Best chance of finding a QB?

[AU-panther]

Which scenario would you prefer, or do you think has the best chance of producing a franchise QB for the organization?

First of all, let's assume QB1(we will say Stroud) you have to trade up to #1 to get.  Cost of trade up will be this year's 1st and 2nd, plus next year's 1st and 2nd and 2025 1st.  Let's assume QB4(we will say Levis) has a good chance of making it to #9.

So, what is more likely to produce a franchise QB?  

Stroud this year, or Levis and Hooker (or Tanner) this year, a 1st and 2nd round QB next year and a 1st round QB in 2025?  Basically, Stroud or 5 swings at other 1st and 2nd round QBs in this year and future years.  

Also, if you want to make the argument you wouldn't draft QBs in back-to-back years you could draft Levis this year, then a different QB in 2025 and 2027 and you have still wasted the same number of draft picks as trading up for Stroud.

Fans and organizations tend to fall in love with one guy and then convince themselves that they are 100% correct on that guy but history tells us otherwise.  I've been saying for years that you have to gamble when it comes to QBs but I don't know how much.  Will be very interesting to see how it plays out.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Basbear]

ALL of the above.

 

Honestly I feel the best way is to have ANdy Reid, ala great QB coaches. First time in panthers history, they do now... 

 

 

[LinvilleGorge]

45 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

 

Fans and organizations tend to fall in love with one guy and then convince themselves that they are 100% correct on that guy but history tells us otherwise.  

Does it though? There will probably end up being one of these guys who ends up standing head and shoulders above the rest. What may seem like a difficult decision now will probably end up being a no brainer in hindsight.

[RenoCarolina]

Best chance is to make offer to Lamar. Not saying that is going to happen or that we could afford it. But you can’t deny it is the best chance. 

[JawnyBlaze]

Stroud. Next year and the following years firsts will probably be even later anyway. 

[WUnderhill]

46 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Does it though? There will probably end up being one of these guys who ends up standing head and shoulders above the rest. What may seem like a difficult decision now will probably end up being a no brainer in hindsight.

Imagine trading away Cam Newton for Jake Locker, Andy Dalton, Brandon Weeden, Brock Osweiler, EJ Manuel, and Geno Smith. Surely there’s a better chance of one of those guys working out than a legit blue chip prospect!

[Brooklyn 3.0]

Hey look, a QB drafting thread! FINALLY. We've needed one!

[CPantherKing]

Trade down. Build a team. Load up the roster with 4 QBs that have been developed by championship coaches.

Last year was the miracle method ala 1999 Rams. This year is no clear 1st round franchise QB for a dynasty so load up the stable with coachable QBs and build the team ala 1992 Packers.

Grab up 4 QBs (Brett Favre 2nd rd trade, Ty Detmer 9th rd, Mark Brunell 5th rd, and Kurt Warner UDFA). Round up overlooked prospects and let the QB gurus do their work (Holmgren, Reid, Gruden, and Mariucci). Pass on the Klinglers (Levis/Richardson) pass on the Maddoxs (Stroud/Young). 

Trade down and build up the defense or find freakish receivers in the 1st round.

[SmokinwithWilly]

1 hour ago, RenoCarolina said:

Best chance is to make offer to Lamar. Not saying that is going to happen or that we could afford it. But you can’t deny it is the best chance. 

It all depends on what we have to give up to get him and our ability to build around him if we do. The downside is if we do make an offer he'll accept, it has to be bigger than what Baltimore is willing to pay or they just say thanks for doing the work for us. I'd guess that will be a full guaranteed contract or damn close to it. 

Lamar is a franchise QB but the Ravens are willing to let him walk. That doesn't happen without reason. It's our FO job to figure out that reason, calculate the risk, and determine if the reward is worth it. That's all it really comes down to. 

[AU-panther]

16 hours ago, WUnderhill said:

Imagine trading away Cam Newton for Jake Locker, Andy Dalton, Brandon Weeden, Brock Osweiler, EJ Manuel, and Geno Smith. Surely there’s a better chance of one of those guys working out than a legit blue chip prospect!

or trading away Baker and having to settle for Allen the following year.  Works both ways.

and honestly Cam was different, we didn't have to trade up.  I'm taking about the amount of risk that you have to incur when you package picks.  For example, the Rams traded up for Goff.  They could have stayed put and hoped Wentz or Goff fell to them, if they didn't, they could have used one of their second-round picks that they traded away for a QB like Hackenburg, who didn't work out, but then they still have their first the following year to pick Mahomes.

 

[AU-panther]

17 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Does it though? There will probably end up being one of these guys who ends up standing head and shoulders above the rest. What may seem like a difficult decision now will probably end up being a no brainer in hindsight.

All 29 times that NFL teams traded up to draft a quarterback (espn.com)

in hindsight maybe but here are 29 times teams thought they were so sure they were willing to not only trade up but often overpay and as you can see they were often wrong.

Even when it looks like they were right, like Houston trading up for Watson (ignoring the off-field issues) if they hadn't traded up, they would have kept their following year pick they could have drafted Allen with.

I'm not saying I'm totally opposed to "going and getting your guy" but there is a risk/reward aspect you have to look at.  Fact is none of these guys are sure things.  Also, Cam had a lot better risk/reward profile because we didn't have to trade up for him.  If we would have been wrong, we were not out any future picks.

What's the maximum you would give up to go to 1, I think there is a point that we would all say, "no thank you".  

 

[LinvilleGorge]

17 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

if they hadn't traded up, they would have kept their following year pick they could have drafted Allen with.

Could have. We could have drafted Justin Fields. We could have drafted Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers or Patrick Mahomes. But we didn't.

[SmokinwithWilly]

17 hours ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

Say we trade 3 1st to move up to #1.

 

Worst case scenario the QB we draft is a bust. It takes about 3 years to see what you truly have at QB. By that time we will have control of our 1st rd pick again.

 

Best case scenario we hit on the QB and have our franchise QB for the next 10+ years.

 

It's a gamble im willing to take because we have failed repeatedly taking on other teams used QB's.

It's easy to say gamble when it's not your career on the line. That's why we have to evaluate so thoroughly. If they do all that evaluation and feel one of these guys is head and shoulders above the rest and is worth it, then by all means go for it. If there's 3 that they feel are all about the same, you have to reevaluate that willingness to trade to 1. If Fitts trades up and this QB busts, he's likely out of a job. I'm sure that's playing back there in his mind somewhere in all of this.

I really want to develop our own QB. But if there's anything all these trade up for top QBs has taught us, it's that it's not about getting the first one, it's about getting the right one. For the first time, I actually have confidence we can draft AND develop a QB.