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!

     

Could we really pick something other than QB or o-line at 6?

Verge

By Verge,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Verge Veteran

Verge

Posted
Posted

Shameless plug time. I wrote an article about it here. 
https://catcrave.com/2022/02/25/5-shocking-draft-picks-carolina-panthers-6/

More seriously though, I do expect Hamilton and Thibodeaux to be very much in play should the scenario play out that we address QB in FA/Trade and the top 3 tackles go off the board by 6 (a very real possibility). I know trade down is a popular theory, and that could become a realistic scenario should Kayvon be there, but would you want to trade down instead of taking him? Would you be okay with Hamilton at the other hybrid safety role? I personally think 6 is too high for a center, but would you be okay with Linderbaum?

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SmokinwithWilly Grand Master

SmokinwithWilly

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Verge said:

Shameless plug time. I wrote an article about it here. 
https://catcrave.com/2022/02/25/5-shocking-draft-picks-carolina-panthers-6/

More seriously though, I do expect Hamilton and Thibodeaux to be very much in play should the scenario play out that we address QB in FA/Trade and the top 3 tackles go off the board by 6 (a very real possibility). I know trade down is a popular theory, and that could become a realistic scenario should Kayvon be there, but would you want to trade down instead of taking him? Would you be okay with Hamilton at the other hybrid safety role? I personally think 6 is too high for a center, but would you be okay with Linderbaum?

The best answer I have is we have to see what is done in FA before the draft. 

Personally I'd like to move down to mid teens or 20 and take Linderbaum there, but if we have no takers at 6 for trade, if Linderbaum checks all the boxes, take him there. 

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

The best answer I have is we have to see what is done in FA before the draft. 

Personally I'd like to move down to mid teens or 20 and take Linderbaum there, but if we have no takers at 6 for trade, if Linderbaum checks all the boxes, take him there. 

There are personnel guys who subscribe to the philosophy of "If you like a player, just take him! Who gives a sh-t if someone thinks he should have gone fifteen spots later?"

I don't know whether Fitterer or Rhule believe in that notion.

Edited by Mr. Scot
  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Verge Veteran

Verge

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, Mr. Scot said:

There are personnel guys who subscribe to the philosophy of "If you like a player, just take him! Who gives a sh-t if someone thinks he should have gone fifteen spots later?"

I just struggle because of how deep this center class is, which is made even more frustrating by the fact we have one pick in the top 100. We could have absolutely gotten a high level starter with our second this year. 

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 2
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
Just now, Verge said:

I just struggle because of how deep this center class is, which is made even more frustrating by the fact we have one pick in the top 100. We could have absolutely gotten a high level starter with our second this year. 

That we treated last season as an "all in / go for broke" year still feels surreal to me.

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SmokinwithWilly Grand Master

SmokinwithWilly

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Verge said:

I just struggle because of how deep this center class is, which is made even more frustrating by the fact we have one pick in the top 100. We could have absolutely gotten a high level starter with our second this year. 

I agree. If we don't go Linderbaum, I don't know where we'll go. It depends on how foolish we are in FA. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted

I'm so accustomed to watching this organization do mind numbingly stupid things that it's going to be really difficult to shock me with anything.

Let's see... re-sign Reddick then draft another pass rusher at #6 overall, trade next year's 1st for Jimmy G then massively overpay for some poo tier FA OL again... yeah, that sounds about right.

  • Flames 1
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

    • PNW_PantherMan
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • tukafan21
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
    • Dave Gettleman's Shorts
      TIME TO SPECULATE

      By Dave Gettleman's Shorts · Posted

      adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
×
×
  • Create New...