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!

     

Joe Person predicts a trade back

Jackie Lee

By Jackie Lee,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

WhoKnows Grand Master

WhoKnows

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, CRA said:

Panthers shouldn't trade down.  We should be drafting BPA at 33 and then 39 (my preference is O).  Not watering down those picks in search of more.  33 is basically a 1st rounder and we don't have ours.  Trading it to pick up a 3rd just ain't worth watering it down. 

I agree. Unless we are getting better picks like 39 for a 2025 1st, no thanks. We’ve seen how our idiot GM traded back to cover his horrid trades and we just got lessor players overall. Just because we don’t have a 2025 2nd doesn’t mean we have to trade way back to get one.

We need impact above average to elite starters. We have 33, 39 and next year’s 1st. We can’t blow those picks so let’s get the top players we need. Hopefully, we don’t F it up and actually get additional starters in the 3rd+. 

  • Pie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
strato Grand Master

strato

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, PantherKyle said:

Trading back is not a bad thing in its entirety if you can draft well. That has been our problem. New GM. If he trades back I am open to it. More shots at good players is never a bad thing. Good franchises get good players later in the draft all the time.

I know this is true and wanted to see how that stands on rosters today but every roster I see gives no draft information so it is hard to really get the picture without putting some time in. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aussie Tank Grand Master

Aussie Tank

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, BrisbanePanther said:

No! Only trade back if a future 1st is on the table. Otherwise hang up the phone.

I’d take a player in a small move down. Hear me out say the Pats go MHJ in the first and we’re sitting there at 33 and Penix is there. So we don’t trade the pick to anyone else they swap 34 for 33 but they throw in Matt Judon because there’s talk they might cut him.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rayzor Grand Master

rayzor

Posted
Posted
43 minutes ago, PootieNunu said:

If we are dead set on taking XL with one of our 2nds we might as well trade down, he will still be there. 

I don't know, there are teams who are apparently pretty high on him.

He's one of those guys you're really excited about the potential or you're kind of meh over bc you see him as a one year wonder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DaveThePanther2008 Grand Master

DaveThePanther2008

Posted
Posted

If I am going to trade 33 and get a pick in 2025.  It will have to be a 1st.  There are going to be several offers for 33.  Those that put a 1st in the deal will get my vote.

Though we only have a couple picks in 2024 our focus should also include what is going to get us in the playoffs in 2025.   Having two first next year really gives us a better chance of reaching the playoffs.

 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stingray3030 Proficient

Stingray3030

Posted
Posted
On 4/12/2024 at 2:57 PM, CRA said:

but we do have last year to make educated assumptions off of. 

33 was traded last year.  For a team to go get a QB.  

so if it is similar to that, just draft the best WR on the board IMO. 

 

 

Well again you may be right - but you may not.  My point is there is no way to be sure because you don't know who is there at 33.  If only 4WR have been drafted it is different than if 6 have been (AD Mitchell/McKonkey vs Pearsall/Troy Franklin) - that can be a huge difference.  Also last year the deal was to move down to 41 and pick up next year's 3rd rounder....not bad.  Plus Nix and Penix are more coveted than Levis from most accounts so likely to get a better offer.  My point was alot of people are saying "yall are wrong we definitely should do this no matter what" when they have no context - contrary to the media's opinion, context matters ever time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SCO96 Veteran

SCO96

Posted
Posted

All of us were upset (and a bit embarrassed) to be to have the worst team/record in the NFL and head into the 2024 season without a first round draft choice after picking #1 last season. 

Now, we have the first pick in the 2nd round and people are actually in favor of trading down for more lesser picks. First round caliber talents are going to fall into the 2nd round....and we are not going to have to pay them a first round contract. 

Why on earth would you move down? I could see doing so if we had a stacked roster and was not in need of an immediate starter from this draft. That's not the case. Our poor drafts this decade resulted in Carolina having the least talented roster in the NFL last year. We should come out of this draft with starters with those first 2 draft choices. To be frank, even out first choice in round 3 should make a significant contribution to the team, even if he doesn't start immediately.

