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!

     

Panthers start making cuts to roster


Recommended Posts

47 minutes ago, shaqattaq said:

Obviously, all "stacked" comments need to come with the disclaimer "compared to last year". I said elsewhere that when your coming from historically shitty... average looks really, really good! All 3 of those positions are light years ahead of the 2024 season! And that's good enough for me...for now.

Yeah, compared solely to the 2024 Panthers, it does look definitively improved.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, MHS831 said:

Sorta related.  I just looked up a stat:  Success rates for NFL draft's second rounders.  I was surprised that it is 49%.  The success rate for first rounders is 58%.   Here success does not mean those that did not bust, it means that roughly half of the players selected in the second round become full-time starters at some point in their careers.  Busts do that too.  However, considering the fact that a first round talent is worth up to 1800 points (first overall pick) more than the first pick of the second round and as low as 350 points (last pick in first round) higher than the last pick in round 2, it seems there could be cases in which it would be to your advantage to trade out of round 1 and draft two or three second rounders for the value.  Of course, the elite players are likely to be gone, and some positions overwhelmingly suck after round 1 (traditionally, like QB or LT, for example), but if you need to find starters at positions like DT, G, LB, S, C, TE, RB, etc, there could be a time when you trade back for more starters.  I was surprised that the margin between rounds 1 and 2 was only 9%.   

While I realize that some of you sofa scholars are thinking, "Well duh?  Trading back gives you more players." as you wipe the Cheetos off your shirt.  Not the point.  The point is you have to consider the draft,the needs (and the number of them), and you need to scout the second and third rounds like you do the first, the cap, and the long-term impact.  If you can find 2 players with a 49% chance of becoming a starter, are you better off than drafting one player who has a 58% chance in the long term?

So if I traded away my first rounder for two second rounders (a trade most teams would make) regularly, when I got 10 second rounders (by trading 5 first rounders), 5 would be starters.  If I did not trade and kept my 5 first rounders, 3 would be starters.  Furthermore, their rookie contracts would be much cheaper than the 5 first rounders. 

math addition GIF

It's all true.  You just need ownership that buys in and understands the law of averages.  You could easily do this, make well informed selections, and then just get super unlucky 2 years in a row.  Now you're fired and someone else gets to inherit the players you picked.

I highly recommend this if you haven't watched it.  

 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

It's all true.  You just need ownership that buys in and understands the law of averages.  You could easily do this, make well informed selections, and then just get super unlucky 2 years in a row.  Now you're fired and someone else gets to inherit the players you picked.

I highly recommend this if you haven't watched it.  

 

There is a real science to it that involves math and if you don't know the language, you are history (see what I did there?) .  You need soldiers before you need generals--Morgan did a great job in this draft, imo.  He wanted to trade back--more picks.  Yes, most of the picks will not pan out, but most of the NFL starters were not first round picks.  Free agency is like dealing with a loan shark to make the house payment--you have to draft strategically.

  • Pie 1
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

    • Why? AI already taking jobs, running up power bills, drinking all the water and just bad for the environment but hey lest try to shoehorn another useless way to use it.          
    • I'm going rogue in R1 but there's so much confusion around us. Last year, we were going Walker or Williams and caught folks off guard with TMac. The previous year we LOVED Legette and it was no surprise when his name was called. This year, I think we nail three areas that weren't totally addressed in FA.  R1 - Kayden McDonald Full disclosure, I want Thienemann here, but think he goes before 19. Some might see an "overdraft" but McDonald unlocks so many people on our D. Having a DT the caliber of McDonald let's Lloyd, Wallace and the newly drafted Hill flood the offensive backfield. Also opens up Moehrig and our EDGES to eat. Lastly, it also removes all the pressure on DB to be the primary facilitator in the trenches and A'Shawn will be missed. I don't care about Turk. McDonald is the only true DT worth of a R1 grade and Morgan seals up our trenches here w/ a kid from a blue blood school. R2 - Anthony Hill Jr *trade up*  I love JRod, but think a smart team takes him at the end of R1 (Seattle, NE w/ two d-minded coaches). Hill, Jr is a beast and lost in the shuffle with all the Styles/Allen/Rodriguez hype. He and Lloyd with DB and McDonald up front and flanked by Scourton/Phillips is nasty.  R3 - Hecht/Lew/Center du jour Let's stop the madness with ignoring this position in the draft. We need one and should start normalizing the capital invested in our OL with someone on a draft contract. He won't need to start day 1, but I think the right selection will push for starter reps. R4 - Bud Clark Not sure if he's here in R4 where we pick, but would fit the "type" of FS/roamer that we need opposite Moehrig and Ransom. Allows us to run 3-safety looks and really keep teams guessing with personnel packages. R5 - Kendrick Law The kind of WR we need. IDK if he's any different than Horn, Jr or Metchie but Law could be a dart throw that brings a deep threat to our WR corps I'm guessing one of the R5 picks is used to move up in R2 along with a '27 day 3 pick.   Post-draft, I sign Njoku to bring in a vet at TE. I'm also keeping my eyes open for pre-week 1 team cuts for a young CB that we could bring in to maybe plan for Mike Jack's departure next year. Flame away.... I know the McDonald pick will not make people happy.  
    • Classic example on what AI is not currently good for.  It will create a baseline of statistics (which are fine but must be used alongside tape and other evals) and partner that with every rumor mongering dips*&$t on the web.  
×
×
  • Create New...