Joe Person predicts a trade back

[BrianS]

I can't understand a trade down at all.  Picks 33 and 39 should, on most teams, be starting quality players.  We can use those.  Once you get to the third round, you don't find as many starters.

[RumHam]

i mean this is tepper and he's done this every single season since being here and loves to throw poo away and draft the wrong people.

[CRA]

8 minutes ago, top dawg said:

At our position, and with our positions of need, arguably there is not a lot of difference between the beginning of the second and end of the third.  Whether we trade back will depend upon who is available at the time, and what is the compensation being offered by another team. It's all about perceived and real value

last 33rd pick was essentially dealt for a 3rd rounder.  I just want them to draft BPA at 33.  Trading more times than not has you kicking yourself in hindsight IMO.  

we need instant offensive help if we are going to salvage this Bryce pick.  That should be the priority.  Seeing if Bryce can remain the dude. We should be able to get skill talent that can see the field in this draft on O.  

[OneBadCat]

We can't afford to trade down and dilute the talent pool. We need to take BPA that can address our needs at 33 and 39.  Those selections are at a sweet spot for 1st round grades to fall.

Edited April 12 by OneBadCat

[LinvilleGorge]

You have what, 18 hours or so to mull it over? You'd be crazy not to field the calls and consider the offers. If I'm a team wanting to move up though, I'm honestly trying to get back into the bottom of the 1st for that 5th year option. But our phone is gonna be ringing. Pick it up.

[Bear Hands]

It's situation dependent. 

I'd prefer we stand pat at 33 if any of the following are available:

JPJ/Barton/Frazier, Chop, Arnold/DeJean/McKinstry, Mitchell/McConkey-- those are 9 specific players where the value add for me is too good to pass us.  

If anything, I would turn around after landing an impact starter, and trade 39 into the 40s on a package deal.  Meaning - 39 & 141 to, for example JAX for 48 and 96 and maybe a late 2025th (checks out chart wise)  

So, land another third, but if you like the second rounders, are still assured a guy in that range.

Scenario could look like:

33(2), 48(2), 65(3), 96(3), 101(4), 142(5), 240(6)..and an added pick in 2025

That 48 could be Ja'Tavion Sander, Edge Cooper, Kneeland, Polk, etc. 

[Navy_football]

I doubt any team gives the Panthers the true value of passing on a McConkey or AD Mitchell or Chop Robinson or JPJ. 

The draft is quality over quantity. Quantity doesn't mean jack if guys aren't contributing on games days. 

And if a team REALLY wanted a player enough to give up anything remotely valuable enough (to me that would be a future first/second and their current second and third), they would have drafted him with their 1st round pick. Not waited until the 2nd round. 

Too many WRs will be available, to a team devoid of WR talent, to start playing around with draft capital. 

[MHS831]

Trading down is usually not a good thing.  You could argue that we traded down to get Jon Beason back in the day.  That turned out alright, didn't it?  The player we traded away?  Revis Island.

Having just thought of one example and applying it to every possible situation as some are prone to do, I will consider this if the following conditions occur:

1.  Since the WR depth is deep, multiple WRs expected to be available at 33 will be available.

2. Any trade backs include a third rounder or higher this season or a first or second rounder in 2025 (I see this draft and laying the foundation, and if we can fill the gaps in the 2025 draft, it could be worth a drop.)

OR

3. Any trade back includes a quality player at a need position in addition to swapping picks this season.

It all depends on the board.  For example, would you surrender Ladd McConkey if you could get Ricky Pearsall and Payton Wilson in return?  

This is a DEEP draft with a lot of first round grades---the Panthers have many needs and other teams know that and will want to move up.  In my opinion, the picks 33-40 will include names that had been projected to go in round 1.  After 40, the talent is pretty level until around pick 70.  So if we could trade 33 for pick 42 and 70, for example, we would have 39, 42, 65, and 70.  WR, C, LB, CB.

However, any GM without a first rounder who enters a draft looking to fill 5 spots is a dreamer.  We should really focus on our top 2 immediate needs ( WR,  C or TE) and the rest are depth.

[PNW_PantherMan]

Trading down is a very easy way of getting absolutely nothing for your draft picks.  See Scott Fitterer for a great example.

Edited April 12 by PNW_PantherMan

[hepcat]

The fact that Mingo is already being considered a bust is such a disappointment. They draft a 2nd round WR last year, they're drafting one again, this team is such a f*cking nightmare to be a fan of. 

[Jon Snow]

You don't trade a quarter for 2 dimes. Just stay put.

[top dawg]

Why does everyone prefer Chop? Robinson might end up better.

[Jay Roosevelt]

So it's official; we're not trading back in the draft.

[PNW_PantherMan]

10 minutes ago, hepcat said:

The fact that Mingo is already being considered a bust is such a disappointment. They draft a 2nd round WR last year, they're drafting one again, this team is such a f*cking nightmare to be a fan of. 

I'd say its too early, and it is.  But the dude was honestly one of the most awkward players I've ever watched.  His body movements and sense of direction were puzzling at times.  The only recent player I can think of that looked awkward like that was Chuba Hubbard as a rookie.  But, he made rookie Chuba look like a natural.