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 on Cowboys Board

stirs

By stirs,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

aussiePanther Newbie

aussiePanther

Posted
Posted

So they had Star ranked third best DT?

 

They did, but they ONLY ranked players they knew they wanted on their team.

Due to the players they already have and their switch to a 4 -3, Star is the only pure NT listed, the other DTs are stronger UT.

 

^ This from another Panther related review of their board

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jdpanther5 Newbie

jdpanther5

Posted
Posted

I actually find this quite interesting. Everyone gave them crap for the Center pick (myself included), but they actually had Frederick listed as a second round pick. The problem was that all 18 of their first round graded guys went ahead of them (as well as some 2nd round grades) and Frederick was the BPA on their board.

 

Though what's odd is that they didn't follow this strategy throughout, since after Frederick Terrance Williams was their next highest ranked player and he was there at their second pick, but they passed on him for Escobar (though they did still end up with Williams in the 3rd). They also let Barkley and Nassib slide to the 4th despite having 2nd round grades on them.

 

I understand it's situational, but why even rank guys so high if you're not gonna draft them when their available for your next two picks? Instead they took J.J. Wilcox, whom they only had a 3rd round grade for. It makes sense for them to amend the BPA philosophy and not take a QB in the 2nd or 3rd, but why not do that in the first as well and not take a center?  :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gabeking Newbie

Gabeking

Posted
Posted

I actually find this quite interesting. Everyone gave them crap for the Center pick (myself included), but they actually had Frederick listed as a second round pick. The problem was that all 18 of their first round graded guys went ahead of them (as well as some 2nd round grades) and Frederick was the BPA on their board.

Though what's odd is that they didn't follow this strategy throughout, since after Frederick Terrance Williams was their next highest ranked player and he was there at their second pick, but they passed on him for Escobar (though they did still end up with Williams in the 3rd). They also let Barkley and Nassib slide to the 4th despite having 2nd round grades on them.

I understand it's situational, but why even rank guys so high if you're not gonna draft them when their available for your next two picks? Instead they took J.J. Wilcox, whom they only had a 3rd round grade for. It makes sense for them to amend the BPA philosophy and not take a QB in the 2nd or 3rd, but why not do that in the first as well and not take a center? :lol:

The real strange thing is they had Floyd as a top 5 guy and they had him sitting there at 18 but they traded down to get the center... Talk about sticking to your board lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jdpanther5 Newbie

jdpanther5

Posted
Posted

Yeah I didn't even think about them trading down. So they were sitting at 18 and had exactly 18 guys ranked as first rounders, so they would get one of their first round guys regardless (would've have the option of Floyd, Rhodes, Patterson, Eifert, and Werner). Basically they planned their entire board (well, the first round) around their 18th pick...I'm thinking you should consider other options (a la, a trade down) when filling out these things, but that's just me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • kungfoodude
      Down year for QBs

      By kungfoodude · Posted

      I took a look at 1990 to 2025(so far). It's an interesting look. In my eyes, I don't think there is a huge difference in the rushing output or attempts over that span. The maximum difference in the attempted rushes over that massive of a span of time was only 2.4 attempts/game. Attempts/game has been rising for the past few years but that isn't the biggest difference, it's the efficiency of those runs that is actually at historic highs over that timespan. Look at YPA averages. The same general thing happened a few years ago with the passing game. Although the range of attempted passes per game is significantly higher in this timespan(5.8 attempts/GM), it's also the efficiency of these passes that has gone up considerably over that era(but peaked a few years ago).  I don't think we are reverting to a "previous era" of offense in terms of the rushing attempts vs. passing attempts. I say that because with all the rule changes, it's sort of impossible for that to happen. What you are seeing is more likely an adjustment to the defensive changes that came about to stop the explosive passing offenses that had developed. These changes haven't led to an inordinate amount of rushing versus passing(although that ratio has dropped) but it HAS led to much more explosive rushing output as evidenced by YPA ticking up since 2018.
    • csx
      Go after Shedeur this offseason.

      By csx · Posted

      And nobody was more coddled than Sanders. HoF dad who became a coach just to escort his kids through college to the NFL. 
    • Jon Snow
      Week 14 - Other NFL Games

      By Jon Snow · Posted

      The Chiefs have a, I have enough rings and I don't care anymore problem. 
×
×
  • Create New...