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!

     

Source: Panthers Open to Drafting Quarterback With No. 8 Pick


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, 45catfan said:

Point #1: It's essentially a 2nd and a 4th.  This year's 6th is very insignificant.  For a staring QB, that is peanuts.

Point #2: You are assuming neither work out and the pick was wasted by not drafting another position

Point #3:  Darold will NOT led us to a QB next year.  His awful will be just good enough to keep us out of range.

Point #4: Potential replacement.  You keep the better of the two and trade for a ransom.

Point #5: You really don't understand the value a QB in this League.  If Darnold pans out, that rookie in a couple years will still garner at least a first rounder and then some to a desperate QB needy team.

 

1. What we gave up is essentially the equivalent of a low second round pick for 2021 by pushing those picks into 2022 and giving up a sixth this year. It's cheap-ish for a starting QB, but it's not cheap from a total value standpoint. 

2. I'm not assuming that at all. It's just bad asset allocation to give up a high 1st and the equivalent of a low 2nd this year on a position where you can only play one guy, particularly when you can spend that high 1st round pick on another position of need.

3. This is complete speculation, and I honestly have no reason to trust your opinion on this point.

4. Can you provide some examples of when a rookie who sat on the bench for a year or more was traded for a "ransom?" If Darnold is worse than a rookie, then what makes you think a QB on an expiring $19M deal is going to fetch a "ransom?" We'll get less, probably substantially less, than what we gave up this year.

5. Actually, I understand it much better than you. What you are proposing is complete fantasy land. Can you point to a single example of someone drafting a QB, letting him ride the bench, then trading him for more than the value of the pick they used on him? Keep in mind that the 8th pick this year is worth more than the 8th pick two years from now in terms of present value. So even if they drafted your crush 8th overall and traded him two years later for the 8th overall pick, it's not a particularly efficient use of value. 

1 hour ago, 45catfan said:

The same would go for Matt Kalil.  Go fish.

I didn't argue starting half of the games in your career means you were successful. You did. Frankly, I think it's an idiotic way to judge success because some guys bust out so fast that they "start" half (or more) of the games in their career but are complete garbage and never even get another serious chance. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Smittymoose said:

 

1. What we gave up is essentially the equivalent of a low second round pick for 2021 by pushing those picks into 2022 and giving up a sixth this year. It's cheap-ish for a starting QB, but it's not cheap from a total value standpoint. 

2. I'm not assuming that at all. It's just bad asset allocation to give up a high 1st and the equivalent of a low 2nd this year on a position where you can only play one guy, particularly when you can spend that high 1st round pick on another position of need.

3. This is complete speculation, and I honestly have no reason to trust your opinion on this point.

4. Can you provide some examples of when a rookie who sat on the bench for a year or more was traded for a "ransom?" If Darnold is worse than a rookie, then what makes you think a QB on an expiring $19M deal is going to fetch a "ransom?" We'll get less, probably substantially less, than what we gave up this year.

5. Actually, I understand it much better than you. What you are proposing is complete fantasy land. Can you point to a single example of someone drafting a QB, letting him ride the bench, then trading him for more than the value of the pick they used on him? Keep in mind that the 8th pick this year is worth more than the 8th pick two years from now in terms of present value. So even if they drafted your crush 8th overall and traded him two years later for the 8th overall pick, it's not a particularly efficient use of value. 

I didn't argue starting half of the games in your career means you were successful. You did. Frankly, I think it's an idiotic way to judge success because some guys bust out so fast that they "start" half (or more) of the games in their career but are complete garbage and never even get another serious chance. 

No, It is cheap, not cheap-ish.  Darnold's 2nd next year will not be very high and his 4th virtually a 5th.  You say this is speculation, and it is, but I guess your crystal ball works better than mine?  I could care less if you trust my opinion, lol.  If Darnold craps the bed, at worse, he hits FA in two years and we have our replacement already in house, with NFL knowledge and scheme savvy.  This is not like Aaron Rogers and Jordan Love.  Love will be in purgatory until the Packers decide what to do with Aaron.  A rookie QB here will be in limbo MAX two seasons.  By that time we will know exactly what to do with the two QBs.  Hedging your bets is fantasy land?  You truly are a fan of the Panthers where mediocrity is the gold standard. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Thaaaat's not a good definition.

