Panthers favor Malik Willis?

[mrcompletely11]

11 minutes ago, tiger7_88 said:

*IF* the Panthers are bound and determined to select a QB at #6, it should be Willis.  He’s the best prospect available in this draft.

 That being said, Willis is a 2nd rounder in any a normal depth QB draft and maybe even lower in a DEEP depth QB draft. (And I say this as an Auburn fan who has always liked Willis, even when he (rightly) transferred away from Auburn).

So the question is, do the Panther’s powers-that-be decide to overspend on that choice? (And any other QB at #6 is overspending even worse.)

I am trying to understand why rhule would pick a guy that will not help next season?

[Sgt Schultz]

1 minute ago, tiger7_88 said:

*IF* the Panthers are bound and determined to select a QB at #6, it should be Willis.  He’s the best prospect available in this draft.

 That being said, Willis is a 2nd rounder in any a normal depth QB draft and maybe even lower in a DEEP depth QB draft. (And I say this as an Auburn fan who has always liked Willis, even when he (rightly) transferred away from Auburn).

So the question is, do the Panther’s powers-that-be decide to overspend on that choice? (And any other QB at #6 is overspending even worse.)

People tend to miss something about overdrafting QBs (or any other position, really) in the first round.  But especially with QBs, we hear "if it doesn't work out, you just try again."  The premise is all it cost was a wasted first round pick.

If you keep at it and keep missing, all of a sudden your roster has other significant holes that could have been filled quite well if the value of the talent pool at the QB position had been honestly assessed and you instead chose that stud LT one year.  Ours already has those holes.  One of them seems to mesh quite well with what is available in this draft.

Drafting a QB at #6 does not mean you drafted a high first round QB at #6.  Just like paying $30,000 for that 4 year old Nissan Versa does not make it a $30,000 car.  It just proves PT Barnum's point.

[Mr. Scot]

13 minutes ago, frankw said:

Mobility with the position is common across the league though so can you really overrate it? Statue type QB's are much more rare than they were ten years ago when we took Cam. If you look at the best QB's right now almost all of them have that ability some more than others. Even Tom Brady will move around now.

If you think mobility can make someone successful without the more important quarterback qualities, then yes absolutely it's overrated.

As I've said before, if you have intelligence, accuracy, the ability to read defenses and the ability to quickly process what you see, it doesn't matter if you're mobile or not.

If you don't have those things, it also doesn't matter if you're mobile or not.

I see a lot of people watching highlight reels and assuming because they see a quarterback make three or four big plays, they must be a great quarterback. But often watching a full game tells a different story.

Bottom Line: That kind of ability, even without the other things I mentioned, can make you a great college quarterback. If you don't have the other things though, you're not going to succeed at the NFL level.

Does Willis have those qualities? I don't know, but I do know the reason there's a discussion is because a lot of NFL scouts don't feel like they know either. If you take him, you're banking on the idea that you can teach him those things. And maybe they can but keep in mind this is our staff were talking about.

My personal opinion? That idea makes me nervous because I've seen that kind of draft strategy fail more frequently than I've seen it succeed.

[micnificent28]

35 minutes ago, stbugs said:

Let’s be honest, he’s not getting it done when it counts. He’s 1-3 in the playoffs with 13 points scored per game. That’s downright awful to be honest. There’s people who would say Cam didn’t get it done and he was 3-4 in the playoffs and even with the SB and that SF game where we couldn’t score at the goal line, Cam’s averaged 24 points per game.

Jackson is a good QB but he’s trending the wrong way lately and his playoff record and performance has been pretty poor so far. He’s got to turn that around or he won’t be considered anywhere near elite.

I don't think a franchise who has NEVER won back to back winning season says yeah you make the playoffs every year but it's getting old. There is no perfect situation where a single gb automatically wins you ever single playogf game.

But if he has proven to have the formula to get you there consistently and win consistently maybe you need to tweak your formula. Because you and the guys sound like Jackson is the reason your not winning in the playoffs. Wins and losses are not a qb statistic. If that's the case Brady wouldn't have left new England. But you plug him into the bucs and bam. 

He needed the right parts around him. You could make the same argument for Jackson. 

