Darnold part of the draft day strategy

[Pup McBarky]

2 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Now if you think he can start his rookie year then we are going have to agree to disagree because that would be a disaster. 

I'm not advocating they take Lance. Never have. My argument is, just because you and Scot and whoever else think it's imperative to take an OT at 8, doesn't mean they will and if they truly believe in Lance and he's available, they are going to pick him. You can call it a mistake now and even on draft night, but only time will tell.

[mrcompletely11]

4 minutes ago, Pup McBarky said:

I'm simply saying, you don't pass on a potential franchise QB in round 1 if you are as certain as you can be. If that's the case, they can't pass on him.

Again, it's not what I would do. I'd trade the pick and pick up Darrisaw. I think he's a much better OT than Slater. 

Slater is a master technician with a mean streak.  Pretty sure the knock on Darrisaw is he plays half ass a good bit of the time and lacks that killer instinct.  

[Jaxel]

I'm with Mr. Scott, Penei Sewell. If he is not available and somehow Pitts or Chase are on the board. I consider one of those two over Slater. Otherwise is Sewell or Slater for me.

[ForJimmy]

6 minutes ago, jfra78 said:

This is how you end up with Little at LT

That’s how our old GM did yes. I can do the same thing and say drafting a top LT gets you Matt Kalil... See it doesn’t really work that way. You can’t say never take a position at a certain round because another staff failed at it...

[Smittymoose]

13 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

I agree, but if they think in a year Lance can be the next big thing. We have Darnold for 2 years and if we salvage him can probably either trade him or get a nice comp once Lance is ready. I don’t think you draft an unfinished product at 8 though, but that could be their justification if they do.

If they thought Lance was going to be the "next big thing," they wouldn't have traded for Darnold.

[MHS831]

Pay attention to what they do, not what they say and try to keep your emotions in check---and you can see the semblance of a strategy forming.

These are hard to dispute, even if you are a bit slow like Growl (no offense intended), for example:

• They gave away a second rounder in 2022 so they could have 3 rounds of picks this year. So the logical question is this:  With immediate needs at LT and CB, why 3?
• Fitterer said at the Darnold presser, "This does not mean we will not take a QB in the first round."  Yes, it probably does, and you were not going to spend the #8 pick on the fifth best 2021 QB.  Translation:  If you want to guarantee that we will not take a QB, you must deal with the Panthers.  I wondered if this was not meant for Denver, picking at #9.  Imagine getting a third or fourth rounder to swap with them so they can grab a QB.  The obvious question:  Why would he announce this if he intended to draft a first round QB (if there)?
• There have been a ton of comparisons to Josh Allen, a QB who struggled early, but as Mr Scot points out, got better with Mr Bean build an OL in front of him.  With Cincinnati screaming for Chase or Pitts, and Miami likely to take a WR, a very good OT will be there at #8.  Could the Panthers trade back (beyond Denver if a QB is available) and leave talented OTs -- day 1 starters--on the block? 
• So if the Panthers take a LT in the first round, it is highly likely they go with a CB in the second.  So why did we protect the third rounder in the Darnold trade?  Picking at #39 gets you a decent CB, but we need a #1 CB.  Is the third to trade back into the late first, early second to grab a CB who might fall?  Is the third rounder to draft a developmental, high ceiling QB like Mills or Mond?  That third rounder is very significant.  It is my guess that we would like to come away with 2 day 1 starters--and a possible backup/insurance policy developmental QB to groom for 2 years.  Do not rule out Trask as well, but I think Mills is the kind of player Brady might like.

 

[mrcompletely11]

1 minute ago, Smittymoose said:

If they thought Lance was going to be the "next big thing," they wouldn't have traded for Darnold.

Yep, I am not sure why this is so hard to understand.  The whole damn staff was there to watch him and that is telling.

[ForJimmy]

1 minute ago, Smittymoose said:

If they thought Lance was going to be the "next big thing," they wouldn't have traded for Darnold.

Unless they don’t think Lance will be there at 8 and can’t afford to trade multiple 1st round picks to draft him. Especially with ATL at 4 trying to trade it.