Probably not the best, but at least this guy attempted to set up some sort of metric.  A poster saying 'first round QBs suck more times than not' (paraphrased) is citing a highly scientific, labor intensive, peer reviewed study that is apparently too nuanced for me.  Maybe it's just their opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, AceBoogie said:

Yea it’s whatever at this point. We’ll be in QB purgatory for the foreseeable future. It’s been botched over two regimes at this point. Hurney went and got Teddy two gloves and Fitt said hold my beer.  

Who is your guy to fix the QB problem? What QB rights the ship in your eyes? Besides Cam i mean as we both know he isn't coming back at this point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Captain Morgan said:
Matt Rhule: "At the eighth position, we'll be flexible. We'll look to take the best player available. We'll continue to look at quarterbacks. We'll look at anything and everything."
 
 
 
 
Clarifying, on earlier comment: Rhule likes Darnold's arm talent.
 
 
 
"We'll continue to look at quarterbacks," Rhule said.
 
 
 
Matt Rhule on how the Sam Darnold trade affects the 8th pick: "It frees us up to pick the best player available. Fill potential needs."

Rhule lives in fantasy land too. He's my neighbor.  Apparently Rhule, Fitts and Tepper don't rely on a precedent to make big decisions for this team.  What a breath of fresh air!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, AceBoogie said:

Don’t matter how good the line is when your QB sees ghosts. 

Dude was dead last amongst qualifying qbs in qbr from a clean pocket and people keep saying fix the line lol. This dude was worse than Dwayne fuging Haskins from a clean pocket. BuT jUsT Fix tHE liNe

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Panthers8969 said:

Dude was dead last amongst qualifying qbs in qbr from a clean pocket and people keep saying fix the line lol. This dude was worse than Dwayne fuging Haskins from a clean pocket. BuT jUsT Fix tHE liNe

While true thats a bit misleading.  He only had like 20 attempts in a clean pocket and even then he knew his line was piss poor so it was just a matter of time before he was crunched and this is 3 years in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just don't let this "still in the QB market" be about Mac jones...

I still love Lance but he is s project and not ready start.. And Fields Meh okay... But No fuging Jones...

  • Pie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

While true thats a bit misleading.  He only had like 20 attempts in a clean pocket and even then he knew his line was piss poor so it was just a matter of time before he was crunched and this is 3 years in.

Sure, but I’d feel better about the whole OL situation if he wasn’t literally the worst qb in the league from a clean pocket. Other qbs played behind poor OLs as well but didn’t suck as much when the protection held up

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Rhule lives in fantasy land too. He's my neighbor.  Apparently Rhule, Fitts and Tepper don't rely on a precedent to make big decisions for this team.  What a breath of fresh air!!!

Did you start watching football last year? It's the season for draft posturing. Of course they aren't going to say "nah we're good at QB." It only hurts the value of the pick to do so. Doesn't mean they're really planning on drafting one, but they have to signal that they COULD draft one. This is elementary, really. 

1 hour ago, 45catfan said:

Probably not the best, but at least this guy attempted to set up some sort of metric.  A poster saying 'first round QBs suck more times than not' (paraphrased) is citing a highly scientific, labor intensive, peer reviewed study that is apparently too nuanced for me.  Maybe it's just their opinion.

So a bad, non-sense metric is better than simply having a subjective opinion based on decades of watching football? This kind of thinking is what the garbage PFF generation hath wrought. You don't play football on a spreadsheet. By the way, if my post was so poor, you could try refuting it? Who, from that list, was not a bust that I said or implied was indeed a bust? 

 

1 hour ago, 45catfan said:

No, It is cheap, not cheap-ish.  Darnold's 2nd next year will not be very high and his 4th virtually a 5th.  You say this is speculation, and it is, but I guess your crystal ball works better than mine?  I could care less if you trust my opinion, lol.  If Darnold craps the bed, at worse, he hits FA in two years and we have our replacement already in house, with NFL knowledge and scheme savvy.  This is not like Aaron Rogers and Jordan Love.  Love will be in purgatory until the Packers decide what to do with Aaron.  A rookie QB here will be in limbo MAX two seasons.  By that time we will know exactly what to do with the two QBs.  Hedging your bets is fantasy land?  You truly are a fan of the Panthers where mediocrity is the gold standard. 

