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!

     

Restocking with just Pick #39?


chknwing
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, Tbe said:

The odds of a 2nd rounder to develop into a starter is 33%. A high 2nd is more like 40%.

The odds of a 3rd drops to 16%.

The math doesn’t favor those trades.

Are we talking starter level player or pro-bowler? I read one article has has picks 31-40 having a 24% chance to net a pro-bowl level player. After that it drops to about 16-18% for 40-70.

Either way, I want the Panthers to take the best player available and only consider trade backs if their board does not match the value of their pick.

It's just a poor strategy to go into the draft with the attitude of acquiring picks instead of talented players.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Krovvy said:

Are we talking starter level player or pro-bowler? I read one article has has picks 31-40 having a 24% chance to net a pro-bowl level player. After that it drops to about 16-18% for 40-70.

Either way, I want the Panthers to take the best player available and only consider trade backs if their board does not match the value of their pick.

It's just a poor strategy to go into the draft with the attitude of acquiring picks instead of talented players.

1st round - about 50% of players drafted in the 1st round developed into solid NFL starters.

2nd round - about 33% of players drafted in the 2nd round developed into solid NFL starter. From here, it dropped by 50% per round.

3rd round - about 16%.

4th round - about 8%.

5th round - about 4-5%.

6th round - about 2%.

7th round - about 1-2%.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, chknwing said:

In my little fantasy world, would it not be crazy to use pick #39 to trade down as many times as possible in the 2nd for a haul of 3rd round picks to restock the team with?

<insert Specialjuan tweet here>

Depends on who is on the board. We need cheap promising starters first and foremost. If there is only potential backup or developmental projects left then I'm open to it.

Edited by Jon Snow
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Tbe said:

The odds of a 2nd rounder to develop into a starter is 33%. A high 2nd is more like 40%.

The odds of a 3rd drops to 16%.

The math doesn’t favor those trades.

carolina doesnt draft well, they need more shots to try and hit on something

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, chknwing said:

carolina doesnt draft well, they need more shots to try and hit on something

That's true but roster spots themselves are an asset. If you're throwing darts at a board and loading the roster with unknowns it can be a net-negative at some point.

It really depends on the rest of free agency.

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Give me Mitchell Evans over T Sanders in this run heavy offense any day of the week. 
    • What's up gents, the OGs remember me, the guy who single-handedly gave the Panthers the greatest uniform in history moniker. Not too long after that I got involved with Pro Football Focus (pre-Collinsworth acquisition) and ended up taking backseat here to preserve some objectivity. But from a distance I noticed a lot. After the end of the Cam era this place devolved into the most un-fun, petty, negative cesspool of whining and bitching that has ever graced the internet. The worst part of it all is that the level of discussion turned into the most ill-informed, hot-take, unnuanced crap, rife with people talking out of their posteriors as if they have any clue about what they are watching. Once you get into the professional side of the sport and actual film rooms, you start to understand there's an absurd number of moving parts to pretty much every snap and the details you are privy to are truly only half the picture. The absolute most important thing I learned from being part of professional level football analysis is that quarterbacking is literally the most intricate and difficult position in all of professional sports, and that the NFL itself is struggling to develop any workable model that allows them to understand what makes one succeed vs what makes one fail. Because of this paradox it has also made the quarterback position itself grossly overvalued from a fan and media standpoint, creating an absurd fixation on the results delivered by a single player who has to rely on the contributions of everyone around them. This also drives the dreaded inflation of QB salaries that inevitably cause even elite teams to lose key talent all to pour cash into the one player supposed to be able to single-handedly elevate the entire team (and defense and special teams and coaching and ownership by some mysterious proxy), yet without those same players even talented teams can wander the wilderness searching for the right guy to take advantage of their talent window. The discussions the last few years around Bryce has personified this insanity, as this board has devolved into some sort of electronic civil war between the hyperbolic Young supporters and the vitriolic Bryce haters. The reality, like practically everything in this world, is somewhere in the middle. He has traits that can absolutely elevate a team with creativity, play recognition, off-arm angle throws, mental toughness, etc. He's also physically limited, with mostly "good-enough" qualities for most situations that a professional quarterback is asked to do, and will never be an overpowering physical force like pre-injury Cam. But "good-enough" physicality represents a large majority of championship-winning quarterbacks, even in the modern era. There's a reason the corpse of Peyton Manning took the chip from elite physical specimen Cam, because the team surrounding him was talented enough to get him there, while we all know Cam was the driving force of that 2015 team. That's no knock on him, that's just how the game of football tends to work: the more complete team usually wins. The summary is this: if this team lives or dies solely on the performance of its quarterback, then it is absolutely a paper tiger even if he plays brilliantly week in and out. There are no superheroes in this sport, there are only conduits that proxy the collective efforts of much of the team around them. And no one alive can tell you how the position is played perfectly, it's all a confluence of circumstance and what unique collection of traits each player brings to the position, which can never be truly recreated season after season, even for the same player on the same team. If this place remains a raging hellscape of idiotic hot takes I will happily remove myself again and do something more productive for yet another decade, but maybe's there hope that we can all get back to the old adage, and keep pounding.
    • Really impressed how the bottom six have looked the past couple games
×
×
  • Create New...