Until Morgan and the rest of the FO proves that they are sloid talent evaluators, they should take the bpa. On paper we have done a great job addressing a lot of holes via FA. No need to get cute with trade dowsn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SetfreexX Mentor

SetfreexX

Posted
Posted

We need to stay at 33, unless we also get a 1st next year to offset the absence of our 2nd round pick. IMO use 33, and 39 to bring in legitimate talent at - WR / C / Edge -- and CB if we don't sign / plan to sign Gilmore as a band-aid. 

We need to adding the best possible talent we can, trading back should be an option, not a foregone conclusion. 

 

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

    • kungfoodude
      The Hurricanes are never getting over the hump untill they spend money in the net

      By kungfoodude · Posted

      I agree. Two holes FTW!
    • csx
      How long do you feel it takes for a head coach to turn a team around?

      By csx · Posted

      Canales has his msjor issue not doing the obvious regarding running Dowdle but with an average QB we would be in the playoffs with an average QB. 
    • kungfoodude
      How long do you feel it takes for a head coach to turn a team around?

      By kungfoodude · Posted

      1. fug TikTak, I ain't clicking that stupid poo. 2. This is really very situationally dependent. Coaching is a huge part but sometimes you step into a scenario where a lot of building needs to happen that is largely out of your control. Recent examples(Last season's hiring cycle): 1. Ben Johnson Johnson chose the OVERWHELMINGLY best open coaching job due to a combination of solid ownership, a solid front office and the most talented roster of the open jobs from that cycle. Negatives were, insanely stacked division. Results have so far indicated that this coaching change has been a massive boost. 2. Mike Vrabel Vrabel went a different direction. He went to a franchise that has solid ownership, a mediocre front office and one of the worst rosters in the NFL. However, he has a track record of NFL head coaching success AND lucked into one of the easiest schedules in NFL history(I believe 3rd easiest). Even with that caveat, a clear indicator that coaching has been a huge boost. 3. Pete Carroll Carroll chose one of the NFL's most volatile franchises. Notoriously bad ownership, very bad front office and a terrible roster. But, Carroll is a HOF caliber NFL HC with success at every stop. At the moment, coaching has not been able to overcome the apparent obstacles. In fact, it's been a complete disaster to the extent that Carroll has already fired multiple coaches. One could certainly argue that pethaps Pete has lost his touch but regardless, this coaching change didn't result in a turnaround and Carroll's future there seems in doubt. 4. Aaron Glenn Glenn's first HC opportunity was a doozy. Near worst ownership, a mediocre front office(at best) and a talented core group of players on an underwhelming roster. This experiment has been quite the ride to date. Glenn's personnel decisions have seemingly led to multiple close game losses(2-5 in games decided by one score or less) and the FO decided to have a roster firesale prior to the trade deadline for a wealth of draft capital. The question will be if Glenn will be given the time to actually see this future draft capital realized, now that a significant chunk of the talented core is not longer there. Coaching has not made a difference but is the franchise now setting him up to fail further? 5. Liam Coen Coen picked a mixed bag. Terrible ownership, a remade front office he essentially had a hand in selecting(or at the miminum influenced) and a middling roster. The early results show promise even if the roster shows significant flaws(and Coen shows visible frustration with his "franchise" QB every Sunday). Could be close to turning a 4 win team into a playoff berth. Coaching has mattered. 6. Brian Schottenheimer This was resoundingly viewed as a bad hire but it's also under challenging circumstances. Bad ownership in the sense that the ownership is also the front office, a future Tepper dream I assume. Very talented but very flawed roster. The initial results have been...interesting. A Cowboys team that was a bad 7-10 after a previous streak of three 12 win seasons is now....mediocre? Couple that with wild roster changes prior to the start of the season and up to the trade deadline and it makes for an incomplete picture. It's not much progress but it doesn’t appear to be regressing either. TBD. 6. Kellen Moore Moore chose the most challenging of all openings. The Saints are in the midst of a simulateous roster teardown and attempted rebuild. Decent ownership, a mixed bag in the front office(great at evaluating draft talent, less so in free agency and in salary cap management). The Saints have been awful but, they were expected to be awful. To that note, they were net sellers before the trade deadline. It was reported that Moore secured an agreement that this is long term building effort prior to taking the position so his status seems safe even while the team flounders week to week. Difficult to grade this now as the entire scenario seems to be a long term strategy. TBD.
×
×
  • Create New...