It's not really that cheap. It's roughly in line with what the 49ers gave up for Garoppolo, what Alex Smith was been traded for the second time around (2nd + cheap player), and what the Chiefs gave up for Matt Cassel (2nd for Cassel and Mike Vrabel). Cheap is getting Tannehill + 6th for a 4th +7th. And there's really no reason to think the 2nd will be "not very high." It's more likely to be the top pick in the 2nd round than the last one, that's for sure. Likelihood is it falls somewhere between 12-17, as Carolina will be a fringe playoff team. 

Mediocrity is wasting four picks on one position where you can only start one guy. The Panthers can instantly upgrade another player group. If Darnold is very bad, then they'll be in position to draft another guy next year. If he isn't, then they've got their guy at least in the short-term and maybe in the long-term. This doesn't have to be hard. You'll just have to detach yourself from Trey Lance fanboyhood. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Panthers8969 said:

Sure, but I’d feel better about the whole OL situation if he wasn’t literally the worst qb in the league from a clean pocket. Other qbs played behind poor OLs as well but didn’t suck as much when the protection held up

For 3 straight years?

Edited by mrcompletely11
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Smittymoose said:

Did you start watching football last year? It's the season for draft posturing. Of course they aren't going to say "nah we're good at QB." It only hurts the value of the pick to do so. Doesn't mean they're really planning on drafting one, but they have to signal that they COULD draft one. This is elementary, really. 

So a bad, non-sense metric is better than simply having a subjective opinion based on decades of watching football? This kind of thinking is what the garbage PFF generation hath wrought. You don't play football on a spreadsheet. By the way, if my post was so poor, you could try refuting it? Who, from that list, was not a bust that I said or implied was indeed a bust? 

 

It's not really that cheap. It's roughly in line with what the 49ers gave up for Garoppolo, what Alex Smith was been traded for the second time around (2nd + cheap player), and what the Chiefs gave up for Matt Cassel (2nd for Cassel and Mike Vrabel). Cheap is getting Tannehill + 6th for a 4th +7th. And there's really no reason to think the 2nd will be "not very high." It's more likely to be the top pick in the 2nd round than the last one, that's for sure. Likelihood is it falls somewhere between 12-17, as Carolina will be a fringe playoff team. 

Mediocrity is wasting four picks on one position where you can only start one guy. The Panthers can instantly upgrade another player group. If Darnold is very bad, then they'll be in position to draft another guy next year. If he isn't, then they've got their guy at least in the short-term and maybe in the long-term. This doesn't have to be hard. You'll just have to detach yourself from Trey Lance fanboyhood. 

We may or may not draft a QB.  However since you watch football (we all do) you are the expert.  Trash PFF and others all you want, but they get paid to provide football analysis and all you do is pay you cable bill to be an armchair expert. Could it be a smokescreen? Certainly, I'll acknowledge that, but you in your divine "I watch football on TV" wisdom knows it's 100% a smokescreen.  You are quite funny, actually.  Garoppolo was not a first round pick--moot point, Smith was a known commodity and has been passed around like a sorority girl at a frat party. Matt Cassell...where do I even begin with that joke (see poor man's Garoppolo).  Tannehill was brought in as a backup, not a starter, so of course his compensation was going to be lower.  The Patriots were able to trade Garoppolo and Cassell because they kept a back stock of decent QBs behind Brady and used that depth to their advantage.  Where they screwed up is thinking Brady would never walk, he did and they got caught with their pants down by trading that away and only having scrubs waiting in the wings.  Do you see the value of having capable backups or any parallels there?  Probably not.  BTW, Sam has Grier and Walker.  I wonder what their trade value would be?  I'll give you a hint: the monetary figure resembles an egg.

Apparently you think competition is a bad thing, unless it's pseuo-competition, you know, scrubs.  As for the 2nd rounder, let's do the math, 32+17 is 49.  Once you hit around pick 50, it's not all that valuable. Heck, Fitts thinks the talent after middle of round one begins to taper dramatically.  What does he know?  I mean he's only a real life NFL GM.  He also firmly believes in stockpiling talent (notice I didn't say warm bodies) at the QB position.

Keep watching TV and maybe one day you can become a real life GM or at least buy a plaque to mount  over your big screen that says so.

Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...