Trey Lance 2nd Pro Day

[CPsinceDay1 113]

Are any of the Panther's  personnel attending?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/ninerswire.usatoday.com/2021/04/10/qb-trey-lance-schedules-2nd-pro-day-kyle-shanahan-john-lynch-expected-to-attend/amp/

If so can we assume we are still looking at QBs. I mean Fitter did say it's still a possibility.

Say maybe Joe Brady?

Edited April 10 by CPsinceDay1

[SmokinwithWilly 4,952]

1 minute ago, CPsinceDay1 said:

Are any of the Panther's  personnel attending?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/ninerswire.usatoday.com/2021/04/10/qb-trey-lance-schedules-2nd-pro-day-kyle-shanahan-john-lynch-expected-to-attend/amp/

If so can we assume we still looking at QBs. I mean Fitter did say it's still a possibility.

If nothing else maintaining the appearance we are still interested is important to give 8 more value than it has. Denver wouldn't trade up one spot if Lance was still on the board and we havent acted interested. As important as it is to get your guy, it's also important to maintain the illusion you're interested in theirs. 

[Wes21 968]

13 minutes ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

If nothing else maintaining the appearance we are still interested is important to give 8 more value than it has. Denver wouldn't trade up one spot if Lance was still on the board and we havent acted interested. As important as it is to get your guy, it's also important to maintain the illusion you're interested in theirs. 

That's not how it typically works.  Teams don't trade with the team that wants "their guy."  Teams trade in front of the team that wants their guy.  If people think we want their guy, that increases the value of the Lions pick...not ours.  Denver would be moving into our spot to block another team from trading into that spot.

[GoobyPls 3,552]

I’m still holding out hope we draft him if he falls.

 

The fact we’ve been in on every QB this offseason from Trubisky to Haskins makes me think Darnold was plan F and we still might draft a QB early.

[DaveThePanther2008 4,842]

15 minutes ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

If nothing else maintaining the appearance we are still interested is important to give 8 more value than it has. Denver wouldn't trade up one spot if Lance was still on the board and we havent acted interested. As important as it is to get your guy, it's also important to maintain the illusion you're interested in theirs. 

As I think of it, it plays in our favor somewhat.  If Denver doesn't try and move up it could get other teams that are interested in him to move up ahead of Denver  The more distant we are between draft picks the more draft capital it will cost them.   Maybe far enough between where we can get a 1st next year as well as this year. 

[SmokinwithWilly 4,952]

1 minute ago, Wes21 said:

That's not how it typically works.  Teams don't trade with the team that wants "their guy."  Teams trade in front of the team that wants their guy.  If people think we want their guy, that increases the value of the Lions pick...not ours.  Denver would be moving into our spot to block another team from trading into that spot.

True, but with so many needy QB teams, and us having just acquired Darnold, we could potentially be more likely to move by offering say 9 and their 2nd or 3rd, than just letting it ride and potentially drafting their guy. They may consider it a 20% chance we take lance because we did attend vs a 0% if we didn't attend. A little bit of uncertainty can possibly net you something. It's just part of playing the game. 

[Shocker 7,288]

I will be happy when we don't pick him

[rippadonn 1,987]

At #8 it's either a QB or somebody that scores points or a savant that takes points away(Pep,Luke).

I'd take that Alabama receiver if Pitts is gone.

[top dawg 13,713]

10 minutes ago, Shocker said:

I will be happy when we don't pick him

So, you're all-in on Darnold then?

[rippadonn 1,987]

Oh, Lance, I'd draft him if he's still there at 8. As always the bottom feeders are QB hungry so San Francisco may actually pick Lance.

[rippadonn 1,987]

Just now, rippadonn said:

Oh, Lance, I'd draft him if he's still there at 8. As always the bottom feeders are QB hungry so San Francisco may actually pick Lance.

I meant to include the Jets. SF is a decent/good squad.

[Shocker 7,288]

15 minutes ago, top dawg said:

So, you're all-in on Darnold then?

No but I have said for a while now that Lance is not the answer.  Biggest gamble in the draft in recent memory.  He never played anybody and isn’t really a quality passer.  If he makes it he will have improved massively from what he is now.

His comp for me is Jordan Love although Love was a much more known commodity.  Love didn’t sniff the field last season and may not for a few more.

Edited April 10 by Shocker

[Harbingers 7,008]

8 minutes ago, rippadonn said:

I meant to include the Jets. SF is a decent/good squad.

Ya. I was gonna say...

[stbugs 9,237]

1 hour ago, Shocker said:

No but I have said for a while now that Lance is not the answer.  Biggest gamble in the draft in recent memory.  He never played anybody and isn’t really a quality passer.  If he makes it he will have improved massively from what he is now.

His comp for me is Jordan Love although Love was a much more known commodity.  Love didn’t sniff the field last season and may not for a few more.

Man, I still don’t get the Love trade up. From all reports I’ve seen, he wasn’t impressive with GB at all. A team in the NFC Championship and they took a backup QB, a third string RB (Jones re-signed) and reached on a TE with their first 4 picks. They needed WRs and could have had Higgins and taken Chinn in the 2nd. So many players they passed on to make a run with Rodgers and instead they got guys who may not ever contribute. It was like Hurney’s 2019 draft except Loce instead of Burns. There are some real suspect GMs out there, really hope we got a good one.