PFF - What would it take for Panthers to trade up for #1 pick

[Tr3ach]

54 minutes ago, rayzor said:

True, but how are you going to know if you don't swing? 

Seriously, what would you give up for Mahomes?

I agree to an extent but you cant swing just to swing.  Youve got to weigh the risk vs compensation. 

[TheMaulClaw]

57 minutes ago, WOW!! said:

Really because 2 in this draft were way better passer then Herbert in college… 

And If Physical talent is your point then Levi’s and Richardson are just as talented physically.. Ppl don’t remember Herbert was great at OU

Then just stay at 9 and draft Richardson.  Look I really want a QB now too, but at what cost?  People are acting like all we have to do is take a qb and we're ready to win the SB.  Trading 3 number 1's is the dumbest thing this franchise could ever do.  If we want to be Superbowl contenders then we should just trade back if our qb isn't there.  We could potentially have 4 picks in the first 2 rounds.  We grab our TE, DT, DE, and another WR. 

We go into next year with very little roster deficiencies with a ton of cap room, and potentially a top 15 pick. 

My point is, we need to have a roster strong enough to withstand 3 years without a 1st rounder before we make that kind of move.

 

[Kentucky Panther]

I would rather move up to 3. Unless the staff thinks there’s only one guy in this draft that can be a franchise guy. I reckon at that point go get your man. The other strategies we’ve tried lately have failed miserably. 

[WOW!!]

28 minutes ago, TheMaulClaw said:

Then just stay at 9 and draft Richardson.  Look I really want a QB now too, but at what cost?  People are acting like all we have to do is take a qb and we're ready to win the SB.  Trading 3 number 1's is the dumbest thing this franchise could ever do.  If we want to be Superbowl contenders then we should just trade back if our qb isn't there.  We could potentially have 4 picks in the first 2 rounds.  We grab our TE, DT, DE, and another WR. 

We go into next year with very little roster deficiencies with a ton of cap room, and potentially a top 15 pick. 

My point is, we need to have a roster strong enough to withstand 3 years without a 1st rounder before we make that kind of move.

 

Agree to disagree 

[LinvilleGorge]

2 hours ago, TheMaulClaw said:

It might get you Herbert. 

Zero chance. There would probably be at least five teams trip over themselves to offer that for him right now. Bidding would quickly exceed that.

 

 

[JawnyBlaze]

53 minutes ago, Kentucky Panther said:

I would rather move up to 3. Unless the staff thinks there’s only one guy in this draft that can be a franchise guy. I reckon at that point go get your man. The other strategies we’ve tried lately have failed miserably. 

If Chicago stays at 1, then I’d be ok just moving up to 3 even though I really prefer Stroud to Young. That might save us a 1st, or at least a 2nd to potentially get Young instead of Stroud. But if it’s looking like Chicago will trade to another team taking a QB, that team needs to be us.  The gap between Stroud/Young and Richardson/Levis is huge imo

[Stuart Smith]

3 hours ago, Jon Snow said:

You guys just don't get it. Any choice they make on a qb is a swing and a risk for the staff. This is their first time together and it sets the groundwork for the direction going forward. 

The options and opportunities are not ideal but they have to adapt to the situation if they are to continue this mad experiment. Any choice they decide to go with in a rookie qb is a swing regardless of round. It's a greater risk for the coach and his reputation but not so much for the team other than a wasted opportunity unless that swing is all you'll have for awhile. 

Going with a vet is a risk and a swing as well because they would be giving it one last bid for the vet qb with a proven veteran staff to make a run while developing a replacement assuming they have one.  It's a greater risk for the coach and possibly the team if the cost for the vet is crippling in the future. 

Any direction they end up going is one big swing at something that inevitably will not be good enough for the majority of this forum. It will be thoroughly entertaining. 

 

Well said. 

[weyco2000]

12 hours ago, ForJimmy said:

That's a fair question.  We would need to have a high rating on all 3 similar to the Niners when they traded up for Lance.  It's a double edged sword really because if we wait and see if our top guy drops and he does say another team like ATL gets interested in drafting that same pick at 3 and it turns into a very fast bidding war.  

Lance is the perfect example of what NOT to do. 

[ForJimmy]

1 hour ago, weyco2000 said:

Lance is the perfect example of what NOT to do. 

They gave up too much and probably picked the wrong one. 

[Kentucky Panther]

7 hours ago, JawnyBlaze said:

If Chicago stays at 1, then I’d be ok just moving up to 3 even though I really prefer Stroud to Young. That might save us a 1st, or at least a 2nd to potentially get Young instead of Stroud. But if it’s looking like Chicago will trade to another team taking a QB, that team needs to be us.  The gap between Stroud/Young and Richardson/Levis is huge imo

You think Houston would take Stroud over Young? I’m not so sure on that. I would feel pretty confident we get Stroud if we move to 3

[JawnyBlaze]

15 minutes ago, Kentucky Panther said:

You think Houston would take Stroud over Young? I’m not so sure on that. I would feel pretty confident we get Stroud if we move to 3

If they’re smart they would. But they’re not, so who knows. 

[Mr. Scot]

49 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

They gave up too much and probably picked the wrong one. 

Yup, which is a mistake I'd really prefer not to see us repeat.

[ForJimmy]

28 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Yup, which is a mistake I'd really prefer not to see us repeat.

Yeah but they were moving from lower than 8 so the cost will be less. We will have Fitt and Reich picking their QB which the board seems high on. If the Niners picked Fields or even Mac it could have been very different. They also weren’t crushed from giving up their picks. They are still a very competitive team that could have won it all without the QB injuries just 2 years later. 

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, ForJimmy said:

Yeah but they were moving from lower than 8 so the cost will be less. We will have Fitt and Reich picking their QB which the board seems high on. If the Niners picked Fields or even Mac it could have been very different. They also weren’t crushed from giving up their picks. They are still a very competitive team that could have won it all without the QB injuries just 2 years later. 

Still serves as a cautionary tale though...

Also FYI, in his recent mock Joe Person has us trading up to third overall. He mentions the possibility of trading to five given the connections between Fitterer, Morgan and the Seahawks front office but feels like three is safer to acquire one of the guys they really want.

For the record, his pick is Will Levis.