AU-panther

Its not the old way of thinking, its reflected in recent contracts. Positional value matters. An average LT at $8m a year is more valuable then an average C at $8m a year. An good LT at $8m a year is more valuable then an good C at $8m a year. These moves don't happen in a vacuum, you have to understand replacement cost.

I saw a tweet by someone we all appreciate and it got me thinking of what might be our realistic options to address the QB position. Lets assume sticking with Darnold isn't an option. I just don't see Rhule hitching his job to him. How are you hoping we address the QB situation this year. I'll add some specifics to the trades and a few extra choices to the above tweet: 1. Deshaun Watson for at least three 1st round picks? 2. Jimmy G for this years 5th and next years 2nd + LT@6 3. Kenny Pickett at 6, BC at LT, maybe FA guard. 4. Willis at 6, BC at LT, maybe FA guard. 5. FA QB (Mariota, Minshew, Winston, ETC) + LT@6 6. Trade down to around 15, draft QB (Howell, Ridder, or Correl), use newly acquired 2nd round pick on an IOL, and let BC play LT.

people need to stop with this. His contract is bad for us because we have to account for the signing bonus. For the team that trades for him his contract is actually pretty good. $8m for one year? Is that really too much for one of the better offensive weapons in the league. $20m for two years? If they keep him the entire time it works out to $11m a year for 4 years. How much did Robbie get? How much did Ian Thomas get? $11m a year isn't crazy for an offensive weapon that contributes in the passing game.

If you are spending the 6th overall pick you better know if he is scheme dependent or not. I'm not saying he is going to bust, my only point is if I'm picking that high I want all of the boxes checked, great measurables, great production, great attitude. The #6 pick is going to get a 4yr contract for almost $32m, you are tryign to reduce risk as much as possible. Also you have to account for positional value, at almost $8m a year he better a top 10 center from the start or you just lost value. The 11th highest paid center is at $7m a year. Where as $8m a year gets you the 20th highest LT. In a lot of ways drafting the center is riskier because he has to be so much better to justify the cap hit. If you draft a LT at 6, and pay him $8m a year and he is just average it still a good pick. If you draft the center at 6 and pay him $8m a year and he is average its a terrible pick. There is actually less margin of error in picking the LT.

in college he might be going against guys that are within 10-20 pounds of him on a weekly basis, in the NFL it might be 30-40 lbs. That might be the "cutoff" to cause him to be not as productive. and the guy he is going against has technique and skill also. He has great tape, and he might very well turn out to be a great pro. As an evaluator you are gambling on whether the player can transition to a more difficult level. If a player has ideal measurables that reduces the risk somewhat, now there are plenty of players with ideal measurables who fail, and plenty with bad measurables that succeed but here again you are just playing the adds, and when picking in the top-10 I would prefer to have every box checked. Also pretty much every evaluation I have read about him says he is going to be somewhat scheme dependent, do you even know what scheme we are running next year? What if we get a new coach that brings in a new scheme? Do you really want to spend a top 10 pick on a guy that is scheme dependent?

He defientaly went to a good situation for him, but it also exposes some of the weaknesses in the evaluation process. I've saw an article by an evaluator talking about it, scouts got caught up in how he was doing things and some of his faults mechanically and not what the actual results were. They started focusing on things they didn't like, such as throwing across his body or off of his back foot and lost track of what the actual results were.

Great points. For years accuracy was a big deal in evaluating QBs, one of those traits that a lot of people thought you couldn't really improve. Then Josh Allen proves everyone wrong and now everyone is looking for a "toolsy" QB. I really believe Allen helped Lance get drafted high last year and will end up helping Malik. Same with Mahomes, some of his fundamentals were terrible, evaluators dinged him for that, but his sucess helped a guy like Zach Wilson get to drafted. I'm sure Burrow's sucess will play into some team's evaluations of Pickett. Chasing exceptions is a risky proposition.

any team that trades for Burn's will do so based on his ability to get to the QB. We were talking about which player would be more valuable in general, not who got ran on the most. Poll 31 teams, all things being equal which player on our team would be the most desired?

He could turn out great. His college tape is great, but as with any player you are trying to forecast if they can transition that same success to the next level, measureables help you calcualte that risk, same as level of competition. In the top-10 I'm trying to mitigate my risk as much as possilble, I want every box checked. If a player has to become an all time great to be worth a pick it might be too risky of a pick to start with. What if he becomes average? What if the LT you pick becomes average? Which is one is worth more? The LT easily. In some ways the LT is a lot safer pick because he doesn't have to be as good to justify his draft spot and subsequent cap hit. Well said. Your O-line just has to be good enough to allow your offense to be good. Would you prefer Joe Burrow behind our line or Sam Darnold behind Dallas' line?

This ^ Look at free agency every year, always seem to be more quality WRs than edge on the market, and they also tend to go for less. Also look at the recent drafts, succesfful WRs seem to be coming into the league at a greater rate than other positions, not to mention they seem to a position that gets up to speed quicker. Being able to get to the QB might be the most sought after and expensive skill in all of the NFL, outside of playing QB). Good teams will maximize what he does well and minimize what he doesn't. Not to mention D-lineman tend to substitute more than other positions so that alone allows you to specialize somewhat with him. All things being equal Burns is easily our most desirable trade piece. Of course, there might be a single team that has a much greater need at WR but overall it would be Burns. On a side note, all of this talk about us having to pay part of CMC's salary is most likely wrong. Everyone thinks his contract is bad, but for the next team trading for him its not. We have already paid his signing bonus. The most a team would be responsible for is one 1yr at $8.4m, his next year's aren't guaranteed in anyway. If he stays healthy and plays great then they can keep him for 3 more years at around $11m a year which is still not to bad for a premier playmaker, but they don't have to keep his at all. They can just view him as a one year rental for $8.4m Is there a contending type team out there what would pay CMC $8.4m for one year. Some team that thinks they are close to a Super Bowl? The Bills? Washington? How much are we paying Thomas? Robbie?

