Analytics that will shape Draft Strategy or my name isn't MHS831

[iamhubby1]

8 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/catcrave.com/2021/04/18/carolina-panthers-washington-perfect-trade-partner/amp/
 

This site has it as a 4th... kind of lame.

 

If it's a 4th, they are out of the running. Step up, or step back.

[45catfan]

2 minutes ago, Captain Morgan said:

 

after the pc last week, I feel CB is very much on our mind in the first.  I think Surtain and Horn are the targets, and one of the two could be there at 15.  It's a gamble.  

I'd take Newsome in the late first, and would move up to get him if we get enough capital in the trade and get a LT at 15.  

I wouldn't be surprise if Parsons wasn't even on our board but I haven't heard that.

 

 

One will be there, likely Horn.  I think this is the reason we are trying to trade down because the value isn't there at #8, but a team may want to move up for a player with that #8 value.  That way we get the corner at the correct value (not reaching) and gain some additional draft capital as well.

[iamhubby1]

9 minutes ago, Captain Morgan said:

 

after the pc last week, I feel CB is very much on our mind in the first.  I think Surtain and Horn are the targets, and one of the two could be there at 15.  It's a gamble.  

I'd take Newsome in the late first, and would move up to get him if we get enough capital in the trade and get a LT at 15.  

I wouldn't be surprise if Parsons wasn't even on our board but I haven't heard that.

 

 

 

Man, how many options are in front of us? Sewel, Fields, Horn, Chase, or that other guy. I'm downright giddy with anticipation.

[BrianS]

1 hour ago, MHS831 said:

Not effectively.  Words are your friends.  Does this stat tell you how often we were in the red zone compared to other teams?  Teams need opportunities to score before you measure their success at scoring.  If the Panthers scored 99% of the time in the red zone and another team scored 59% of times in the red zone but scored more points, do you think red zone scoring was an issue?  Man, I am a research professor.  I know the difference between the central problem and side effects.  Scoring is shiny and what everyone pays attention to-opportunities to score are more important, so no, it does not scream OL. It could scream QB, WR, TE.  Dont know how you arrived at that conclusion, frankly.

Sigh.  Yes, it does, I was trying to make it easy to read.

Only eight teams last year scored fewer points than we did.  Conversely, only 11 teams had more red zone opportunities.  How many teams with more opportunties, scored fewer points?  NONE.  How many teams with fewer opportunties, scored more points?  EIGHT.

But seriously, I don't need stats to tell me our offensive line was below par.  I just need to watch us fail over and over to see that we couldn't move people when we needed to.

In terms of your stats, you are simply showing raw conversion percentage.  What you AREN'T showing is distance to go.  Obviously, covering receivers is important.  Of course.  Were we bad on 3rd down?  Yes, of course.  Awful.  The real question is were we offering too many 3rd and short / medium opportunities?  If so, the problem wasn't third down at all.  It was first and second where we failed.

 

[iamhubby1]

8 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

One will be there, likely Horn.  I think this is the reason we are trying to trade down because the value isn't there at #8, but a team may want to move up for a player with that #8 value.  That way we get the corner at the correct value (not reaching) and gain some additional draft capital as well.

 

I think the trade down has gained some speed lately. Getting extra draft capital would help this team out tremendously. 

 

The 2 nickles over 1 dime paradigm.

[Panthers Rhule]

13 minutes ago, Captain Morgan said:

 

We have 16 players with first round grades.  Trading with NE (15) guarantees us one of them.  

Trading with WFT (19), we could get lucky and still get one.  If only 2 of the 5 QBs in draft are on list, and 5 get taken there is a decent chance one of our guys could fall to 19.  But because of the risk involved, I'd want a hell of a lot from the WFT in that trade.

There are a couple of other players who could get drafted within that range who I'd doubt would be 1 of our 16 like Parsons and Smith. We could even have a thing against players who opted out last season if we don't like their reasons. In the pre-draft presser they said some players had good reasons. And the ones who didn't? Does that drop them from our 16? Maybe.  

 

[Panthers Rhule]

1 hour ago, BrianS said:

That's a lot of words.  I can shortcut that a bit.

We score TD's 50% of the time we are in the red zone.  If that doesn't scream OFFENSIVE LINE I don't know what does.

Does it? I'm not saying that you're wrong but how much of that can we absolutely put of the offensive line? Surely some of it. Not being able to push it in on the goal line for example. But I'd also say a lot of it was not have a legitimate red zone threat coupled with a conservative QB who wasn't able to "put it in there" or "run it in there". 

[kungfoodude]

1 hour ago, MHS831 said:

It sure is, but not far.  I am really loving Surtain, Farley, and Horn.  Add a second rounder, take the OL and WR and the rest is gravy.

I am not that high on any of them but the hope is that perhaps they can be at worst a solid #2 CB. 

[iamhubby1]

2 minutes ago, Panthers Rhule said:

Does it? I'm not saying that you're wrong but how much of that can we absolutely put of the offensive line? Surely some of it. Not being able to push it in on the goal line for example. But I'd also say a lot of it was not have a legitimate red zone threat coupled with a conservative QB who wasn't able to "put it in there" or "run it in there". 

 

That short yardage package was no where near a thing of beauty, that's for sure. And it definitely played a role in our lack of point production. 

 

IMO, I would put it on a par with our Defenses inability to get off the field as equal partners in our abysmal 5-11 record.

 

Fix one and we are better. Fix both and we can be competitive. 

[MHS831]

41 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Man, that was a long-winded post by the OP to say we need a CB.  I already knew that, duh!  Now, I disagree it needs to be in the first as corner is probably the deepest position in the draft besides WR (and were are mostly good there).

We won't take one at #8; only in a trade back.  I'm certain of that.  If we trade back with Sewell already gone I won't be too perplexed.  If we trade back with Sewell still there, I can't say the same.

You do understand that the concept was analytics, right?  They are not fortune cookies--they are in-depth, statistical reasons that help you see what you think you know or thought you knew.   Now how many CBs in the second and beyond are #1 CBs?  I think another CB is not a need--we have 5-6 who can make a roster.  We need that guy---and that is stated.

 

35 minutes ago, *FreeFua* said:

Wanna bet?

No, I did not say I think it, but it would not surprise me

 

OK, FUA, I will bet that we draft a CB in round 1 if Sewell is off the board---at #8 or later---(damn I wish I had not started that betting thread).

This draft is already getting crazy, my friend. 

Edited April 25, 2021 by MHS831

[Pup McBarky]

I'm fine with taking a CB in the first, but only if it's Horn. I think Surtain is gonna be okay, but not the shutdown guy some believe he is.

[ForJimmy]

2 minutes ago, Pup McBarky said:

I'm fine with taking a CB in the first, but only if it's Horn. I think Surtain is gonna be okay, but not the shutdown guy some believe he is.

We like Samuel Jr (interviewed with him twice). I’m high on Newsome. 

[iamhubby1]

9 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

I am not that high on any of them but the hope is that perhaps they can be at worst a solid #2 CB. 

 

Horn, Sertain, Sewel, and Slater have the best shot at succeeding. However, there are others who have a chance as well. Just a longer shot to do so.

 

If you can get one of those 4, you good. For me it is trade back for Horn, and then LT. I should hope to come out of that with 2 top shelf starters. And still have draft capital to still make some noise.

[Pup McBarky]

1 minute ago, ForJimmy said:

We like Samuel Jr (interviewed with him twice). I’m high on Newsome. 

I like Newsome too. I also think Stokes from GA is gonna be like Bradberry...maybe struggle at first, but he's gonna be a baller.