Edited April 4, 2022 by micnificent28

[Mr. Scot]

3 minutes ago, Sgt Schultz said:

People tend to miss something about overdrafting QBs (or any other position, really) in the first round.  But especially with QBs, we hear "if it doesn't work out, you just try again."  The premise is all it cost was a wasted first round pick.

If you keep at it and keep missing, all of a sudden your roster has other significant holes that could have been filled quite well if the value of the talent pool at the QB position had been honestly assessed and you instead chose that stud LT one year.  Ours already has those holes.  One of them seems to mesh quite well with what is available in this draft.

Drafting a QB at #6 does not mean you drafted a high first round QB at #6.  Just like paying $30,000 for that 4 year old Nissan Versa does not make it a $30,000 car.  It just proves PT Barnum's point.

Missing on a high round pick because you took the wrong player (even at the right position) also usually means you missed out on another player at the same or different position who could have been the right pick. So in a lot of ways, it's two mistakes in one.

Do that more than once and yeah, you can really hurt your roster.

[micnificent28]

4 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

If you think mobility can make someone successful without the more important quarterback qualities, then yes absolutely it's overrated.

As I've said before, if you have intelligence, accuracy, the ability to read defenses and the ability to quickly process what you see, it doesn't matter if you're mobile or not.

If you don't have those things, it also doesn't matter if you're mobile or not.

I see a lot of people watching highlight reels and assuming because they see a quarterback make three or four big plays, they must be a great quarterback. But often watching a full game tells a different story.

Bottom Line: That kind of ability, even without the other things I mentioned, can make you a great college quarterback. If you don't have the other things though, you're not going to succeed at the NFL level.

Does Willis have those qualities? I don't know, but I do know the reason there's a discussion is because a lot of NFL scouts don't feel like they know either. If you take him, you're banking on the idea that you can teach him those things. And maybe they can but keep in mind this is our staff were talking about.

My personal opinion? That idea makes me nervous because I've seen that kind of draft strategy fail more frequently than I've seen it succeed.

But I think the reverse is also true. Having mobility can make you dangerous enough without being Tom Brady. I'm not saying throwing isn't the ultimate win all be all whatever. But pin point drop back passers aren't growing on trees... clearly from this year's class those type of talents just aren't a option this season.

What mixture of tools can I use to make up for that? As much as people hate to admit it the game just isn't played the way it use to be... Our own Cam Newton Changed the position forever..  

[Sgt Schultz]

7 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Missing on a high round pick because you took the wrong player (even at the right position) also usually means you missed out on another player at the same or different position who could have been the right pick. So in a lot of ways, it's two mistakes in one.

Do that more than once and yeah, you can really hurt your roster.

Absolutely.  The concept of opportunity cost is lost on many people.  You not only missed on who you took, you missed on who you could have taken.  It's not like the LT that was sitting there or one of the other QBs you passed on was waiting for you in the second round.

Oh wait, we don't have a second round pick.  We have Darnold, instead, who was an example of what we are talking about for the Jest, and then again for us unless he magically finds his inner Elway.

[MechaZain]

Some wishful thinking on my part here but my guess is that our big board for #6 in order is

• Evan Neal
• Malik Willis
• Ikem Ekonwu
• Kenny Pickett

[Catsfan69]

14 minutes ago, micnificent28 said:

But I think the reverse is also true. Having mobility can make you dangerous enough without being Tom Brady. I'm not saying throwing isn't the ultimate win all be all whatever. But pin point drop back passers aren't growing on trees... clearly from this year's class those type of talents just aren't a option this season.

What mixture of tools can I use to make up for that? As much as people hate to admit it the game just isn't played the way it use to be... Our own Cam Newton Changed the position forever..  

Lol Cam Newton wasn't good enough.

I want better than Cam Newton.

[Mr. Scot]

6 minutes ago, micnificent28 said:

But I think the reverse is also true. Having mobility can make you dangerous enough without being Tom Brady. I'm not saying throwing isn't the ultimate win all be all whatever. But pin point drop back passers aren't growing on trees... clearly from this year's class those type of talents just aren't a option this season.