So Pickett?

Making room for Jimmy G???

Does it matter? Does he drop? Would you be ok spending pick 6 on a guy that has to be an exception?

my guess is Ron still gets fired and good chance we still end up with Rhule. What do you think would have happened?

Even if nobody trades in front of us we lose nothing by pretending we want a QB.

Just based on some quick searching, seems like his foundation is WCO: Can Ben McAdoo Fix the Panthers Offense? - Sports Illustrated Carolina Panthers News, Analysis and More How Ben McAdoo’s New Offense Will Fly | PFF News & Analysis | PFF Do Panthers, Ben McAdoo have a potential fit in Jimmy Garoppolo? (usatoday.com) Might just be some coach speak by Rhule, its not like a coach is going to admit we want to run sideways. Coaches have a habit of telling fans what they want to hear. If we do end up going to more of a power based running attack, that might actually lower Linderbaum down our draft board. A lot of the reports I've seen on him is that he is more suited for zone. He definitely doesn't fit the "bigger" profile.

Everyone keeps referring to the top 3 tackles as they are all worthy of the 6th pick. There is a very good chance the teams don't view them that way. That is why Jeremiah says we might reach for someone like Penning. He actually has Cross mocked 22nd. To the fans' Cross isn't a reach but to Jeremiah or the teams he could be. It's very possible the us, or any team, could have OT1 and OT2 in a totally different tier then OT3 and OT4. That is why I would not be surprised at all if OT1 and OT2 are gone we don't consider another position. I could easily see the top of our board looking something like OT1, OT2, DE1, DE2, CB1, S1 in no particular order. If one of those top tier talents are there, they might not be willing to pass to draft a lower tier talent even if it is at position of "great" need such as most think LT is. At that point they might decide to make due with BC. Personally, I think there is a very good chance at least 2 of the OTs are off the board by the time we pick, Jags, Giants, Texans are all in play, how high we view OT3 will go a long way in deciding what we draft.

He is probably talking about Penning or Cross being reaches. https://www.nfl.com/_amp/daniel-jeremiah-2022-nfl-mock-draft-2-0-bills-land-another-playmaking-wr-for-jos Not everyone is as high on Cross, he has him mocked 22,and has us drafting Penning.

If that is true it isn't crazy to think that Rhule consulted (off the record) with him some in the search that resulted with Rhule. What his opinion of Rhule was we will never know.

So, we decided to go with Darnold because "he cares about ball" and he is young? Did we factor in how he had actually played the previous 3 years? As fans we will probably really never know but was anyone in the building against the move? Also, I think we might have got a bit greedy on the draft picks, to us the draft picks we gave up for Sam seem like a lot, but at the time I think they viewed those picks as giving up a lot less than if we had spent our 1st on a QB. Basically, if they trade for Sam, they get to keep the 1st to use on a different position. It's easy to bash Rhule right now, and yes, he has final say, but I have serious doubts he is making all of calls entirely by himself. Same with the Ian Thomas extension, I'm sure Rhule decided he wanted to try and keep Thomas, but I doubt he is coming up with the contract terms on his own. If Tepper would have fired Rhule this year I think there would have been a greater chance of him leaving some of the front office as opposed to if he ends up firing Rhule next year.

people need to give up on this idea Why would a coach, and maybe GM, who are on the hot seat, go into the season and not change the most important position on the field that happened to be one of the worst in the league last year? Only way that happens is if the owner steps in.

what's an extra $6m at this point?

Sad part is we didn't find Teddy Bridgewater at a reasonable price either, $30m for one year of play. If we keep Sam this year the total 3 year cost of Teddy and Sam will be: $56m ($30m for Teddy, $20.6m for Sam) a 2nd, 4th, and 6th. (I didn't even include the potential 3rd round comp pick we lost out on by signing Teddy) Scary part is the tab isn't closed yet. If we add another QB this year you can add that to the 3-year total.

going the rookie route might buy you a mulligan, I"ve said for a while that is a possibility, but if you use pick 6 on a QB then you aren't using it on a LT. If he doesn't improve the line much then whatever rookie QB you draft might look so bad you don't even get the mulligan. Honestly the option that is probably the safest for saving Rhule's job is to use pick 6 on a LT then go and trade for Cousins. Not sure if that is the long term answer us fans want but if I was in Rhule's shoes that is probably the route i would go, seems like the best chance to win 9 games or so and maybe be in the playoff hunt in the short term.

Fans seem to be grouping Neal, Cross, and Ekwonu pretty close together but it isn't crazy to think some teams might have a gap between OT 2 and OT 3. Of the 3, I've seen a few reports of Cross being viewed lower. I could actually see a scenario where OT1, OT2, DE1 and DE2 are all gone by the time we pick and us not being as high on OT3. If that was to happen, I could actually see Hamilton come into play and dare I say CB1, if we aren't able to trade down. I think sometimes at the very top of the draft teams have a hard time passing on "elite" prospects to chase need.