade value points.

Drafting Darnold allows the Panthers the opportunity to trade back or take a strong player at #8--like a LT such as Sewell.  OK, you just made Darnold better because by trading for him you saved your first and second and third round picks.  Now you can get the LT to play opposite Moton.  Miller is no slouch, and Paradis was improving.  LG is the only hole, and with Daley, Erving, Elfein all able to play LG, are we suddenly solid on offense? 

What if we add a TE to go with Arnold? 

 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MHS831 Grand Master

MHS831

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Anybodyhome said:

I would not be surprised in the least that if a QB were to be available at #8, the Panthers would be willing to give that pick up for the right price.

I think they would hear, "Kaaaachingggg!"  Move back (staying in the 9-20 range--which includes

  • 9. Denver
  • 12. Philly
  • 14.  Minnesota (my dark horse move up for QB )
  • 15.  New England (the ideal trade partner)
  • 17. Vegas
  • 19. Washington
  • 20. Chicago
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MHS831 Grand Master

MHS831

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

I thought about referencing Jordan Peterson rather than Jung, but that would have invoked mutually assured destruction from the Tinderbox crazies and completely derailed this thread.  

 

I just thought you were trying to turn me into an introvert. 

(Jung humor)

Edited by MHS831
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CPF4LIFE Grand Master

CPF4LIFE

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

If we move back from 8 to 15, I want a hell of a lot more than NE's first next year (which is likely to be in the second half of the first round) and a late round pick.

With how this draft is shaping up, the 7 picks before us will be at least 3 QB's, potentially 4 or 5, and at least 1 if not 2 or even 3, of the WR's/Pitts.

Which means at 8 we're essentially guaranteed to be able to get Sewell, Slater, or the staff's favorite DB in the draft.

If we move back to 15, we lose out on every one of those options, and there is no bigger need on this team than an elite LT and a shut down DB.  If we're moving back that many picks and losing out on a player like one of those, I want 15, their 2nd rounder this year, and their 1st next year.  Anything less than that and I'm taking one of the LT's and if there somehow both gone, I'm taking the top DB.

Agree on this, i am honestly only willing to go back as far as 10. 

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

    • woahfraze
      This Bryce Guy (General BY Discussion)

      By woahfraze · Posted

      I’m not necessarily advocating sticking with Bryce. His highs show the ability is there, but there’s enough bad film out there to doubt that he can consistently enough play at a high enough level. But this video from Brett Kollman is a pretty good argument to give it a bit more time, whether that be rolling with Bryce just next year or picking up his 5th year option (not extending him).      The gist is that the structural (wider hashes) and rule (3 yd vs 1 yd thresholds for intelligible offensive lineman downfield penalties) differences in the college and NFL have led to wildly different play calling and scheme diets in college. There is much more shotgun and RPO calls in college and screen/quick throws. This simply doesn’t set up young QBs to be able to play under center, which is more preferred in the NFL due to RBs being able to more effectively run out of that formation.  They don’t know how to do it and have to learn. Yes, the NFL has trended more toward college style offense in the last decade or so, but it isn’t that pronounced and is more out of necessity than desire. And on top of all that, they ask the young QBs to do all this learning with coaching and other personnel churn going on around them.  Bad results lead to coaches getting fired and new ones with different ideas on scheme and footwork and different terminology and playbooks coming in. It makes it harder on those young QBs to learn.     So we may drop Bryce for a young QB starter in the draft and be in a similar situation. With a QB who is going to take years to learn how to operate in an NFL style offense and will struggle along the way.  So you have to weigh whether the struggles we see from Bryce are more due to this learning process vs solely physical limitations on his part. It’s almost undoubtedly a bit of both, but the answer to that question I think dictates your strategy at QB over the next few years. And of course, you have to consider what the alternatives available are.    I’m neither a Bryce hater or a Bryce Stan and I don’t have an answer to that question. But I do fear that if we move on from him, unless it’s for an established player, we’re just in for continued frustration on the QB front because it’s going to take a few years for a college QB to develop (Drake Maye’s don’t grow on trees). 
    • CRA
      A question no one is asking about Bryce and The Panthers

      By CRA · Posted

      The defense has pulled that feat off this season though.  Multiple times. offense has not had a single good first half all season.  Only and good opening scripted drive paired with disappointing play.  defense has been the actual unit you can measure real and consistent improvement IMO.  Still holes and flaws to it that aren’t going away until new bodies get here but they really are the story of the season IMO
    • ImfromClayton
      Hubbard says he might have rushed back

      By ImfromClayton · Posted

      One thing about RB's and LB's is they are going to get hurt. It's inevitable. Having a fresh Chuba is not a bad thing.  My only criticism of this entire situation is that I wish our staff would adjust personnel to matchup a little better. I think Chuba is a lot better than Rico against the stacked boxes we've seen the last two weeks. They are very different backs with very different strengths, and I love them both. Rico is so good at identifying the hole early, and hitting it full speed early. He's much better at breaking the big run. Chuba is a much more patient back, and finds 3 yards when there's nothing there better than Rico.  It's in no way a criticism of either, but I think Chuba would have had more success than Rico the way the Saints and Falcons attacked us from a Defensive standpoint.  When you put 9 in the box, often times there is no hole to attack. 
×
×
  • Create New...