Under No Circumstances Should We Trade a Haul for a QB/Pick

[NJPanthers89]

The Bears are not getting a first rounder for Fields, every team would wait them out knowing they won’t keep both QBs in that scenario .  Fields would probably go for a second rounder as the second the Bears draft his successor he is devalued and they have lost major leverage.

[USDepartmentOfSavagery]

19 hours ago, CBDellinger said:

Ughhhhh this silly line of thinking again… Josh allen went 7th, Mahommes went 10th while Baker and Sam went 1 and 3 overall.  
 

draft position doesn’t guarantee you a better prospect.  Its more about good scouting and a good situation for them to land it. 

It’s not about draft position lmao. It’s about not being in a position at all to draft a franchise QB. Chiefs traded a ton to move up for Mahommes by the way. Thanks for proving my point. 

[CBDellinger]

15 minutes ago, USDepartmentOfSavagery said:

It’s not about draft position lmao. It’s about not being in a position at all to draft a franchise QB. Chiefs traded a ton to move up for Mahommes by the way. Thanks for proving my point. 

They didn’t give up a ton.  It was a fairly reasonable trade. 
 

but yeah it not about position. It’s more about evaluation.  We see it time and time again, the best players don’t end up going top 5.

Edited January 12, 2023 by CBDellinger

[panthers55]

If we stay where we are we can land a guy like Richardson who is a big time talent. And if these offensive geniuses we are looking at are as good as advertised they should be able to maximize the potential of whoever we pick. We don't have to mortgage the farm for a top 2 pick. There will be good qbs at 9 just like most years.

[Bear Hands]

Drafting a stud is all circumstantial.  The teams drafting really high are mostly there for making poor draft decisions and missing on those QBs (and a bunch of other issues).  Sometimes they'll just get lucky and a Cam or Luck come along.  But otherwise, the teams that may have an eye for a QB can see a guy they like slip past those top slots and then boom.  They pounce after the promising dude gets past the Bears, Texans, Colts, Raiders of the world. 

You'll have franchises that are consistent, maybe in a down year/rebooting picking ~10-20 can target that trade up for a guy they like.  Exhibit A & B being KC and BUF.  

Wait and see is fine, but if there's a clear tier 1 and a tier 2 QB group on our board, and one of those guys is available after the Colts pick, I'd say, try and get something done.  

I'm a bit torn between what we'd give up moving to pick 3 (AZ) but think pick 5 could be a good spot.  Just depends.

 

[tukafan21]

5 hours ago, USDepartmentOfSavagery said:

It’s not about draft position lmao. It’s about not being in a position at all to draft a franchise QB. Chiefs traded a ton to move up for Mahommes by the way. Thanks for proving my point. 

Have you read any of my posts about Mahomes in this thread?

They gave up the 27th pick, a third rounder, and a future first rounder to move up to 10th in the draft to take Mahomes.

That's a borderline steal of a trade by KC before you even factor in what Mahomes became, just giving up a 3rd and a future first to move up 17 picks in the draft to be in position to draft a QB is ridiculous.

[mav1234]

6 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

Have you read any of my posts about Mahomes in this thread?

They gave up the 27th pick, a third rounder, and a future first rounder to move up to 10th in the draft to take Mahomes.

That's a borderline steal of a trade by KC before you even factor in what Mahomes became, just giving up a 3rd and a future first to move up 17 picks in the draft to be in position to draft a QB is ridiculous.

If you believe the draft value chart, Buffalo traded a pick worth 1300 for 680 (27th) + 136 (91) in 2017 and a first rounder in 2018 that if we assume average value (mid point of the 1st or 1000 in year of trade, halved to 500 since it's a year later) would be 500 for a total of 1316 or nearly spot in for exact value of the pick. In some ways the Bills may have bet on that 2018 pick being worth more than it was - it's actual pick at 22 meant it woulda been worth less (780) than mid-point of the round.

[BrisbanePanther]

5 hours ago, CBDellinger said:

They didn’t give up a ton.  It was a fairly reasonable trade. 
 

but yeah it not about position. It’s more about evaluation.  We see it time and time again, the best players don’t end up going top 5.

Exactly, and the Panthers organization has not shown the consistent ability to evaluate QBs. If we were KC, I doubt we make the Mahomes trade, for example.

I'd be totally comfortable for us to wait at 9 to land a great defensive player. We've consistently proven that we can do that. But a QB? Nope. Sometimes the simplest decision is the best one, and "sometimes better to be lucky than good" and if we're at #1 or #3 it's a lot easier to have the decision made for you. That's what this franchise needs for a QB. That's why I'm all for trading up (whether picks and/or players) to do so. When we've gotten cute trying to evaluate and outsmart the league for a QB, it's led to pieces like Armanti Edwards. You can even argue Darnold, where we totally bid against ourselves.

The irony is that we've mainly traded draft capital across our history...for defensive players. The only noteworthy offensive trade using draft capital that I recall may be Olsen. In fact, maybe the biggest example of trading up in the draft for a bust was for a defensive player, Everette Brown.