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!

     

No Pitts? Slater gone? Pene off the board?

Ivan The Awesome

By Ivan The Awesome,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Jay Roosevelt Grand Master

Jay Roosevelt

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Panthers Rhule said:

Yeah they always scare me first round same with QBs and LTs but also same as those, elite CBs are rarely found after the 1st. It's possible same as with QBs and LTs but rare compared to other positions. 

True, but teams don't necessarily need an elite CB to win a championship, just 2-3 good/solid ones. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
joemac Grand Master

joemac

Posted
Posted

I don't know why everybody is so hard to trade down all of a sudden.  With the way this team is being built, this may very well be the last time we are picking in the top 10 in the draft for a long time.  We need to capitalize on this, and select the game breaking player who will assuredly be available to us at 8.  Grab our next CMC or Luke and call it good.  Don't get cute and trade back into the low teens or high 20's where the drop off is huge in this draft.  8 is sitting pretty, IMO this year.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Michael G Mentor

Michael G

Posted
Posted
Quote

I don't know why everybody is so hard to trade down all of a sudden.  With the way this team is being built, this may very well be the last time we are picking in the top 10 in the draft for a long time.  We need to capitalize on this, and select the game breaking player who will assuredly be available to us at 8. ....

I guess this really comes down to who is available. Do you take that Great Player if he's not a QB or Tackle? What is its a receiver (Chase)? Should we take a Great Player at a position we already have talent or Trade Back and maybe get a few decent starters at positions of Need?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
joemac Grand Master

joemac

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Pup McBarky said:

I couldn't disagree more, outside of Pitts.

But its true.  Its widely accepted that the top 12-14 players in this particular draft are head and shoulders above the rest of the top rated talent, then you have pretty much similar rated players from 15 or so all the way to around 40-45.  Obviously its a crap shoot at the end of the day, but this seems to be the consensus that I have read from multiple sources.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pup McBarky Proficient

Pup McBarky

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, joemac said:

Its widely accepted that the top 12-14 players in this particular draft are head and shoulders above the rest of the top rated talent

By who? I've seen Micah Parsons rated anywhere from #2 to #26 by so-called "experts." What about Mac Jones? Some rate him top 5, some rate him 2nd round. Then there's Trevon Moehrig. Some rate him top 10, some have him early 2nd.

There is loose consensus on about 5 players. After that, there's tons of disparity.

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
      Okay, now face the facta guyd

      By Joe Bear · Posted

      No, it will be a raw 6'7" 17-year-old European who just played basketball for the first time in March and who the idiot GM "had first on our board." He'll play the whole G-League season, get in 42 games for the Hornets and average 1.1 ppg on 35% shooting. Been there, seen that.
    • ForJimmy
      JJ Jansen on tanking

      By ForJimmy · Posted

      We missed on Burns at his peak value. That’s the problem with trading for picks 2-3 years away (which people were convinced the Rams would suck by now and these would be higher picks btw). Each year away the pick is the further in value it drops. Fitt was clearly hired based on turning us around quickly. It’s one of the many reasons tanking isn’t really a thing as our player JJ is telling you in this original article. It would take the whole organization from the owners down admitting they aren’t winning soon with Burns and picks 2-3 years away having more value because that’s when we are still rebuilding. It would only make sense if Fitt had a longer leash and would more than likely be the ones making these picks anyway which you wouldn’t want. The question is would you rather have those Rams picks with the strong possibility of Fitt still being here or would you rather Fitt try to “win now” like he did and expedite his firing? Altering the timeline would affect more than just the Rams picks. 
    • HaricotVert
      Potential changes to playoff seeding

      By HaricotVert · Posted

      I dont buy the idea that it would create more competitive games Given this: Seed Current Format Record Proposed Open Seeding Record 1 Lions 15–2 Lions 15–2 2 Eagles 14–3 Eagles 14–3 3 Buccaneers 10–7 Vikings 14–3 4 Rams 10–7 Commanders 12–5 5 Vikings 14–3 Rams 10–7 6 Commanders 12–5 Buccaneers 10–7 7 Packers 11–6 Packers 11–6 That would mean Wild Card round would have been Eagles (14/3) v  Pack(11/6) Vikings(14/3) v Bucs(10/7) Commanders(12/5) v Rams(10/7) Instead of Eagles (14/3) v  Pack(11/6) Bucs(10/7) v Commanders(12/5) Rams(10/7) v Vikings(14/3) Then with the reseed it would mean that highest remaining seed would always draw the lowest remaining team.
×
×
  • Create New...