What mixture of tools can I use to make up for that? As much as people hate to admit it the game just isn't played the way it use to be... Our own Cam Newton Changed the position forever..  

People said Vick "changed the game forever" too. But the reality is that neither of them did.

Newton was someone with a highly unique set of physical characteristics who happened to play quarterback. But to claim that Newton "changed the game forever", you'd have to be able to point to a preponderance of Cam Newton like quarterbacks in the NFL right now. There's not. Outside of Lamar Jackson I can't think of any. Kyler Murray and maybe Russell Wilson can be called dual threats but both are very different from Newton.

There are a good number of decently mobile quarterbacks in the league right now, but that's not as new as people think. As far as actual dual threats? Very few. Now, you could try to say that any quarterback who's capable of running once in a while is a dual threat, but that's a huge stretch.

Truth be told, if anything has led to a greater need for mobile quarterbacks, it's probably that the quality of offensive line play is a lot worse than it used to be.

[micnificent28]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

People said Vick "changed the game forever" too. But the reality is that neither of them did.

Newton was someone with a highly unique set of physical characteristics who happened to play quarterback. But to claim that Newton "changed the game forever", you'd have to be able to point to a preponderance of Cam Newton like quarterbacks in the NFL right now. There's not. Outside of Lamar Jackson I can't think of any. Kyler Murray and maybe Russell Wilson can be called dual threats but both are very different from Newton.

There are a good number of decently mobile quarterbacks in the league right now, but that's not as new as people think. As far as actual dual threats? Very few. Now, you could try to say that any quarterback who's capable of running once in a while is a dual threat, but that's a huge stretch.

Truth be told, if anything has led to a greater need for mobile quarterbacks, it's probably that the quality of offensive line play is a lot worse than it used to be.

I think Vick.. Cam Newton those guys what they do with the ball is generational. Would both go number 1 if their classes could be done over again? Probably. Why we don't see more vicks and Cams is because they are generational talents. You can take a fast guy and put him at qb but can he throw it 80 yards like vick? Or a big guy at qb but can he run like Cam? Or as fast?

Those guys Changed the position because they made scheming against them headaches and nightmares. Even if you defeated them you could just play them like any other qb.. they needed their own specific template. I don't think you get to Cam Newton without Vick opening the door to the dual threat..  

You don't get to the rise of the RPO dual threat system we see all over the league now. Without Cam does RG3 go number 2 the following year? Guys like Hurbert who were seen as runners in college, Lamar jackson, Marcus Mariota, Jalen Hurts all these guys don't go as high as they did in the draft without the success of Cam Newton. That's what I mean by changed the position.

[Mr. Scot]

5 minutes ago, micnificent28 said:

I think Vick.. Cam Newton those guys what they do with the ball is generational. Would both go number 1 if their classes could be done over again? Probably. Why we don't see more vicks and Cams is because they are generational talents. You can take a fast guy and put him at qb but can he throw it 80 yards like vick? Or a big guy at qb but can he run like Cam? Or as fast?

Those guys Changed the position because they made scheming against them headaches and nightmares. Even if you defeated them you could just play them like any other qb.. they needed their own specific template. I don't think you get to Cam Newton without Vick opening the door to the dual threat..  

You don't get to the rise of the RPO dual threat system we see all over the league now. Without Cam does RG3 go number 2 the following year? Guys like Hurbert who were seen as runners in college, Lamar jackson, Marcus Mariota, Jalen Hurts all these guys don't go as high as they did in the draft without the success of Cam Newton. That's what I mean by changed the position.

That's like saying Luke Kuechly changed the game, but he didn't.

Being unique doesn't change the game. You can only be credited with changing the game if others are able to duplicate what you did. And no, guys like Mariota and Hurts don't compare to Newton. Heck, those guys would make you want to not draft that type of quarterback.

As to the systems, you're seeing more of the other kind because very few colleges run pro style systems anymore. It's become much harder to find a prorated quarterback and it used to be so you have to adapt.

[firefox1234]

18 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

Lol Cam Newton wasn't good enough.

I want better than Cam Newton.

[SizzleBuzz]

Joe "Last to Know" Person says they are taking Malik the Streak at #6

(in his opinion)