[mrcompletely11]

1 minute ago, MHS831 said:

Pay attention to what they do, not what they say and try to keep your emotions in check---and you can see the semblance of a strategy forming.

These are hard to dispute, even if you are a bit slow like Growl (no offense intended), for example:

• They gave away a second rounder in 2022 so they could have 3 rounds of picks this year. So the logical question is this:  With immediate needs at LT and CB, why 3?
• Fitterer said at the Darnold presser, "This does not mean we will not take a QB in the first round."  Yes, it probably does, and you were not going to spend the #8 pick on the fifth best 2021 QB.  Translation:  If you want to guarantee that we will not take a QB, you must deal with the Panthers.  I wondered if this was not meant for Denver, picking at #9.  Imagine getting a third or fourth rounder to swap with them so they can grab a QB.  The obvious question:  Why would he announce this if he intended to draft a first round QB (if there)?
• There have been a ton of comparisons to Josh Allen, a QB who struggled early, but as Mr Scot points out, got better with Mr Bean build an OL in front of him.  With Cincinnati screaming for Chase or Pitts, and Miami likely to take a WR, a very good OT will be there at #8.  Could the Panthers trade back (beyond Denver if a QB is available) and leave talented OTs -- day 1 starters--on the block? 
• So if the Panthers take a LT in the first round, it is highly likely they go with a CB in the second.  So why did we protect the third rounder in the Darnold trade?  Picking at #39 gets you a decent CB, but we need a #1 CB.  Is the third to trade back into the late first, early second to grab a CB who might fall?  Is the third rounder to draft a developmental, high ceiling QB like Mills or Mond?  That third rounder is very significant.  It is my guess that we would like to come away with 2 day 1 starters--and a possible backup/insurance policy developmental QB to groom for 2 years.  Do not rule out Trask as well, but I think Mills is the kind of player Brady might like.

 

3rd is for a starting safety IMO. 

[mbarbour21]

I doubt it, for several reasons:

1. If teams think we don’t want to draft a QB, they would probably seek to trade with us. Once we refuse a really good offer to stay put, they will assume it’s for QB and trade in front of us. Unless we convince them we are sitting still for a top OL (which SHOULD actually be the case), they will see through that smoke screen. 
 

2. A lot of people thought that the Jets should stick with Darnold and actually put him in a good position. If a QB is still there at our pick, hopefully, we strongly consider trading back. There are plenty of holes we can fill in this draft. 
 

3. If you want a guy, just trade up and get him. Giving away a second and some change for a QB you really have no intention of building around for a POSSIBILITY that someone decides not to move up is insane IMO. 

[Mr. Scot]

6 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

Unless they don’t think Lance will be there at 8 and can’t afford to trade multiple 1st round picks to draft him. Especially with ATL at 4 trying to trade it.

We've seen multiple sources suggest the Panthers don't love all of the top five quarterbacks, and more than one suggesting that it stops at Lawrence and Wilson.

You might be able to throw Fields in there, but I'd have serious doubts about Lance or Jones.

Edited April 7, 2021 by Mr. Scot

[Smittymoose]

5 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

Unless they don’t think Lance will be there at 8 and can’t afford to trade multiple 1st round picks to draft him. Especially with ATL at 4 trying to trade it.

If they were willing to wait and see what was available at 8, then there would have been no reason to trade for Darnold in early April. 

[ForJimmy]

3 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

We've seen more than one story suggesting the Panthers don't love all of the top five quarterbacks, and more than one suggesting that it stops at Lawrence and Wilson.

You might be able to throw Fields in there, but I'd have serious doubts about Lance or Jones.

Yeah for me it’s Fields or LT. I’m just stating we don’t know what they want or who they like. They met a huge need with Darnold, but that just prevents them from acting desperate for a signal caller. If one they love falls on their laps it not crazy to think they will draft him.

[Shotgun]

10 minutes ago, Smittymoose said:

If they thought Lance was going to be the "next big thing," they wouldn't have traded for Darnold.

If they think Darnold is next big thing...someone should be fired.