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!

     

If... AR drops to 9, do you take him then?

musicman

By musicman,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

musicman Proficient

musicman

Posted
Posted

Let's say the price is too high to move up to 1 or 3. "Look at what SF gave up to get Lance and he's done nothing in 2 years". It's a risk. If the Bears don't get a huge haul they can just take a great player - not a QB. Maybe we get in at 5 or 6 and take Levis as CJ Stroud and Young will be gone in the top 4.

But if you stay put and AR is at 9, do you take him and build around him, like a TE and WR in the 2nd through 4th? Is 9 to high for AR. He is a project and I can't see teams moving up to get him that high. If you look at Fields who dropped to 11 and he had more production on tape. Even if you resign Sam for a year, give Corral a shot to develop and AR some time, you can still have a playoff team with a good draft and a couple of good FA pick ups and then go for it all by 2024. 

I trust in Fitterer and the FO to do what is best so I'm just thinking out loud. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stan786 Mentor

stan786

Posted
Posted

Yeah I wouldn’t leave the draft without a first round caliber QB personally and I personally think ARich pretty developed in most of the things you can’t teach like pocket presence, athleticism, arm talent and I think his flaws are pretty correctable with good coaching.

I’d prefer to go up and get Young or Stroud and I think we do but I’m open to any of the top 4 really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jon Snow Grand Master

Jon Snow

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, top dawg said:

I wouldn't, but I'll be good if he's the pick. I'm going to trust management unless things start going sideways. We have some smart, thoughtful and experienced football people in the house. I'd be surprised though.

It's still hard for me to believe that 3 qb's go before 9. I'm not buying the hype around these guys and neither are most GMs and coaches.  I think the Raiders sign Jimmy G before the draft. Seattle and Carroll sticks with Geno because Pete does not want to develop a rookie at this stage in his career. I don't care what Pete  says it's just smoke trying to get someone to trade up with them for more picks.

  • Pie 6
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rayzor Grand Master

rayzor

Posted
Posted

if he is available and 9 and we are still there then yes, we take him. absolutely.

but...

1) he won't be there still

2) we won't still be at 9. if we're serious about getting a QB then we will be trading up. there won't be one at 9.

and settling for any of the QBs past the top 4 is not a sign of a team serious about upgrading at QB. 

  • Pie 6
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
shaq Mentor

shaq

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, *FreeFua* said:

Richardson’s floor is Seattle

Next question

Personally I think his floor is us at 9, Seattle just resigned Geno so the urgency to take a QB might not be there. But if Richardson dropped to 9 there’s no damn way he’s getting past us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CPcavedweller Veteran

CPcavedweller

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, Cdparr7 said:

I trade back and take Robinson or some other skill guy and use my 2nd on Hooker with a bridge QB.

Levis, Young, or Stroud by some miracle at 9 I would take them. 

Why would we take Hooker in the 2nd when we have Corral? If you don't take a QB in the 1st, you roll with Corral and re-sign Darnold. Why? If you draft a QB in the 2nd or later, they are probably going to be QB2, yet many would want a veteran to start. So then you end up with Veteran, Corral, Hooker.

You're wasting a pick when there is a ton of talent in the first three rounds of this draft.

1. Torrance

2. Darnell Washington

3. Zach Charbonnet

4. Mimms 

5. Re-sign Darnold and see if Caldwell can help develop Corral and Darnold enough to maybe have some trade bait in 2024 which you can then use to trade up to 1 or 2 to get Drake Maye or Caleb Williams.

Doing this you've developed the talent base of your roster enough to have the ability to trade future 1sts away to nab one of those two QB's who will be generational talents like Trevor Lawrence and Andrew Luck.

  • Pie 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

    • Mistuh Jones
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By Mistuh Jones · Posted

      This is gonna be longest six weeks ever 
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...