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!

     

Impact Rookies in Playoffs (Beyond Round 1)


Bear Hands
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, 45catfan said:

I liked: McConkey, DeJean, Fiske, Frazier, McMillan and Franklin.   All three of the WRs had better tape than XL, yet we traded up and took the guy that needed the most development.  GM, scouts and coaches can't help themselves when trying to 'mold' underdeveloped players. Take the freaking layup and draft the more polished player!

Exactly 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, thunderraiden said:

This is dumb, these are all the positions that were backloaded in the draft and would have been R1-2 talent in most drafts. This is why you see some of us this year going draft Tet or trade back and get an edge because the position is loaded at edge this year, yeah we need an edge but outside of Carter they are all the same and a decent Round 1 edge in this draft can be found in R2 much like CB was last year.

Not speaking positionally.  Every position group is represented in the list. 

And I'd say their value aligned much better with their selections and this current class is a bit thin overall.  Some decent edge rushers, sure, but I think Carter would have been ED3 or 4 last year.  I'd love to hear a good argument for him vs. Verse, Turner, or Latu as prospects.  I feel he's quite behind them from the standpoint of awareness, run defense, and actual pass rush moveset and technique.  His upper body technique is really spotty.  He's better than his predecessor in Chop, I'll give you that.   

This draft has maybe 12-15 R1 grades IMO.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bear Hands said:

I'd argue Wilson's risk is inherently different given he had a reconstruction & revision on his knee, he also had surgery on both shoulders and was an older prospect at 24.  Teams were hesitant, and at their own detriment, because he's balling out.  And he was still a top-100 guy so it's not like some Trey Smith type fall.  

A dare say a RB coming off an ACL injury is at higher risk than a LB to re-injure the knee due to cutting, shifting, stutter stepping etc...  That bore itself out.  I get the shoulder surgeries with Wilson, but he was/is healthy and had dropped to the point where the risk was worth the selection.  If he had a clean medical, Wilson would have been a late first rounder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

A dare say a RB coming off an ACL injury is at higher risk than a LB to re-injure the knee due to cutting, shifting, stutter stepping etc...  That bore itself out.  I get the shoulder surgeries with Wilson, but he was/is healthy and had dropped to the point where the risk was worth the selection.  If he had a clean medical, Wilson would have been a late first rounder.

If your beef is about us taking Brooks over him, then I can get that.  I'm explaining why teams were likely hesitant with him.  Great talent.  

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, 45catfan said:

I liked: McConkey, DeJean, Fiske, Frazier, McMillan and Franklin.   All three of the WRs had better tape than XL, yet we traded up and took the guy that needed the most development.  GM, scouts and coaches can't help themselves when trying to 'mold' underdeveloped players. Take the freaking layup and draft the more polished player!

 

Pre-draft analysis… Pre…Draft…

image.thumb.jpeg.28483a21c7039bc19ea117bc3535c4ed.jpeg

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

2 hours ago, 45catfan said:

McMillan and Franklin weren't first rounders.  Apples to apples, Ladd looks better.  While,yes, he went at the top of second round #34 overall, when we moved up--XL, Coleman and McConkey were the choices and we took XL.   The move up wasn't the main problem, the player that was the rawest of the three that we drafted was my gripe.

Coleman had very similar production to Legette in their respective rookie seasons, but in a much better offensive situation.  If you're acknowledging XL is the rawest of the three, then it doesn't make sense to compare them on the basis of their rookie seasons.  Ladd's floor and ceiling may be mere inches apart (which is still a very good receiver), whereas Legette has miles to go to hit his potential.  So it's all about his trajectory over the next 1-2 seasons.  We're not built to win now anyways, so if Legette can turn into a 1000-yard receiver by Year 3 then that's still a win in my book, even if it took him longer to get there than it did Ladd.

We have obviously been focusing on his drops this year, but also the timing between Bryce and Legette just seemed off at times.  He had his fair share of underthrown and overthrown balls, at a seemingly higher rate than with Thielen, Coker, David Moore, and Tommy Tremble.  I expect the two of them to build their chemistry in the offseason and the production should follow.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 45catfan said:

Only in round one.  Hurney nailed about every one of those.  His hit rate after day one  was ugly.

And that exactly demonstrates how vitally important slamming your first round pick is. Even with the lackluster later round record, the team almost always had enough talent to be competitive. 

He picked Kuechley when they already had Beason and Davis. It’s all about BPA.

In the first, you look for who is most likely to be an all pro, and you pick that guy. At worst, you may have improved a position of strength with younger and cheaper talent. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MasterAwesome said:

Coleman had very similar production to Legette in their respective rookie seasons, but in a much better offensive situation.  If you're acknowledging XL is the rawest of the three, then it doesn't make sense to compare them on the basis of their rookie seasons.  Ladd's floor and ceiling may be mere inches apart (which is still a very good receiver), whereas Legette has miles to go to hit his potential.  So it's all about his trajectory over the next 1-2 seasons.  We're not built to win now anyways, so if Legette can turn into a 1000-yard receiver by Year 3 then that's still a win in my book, even if it took him longer to get there than it did Ladd.

We have obviously been focusing on his drops this year, but also the timing between Bryce and Legette just seemed off at times.  He had his fair share of underthrown and overthrown balls, at a seemingly higher rate than with Thielen, Coker, David Moore, and Tommy Tremble.  I expect the two of them to build their chemistry in the offseason and the production should follow.

I suspect he's put it all together in year 4 to get a new contract.

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

    • And don’t worry about Bryce he will be great… Peyton Manning had a horrible rookie year too 😂
    • Nothing wrong with it at all until you start telling others they are bad fans or not fans. But you are the good fan because you never say negative stuff about the team.    I did many years of that type of uninformed fanning because there really was no info and coverage like there is with the internet.    I mean, I used to go to the store and get Street and Smith’s annual football issue. That was about the extent of what you could get if you didn’t live in a big city with sportswriters covering and reporting.  There was no video to look at or replay the games and if you didn’t live in the market you could only rarely see your football team play.    TI have fanned since being a kid in the early 1960s, and as late as 1995 - ‘97 I lived in Atlanta and good luck getting more than 3 or 4 games a year on TV. No radio either. No print coverage outside of an AP recap and box unless they played Atlanta.  People today that have always had the network connection don’t know.    I wasn’t very educated about the Panthers until I finally got internet. 
    • oh now that's what you call Mother Fiuggure fans the ones that always have this fierce protective shield around the team no matter if they win or lose  & to be honest there is nothing really wrong with being a Mother Fiugguer fan they just have a different meaning or sense of what a true fan really is                                                 ☺️ 
×
×
  • Create New...