REPORT: per Albert Breer, Panthers have been most aggressive team in attempting to trade back

[mrcompletely11]

11 minutes ago, frankw said:

You don't make a deal just for the sake of making a deal when you already have the reputation of being a sucker. That was Scott Fitterer's motto. "In on every deal". Dude was even worse than Marty Hurney when it was all said and done. If Morgan follows in those footsteps and continues to draft poorly he will be sealing his own fate.

Well said

[PanthersNCSU]

1 minute ago, PantherKyle said:

The meat of this draft is 20 and 85. Don't even think having those two is much worse at all than 8. 

I do think there's some truth to this. If there's not a big gap between guys you have ranked 8th to 80th, why not add "something". Granted, I don't want to add crap for the sake of adding crap, but might be the FO's MO here in a bad draft and just needing to build depth and hopefully get lucky on a starter or two. 

Also why I've gone more towards position value be damned to a certain extent. If Warren is a blue chip guy for instance...I'd rather take the blue chip guy at TE than a DE that some teams think is a 1st rounder, others think is a 2nd rounder, etc. It's a weird draft, and I don't think a lot of the age old parameters necessarily work when looking at it. 

[frankw]

38 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

You never make a move unless you're willing to take that deal as the only deal. Relying on making a trade up after the trade down just increases your level of desperation and this organization really needs to stop acting out of desperation. It's why we keep getting hosed.

Trading down for the sake of trading down and then watching prospects from one position group fly off the board and trading back up in a panic was Scott Fitterer to a tee. Some people here have developed Stockholm Syndrome.

[countryboi]

I think the Panthers are feeling the effects of a draft that’s deep and balanced in the middle. They probably believe they can get a comparable player later while picking up extra draft picks in the process.

[Matthias]

I believe we should keep trading back, until we have the top 15 picks in the second round.

[PantherExpress]

[Tr3ach]

11 minutes ago, PanthersNCSU said:

I do think there's some truth to this. If there's not a big gap between guys you have ranked 8th to 80th, why not add "something". Granted, I don't want to add crap for the sake of adding crap, but might be the FO's MO here in a bad draft and just needing to build depth and hopefully get lucky on a starter or two. 

Also why I've gone more towards position value be damned to a certain extent. If Warren is a blue chip guy for instance...I'd rather take the blue chip guy at TE than a DE that some teams think is a 1st rounder, others think is a 2nd rounder, etc. It's a weird draft, and I don't think a lot of the age old parameters necessarily work when looking at it. 

This is exactly how im thinking, who would we take at 8 that we know 100% wouldn't be there at 14 or 15?  After the top 4 or 5 players there are a good 10 or 15 players that all feel really similar grade wise.

[L-TownCat]

Who keeps telling the media what we’re doing?  Could they maybe stfu?

[XClown1986]

To me, this says we have a specific target in the 2nd and we want more ammunition to go get him. 

Edited April 23 by XClown1986

[TheSpecialJuan]

23 minutes ago, countryboi said:

I think the Panthers are feeling the effects of a draft that’s deep and balanced in the middle. They probably believe they can get a comparable player later while picking up extra draft picks in the process.

100%

[TheSpecialJuan]

https://x.com/nfldraftscout/status/1915142517906870520?s=46&t=xeIgh_-Vr2aKxBkBJdfnKA
 

Walter Nolen if we stay at 8

[Aussie Tank]

The team obviously has a good amount of players with similar draft grades. So they're happy to take a little hit on the trade calculator to add the same level prospect in thier eyes and extra draft capital. Plus they will save a couple bucks on the 1st rounder sliding back in the draft 

Edited April 23 by Aussie Tank

[Waldo]

It's not desperation to see the reality of the situation and take a discount. Again, a 3rd would be fine but a 2nd would be best. I'd also be fine with their 3rd and flipping 2nds if they have an earlier 2nd.

[ForJimmy]

10 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

But my point is that it's a much more difficult draft to predict who will still be there after a trade back.

For example... look at the Lions draft from a couple years ago when they took Gibbs and I think a LB in the 1st and then LaPorta early in the 2nd.  They traded back and then still "overdrafted" the guys they were targeting, and they were able to do that because it was an "easier draft to predict" so they knew the guys they really wanted would still be there after the trade back.

This draft is going to be so unpredictable that a player we might think would still be there around pick 20 and the reason we'd want to do the 2 for 1 scenario you're talking about, could end up getting scooped up well before that.  

That's why I'd rather just take the guy we feel the strongest about, make sure we get them, and call it a day, not play chicken with ourselves and pray the 1 (or small handful of guys we like the most) player is still there when we're back on the clock.  To me, that is a better way to make sure the player we draft in the 1st will pan out, because we're taking someone we feel the strongest about, not "settling" for guys we like to get an extra pick out of it.

It's all about our big board.  If pick 6-100 have a small variance then you take the more picks.  That's why many teams want to trade back and less are wanting to trade up in this draft.  Obviously if you are sold on one player like you are suggesting you just take him, I just have the feeling we are sold on any of them yet.  They all have some red flags.