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!

     

FRIDAY OUR DRAFT BEGINS! What positions do you want to be filled first


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, CRA said:

well, I don’t think it is either….i think need shapes the board.  And if needs shapes it, BPA isn’t really a clear thing. 

Panthers definitely last year let need and even draft runs overly dictate things IMO and influence them 

Canales today said that scheme influences "BPA", or "rankings" rather might be the better word. With this draft smokescreen stuff no one ever really finds out the truth behind the big boards and whether a team panics and reaches when the clock is ticking

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It makes sense. It needs to fit the need. I am ignoring subtlety, but you don’t hire a heavy metal band for a church picnic. I hope. 

Fitting needs has been a fuging problem with all the yearly changes in HC, DC, OC, they need to settle that down. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Center is very interesting.  If Corbett is telling the truth and he can play C, then I wonder "at what level" and "who is your backup?"   After watching the interview with Powers-Johnson, I would love his presence in the locker room. 

However, I actually had a dream about this, and we drafted Ladd McConkey and Mike Sainistil.  We drafted a LB in the third, but I don't know if that was part of my dream or if it was what I told my wife when I was cuddling with her after a traumatic nightmare.

I am kidding--I would actually like that draft.   Not sure if the Sainistil pick was a trade back or not.  Still feeling that we are going to trade back #33.  I see possibly Denver moving up for Nix, offering us a future second rounder and a third this season to do so. 

As for edge--I just think there is a bit of a gap between rounds 1 and late 2.   Best to wait and see if Elliss or someone like that drops.  Please, no RBs or TEs until day 3.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MHS831 said:

If Corbett is telling the truth and he can play C, then I wonder "at what level" and "who is your backup?"

Just because someone thinks they can play doesn't mean they actually can. There's a reason he's never been a starting center and it's because he isn't a center.

1 hour ago, MHS831 said:

Please, no RBs or TEs until day 3.

Depends on the TE. If Bowers is there at 33, yeah, I know it's not happening, but if he were there, you'd have to make that pick.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is based on need and the expected availability in the draft:

33.  Trade to get a second rounder next year and a third or fourth this year.  imagine we need a QB like Denver and are sitting there at #12 without a second rounder.  Say we drop to pick 50.

39.  Wide Receiver (a quality WR should be there---Pearsall, Coleman, Franklin, Worthy, Legette, or Worthy--all have a 50% chance or better to be there)  Do not be surprised if the Panthers pick Mike Saindristil. 

50.  Inside Linebacker: Cooper (Tex AM) or Wilson (NCSU).  The Panthers have a history of Dawg LBs and have not been successful without one. 

65. Nickel CB  (I would consider moving up for Sandristril here to about 55.  If not, CB Max Melton (Rutgers)

Of course, if an edge falls of a top C is there, I might go another direction--if Powers-Johnson is at #39, I take him.

101: This is the sweet spot for a backup Center: Nourzad (Penn St), Pran Granger (Georgia); We could find some fallen value at Edge:  Eliss (Utah), and Austin Booker (Kansas).  RB: Ray Davis (KY), Blake Forum (Mich)

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carolina chances of trading back 15%

Carolina trading  into the first to get their guy is 60%

Carolina trading for a very liked WR just went up %5(was 0 this morning but a new deal is getting worked on

Carolina stays is 0% 

Carolina know who they want but news coming in says he may not be available if they wait 

 

 

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

    • Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
    • Sanders is with Tom Brady brand and that's his mentor. The Raiders owner was with Sanders taking pics at a Vegas game together.   It doesn't take much to connect the dots that Vegas will be interested in Sanders as their franchise QB. Oh yeah and guess who hasa small ownership stake in the Raiders Tom Brady.   I guess this is just another made up Madden idea by me huh?
    • Bro I don't mind debating you, but did you really have to write all that to get your point across.   This isn't Madden. If you have the #1 pick you literally control your own destiny. If nobody wants to trade which I have a hard time believing they won't then you obviously take the best QB.   I think we will have suitors. If that's Madden then so be it.
×
×
  • Create New...