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!

     

Top 5 draft targets for positions of need


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, TD alt said:

BPA. BPA. BPA. I don't care what position it is. I know some don't agree, but that's life.

I understand and agree with the sentiment. That said I think the definition of “BPA” differs from one person/team to the next.  

I know people say they draft BPA but have a feeling there is some rationalization to getting to that point.

Personally I would have a formula based on raw assessment then look at other criteria such as team fit and roster impact (forecast number of expected game play, starts snaps etc…). 
 

Otherwise u could end up with 4RBs  backs and 3 CBs. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pejorative Miscreant said:

I understand and agree with the sentiment. That said I think the definition of “BPA” differs from one person/team to the next.  

I know people say they draft BPA but have a feeling there is some rationalization to getting to that point.

Personally I would have a formula based on raw assessment then look at other criteria such as team fit and roster impact (forecast number of expected game play, starts snaps etc…). 
 

Otherwise u could end up with 4RBs  backs and 3 CBs. 

I think you look at needs. The you get to the spot… if some guy fell and is there, and is so much better than your need options you can do two things. Take him, or trade back if possible to better match your need guy to his value. 
Last year we didn’t see the right value in our needs at our spot, and went BPA because we had room for a WR. Worked out great. If it were a LOT there who was BPA? May not have worked so great 

Edited by strato
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/24/2026 at 2:31 PM, Johnstonny said:

Tired of wasting picks on TE's...damn no in first round.

No kidding. 3 drafts and the only OL drafted was Zavala. We’ve drafted 8 WR/TE/RBs in the same 3 drafts and only 1 of the 8 has been an impact starter.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pejorative Miscreant said:

I understand and agree with the sentiment. That said I think the definition of “BPA” differs from one person/team to the next.  

I know people say they draft BPA but have a feeling there is some rationalization to getting to that point.

Personally I would have a formula based on raw assessment then look at other criteria such as team fit and roster impact (forecast number of expected game play, starts snaps etc…). 
 

Otherwise u could end up with 4RBs  backs and 3 CBs. 

I agree. The "problem" is that we'll never know exactly what the formula is. There is undoubtedly a "need" component in the calculus, but I seriously doubt that elite teams are in the business of drafting needs at the expense of drafting generational guys, or even guys they suspect will be good or solid players for years to come. And, as you suggested, "fit" plays a big part of that calculus as well. 

At this point, there are several positions that we could justify using day one and two picks on. I'm looking forward to see what they come up with. Moreover, the plan is always to use FA to set up the draft, so that one doesn't feel compelled to do something stupid based upon needs.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2026 at 10:28 AM, strato said:

Well I look at the option of a bust. Seen people burned too many times on these small school guys. The competition they face matters.  
 

I am better taking them later when the stakes are lower. 

Maybe...but that should be according to scouting them not the school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, TD alt said:

I agree. The "problem" is that we'll never know exactly what the formula is. There is undoubtedly a "need" component in the calculus, but I seriously doubt that elite teams are in the business of drafting needs at the expense of drafting generational guys, or even guys they suspect will be good or solid players for years to come. And, as you suggested, "fit" plays a big part of that calculus as well. 

At this point, there are several positions that we could justify using day one and two picks on. I'm looking forward to see what they come up with. Moreover, the plan is always to use FA to set up the draft, so that one doesn't feel compelled to do something stupid based upon needs.

Yeah well thats after they drafted for need to build up to elite.Its quite a luxury to aspire to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, TD alt said:

I agree. The "problem" is that we'll never know exactly what the formula is. There is undoubtedly a "need" component in the calculus, but I seriously doubt that elite teams are in the business of drafting needs at the expense of drafting generational guys, or even guys they suspect will be good or solid players for years to come. And, as you suggested, "fit" plays a big part of that calculus as well. 

At this point, there are several positions that we could justify using day one and two picks on. I'm looking forward to see what they come up with. Moreover, the plan is always to use FA to set up the draft, so that one doesn't feel compelled to do something stupid based upon needs.

I think there actually is a strategy to dealing with the "problem." At least IMO. Figure out the success rate of position by round, where the average of each is drafted, and which colleges produce contributing position players regardless of draft position. Then build your draft board like you always would based off talent. See how players fit into the draft predictor, and then track how it unfolds. All those little pieces can help you figure out who to take and where they might fall and get you on the front end of runs instead of chasing scraps. Fitterer could never figure this out and was the worst at reading a draft I have ever seen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, heel31ok said:

You draft bpa according to need 

I hope not. Needs change year to year. 

If we get to the 3rd round and there is a wide receiver we had graded in the 2nd, but our "need positions" are graded as 4th round or lower, I would really hope we draft the receiver. The fan base may flip out, but the goal is to bring in the best players and look out for the long term success of the team. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/26/2026 at 9:30 AM, NAS said:

JT Sanders has been such a disappointment.  I really thought he'd be good after his promising start to the rookie season. 

Guys being as good as they're ever gonna be on day one of their rookie seasons is quite a trend for a lot of Panthers draft picks.

Our drafting has sucked, but so has our talent development. 

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

    • As much as I despise Billy B, his philosophy on QBs is how I would approach things if I were a GM. You always keep looking for your next starter.  He has Bledsoe, who got injured and his backup ended up being the GOAT. Even while he had that going, he kept getting his next guy and developing them. When Brady got hurt, Cassel stepped in and went 11-5 and they missed the wild card by dumb luck. Who knows how far they would have gone if they had gotten in. Jimmy Gs career started in NE. There were others, but he always kept looking.  You can't be afraid to keep looking for your next starter, but it looks like we're afraid to look for more than a marginal one. If you're going to offer a $25m contract with incentives, that screams marginal QB. It also screams you're just a transition until we find our guy. After a 10 or 11 win season, he's not accepting that offer. And then you're in a Daniel Jones situation. Do you pay for a year of success and pray it wasn't a one year wonder?  To this point, Bryce has really produced nothing, yet for whatever reason, our FO has not even sniffed at the idea that we need a real QB room with real QBs. Dalton was never starter potential, Plummer was a joke. KP certainly isn't, neither is Grier.  Our approach to the QB room needs to be one of strength not fear. Bring in guys who can compete or who you think can compete. This is THE elite position, in an elite sport, paid premium salary, where production matters. Either you produce or you can lose your job. It's not mean, it's just the reality of the position.  And I'm really just tired of our candy ass approach to it. 
    • If you plug Bryce onto the Pro Bowl roster you might have a chance to compete for a SB. If he's surrounded by top tier talent with a top tier defense on the other side, a field flipping punter, and a kicker good from 60+ you might have a chance. But that means you basically have to recreate Saban's Bama in the NFL and that's impossible... and Bryce couldn't win a championship in that environment either. What the Panthers didn't realize when they got so obsessed with his "PG mentality" was that what they were looking st was a "barely checks the box PG". The basketball equivalent of Bryce would be an undersized PG with marginal athleticism who can make the basic plays but adds nothing to the team in terms of elevating the overall team. Not a great shooter, not a great defender, not a great driver. Just a guy who can basically get you into the offense and be a matador on defense. Basically a placeholder while you look to upgrade the PG position. 
×
×
  • Create New...