MHS831

I do not see Luvu as an edge--I think they play him at ILB. That may explain it, and Barno is very raw and unproven. That is probably the reason we are not on the same page--I really do not know how they will use Luvu and Chinn--so this is hard to gauge--but last year, we have Luvu and Barno and YGM and Burns--aside from Burns, Luvu had 7 sacks, but he was not playing edge/end. So who knows? However, if you decide Luvu is an edge rusher, you need a LB-- But yeah, it is hard to gauge--you have to pick 1 perspective and stick to it to avoid madness.

interesting

The following helped me see the depth of talent at the Panthers top areas of concern (after QB) in rounds 2 and 3. I include round 1 to predict who might be off the board. I have included my needs list. Thought I would share-(lotta cutting and pasting--hope it is legible) MHS’ prioritized list of Panther Needs entering Draft as of 4/1/23: 1. Quarterback 2. Edge Rusher 3. Cornerback (nickel) 4. Wide Receiver depth 5. Inside Linebacker depth 6. Defensive End (3-4, 3-5t) depth 7. Offensive Tackle (Swing) depth FIRST ROUND EDGE RUSHERS FIRST ROUND CORNERS FIRST ROUND WIDE RECEIVERS Round 1: I have 4 QBs potentially being drafted, 5 Edge Rushers, 4 WRs, and 6 CBs (questionable). That would be 19 of the 31 players selected, so there are players who could fall into the second round. In my opinion, the following players could possibly fall past pick 31: • CBs: Deonte Banks, Kelee Ringo Would that cause the Panthers to forego an Edge Rusher and grab a CB? I do not think so. I expect the Panthers to take an Edge Rusher in round 2. SECOND ROUND EDGE RUSHERS SECOND ROUND CORNERS SECOND ROUND WIDE RECEIVERS Round 2: With Five Edge Rushers going in Round 1, expect a lot of trading between nights one and two by teams wanting to move up into round 2 to get that edge rusher because there are literally 12-14 quality edge rushers capable of starting early. Not all are perfect fits for the Panther's 3-4—the Panthers could harness this momentum and trade back into round 2 and still get a good edge. There are 7 quality Edge players that are given round 2 ratings. The CB market is not that impressive, but if Banks and Ringo fall as predicted, it gets better. Although we need a WR, Hyatt could go round 1 and Downs just does not meet our needs, imo. However, it seems that there are three-four DE’s perfect for the Panthers that have “Plus Starter” ratings from NFL.com. They are (in no particular order): • Felix Anudike-Uzomah, Kansas State • Derrick Hall, Auburn • BJ Ojulari, LSU • Isiah Foskey, Notre Dame I just do not see how we go WR or CB in round 2 when we need an Edge—the second round is loaded with quality Edge rushers. ROUND 3 EDGE RUSHERS ROUND 3 CORNERS ROUND 3 WIDE RECEIVERS Round 3: At the end of round 3 might be the best time to get the CB. We need a nickel CB to keep Horn and Jackson on the outside. Last year, teams like the Bucs were able to force the defense into situations where the Panthers had to play Henderson or Taylor on the outside vs. the #1 WR. Not ideal. While I prefer a free agent CB to play the nickel (remember, there will be times when Chinn is in the big nickel, so this player is not a starter—but needs to be better than Hartsfield was. However, there are some decent gems at WR that could be there at the end of round 3. Some names of interest at each position are: • CB: Williams (Syracuse), Turner (Michigan--some have him going much earlier), and Kelly (Stanford) • WR: Rice (SMU), Mimms (Oklahoma)

If there is collusion, it is based on fully guaranteed contracts--you give a player $250m for 5 years and he pulls a Russell Wilson? A Deshaun Watson? Next thing you know, every starting QB will want that kind of $ and that kind of deal--they need to cap positions--or it is going to get way out of hand.

https://okcfox.com/news/local/oklahoma-city-wranglers-semi-professional-football-ufl-league-crossroads-mall-temporary-location-former-nfl-player-university-of-oklahoma-ou-jd-runnels-head-coach-sports-okc-april-2023 Just thought it would be funny to have a guy named Levis playing for a team named the Wranglers. Discuss.

Are you assuming that intelligence is why you interview? I do not think it has much to do with the reason you interview--it is to get to know the person, imo.

I am seeing some mocks that have Hooker going earlier--I know in February, I had him mocking around the end of round 3, then I bumped him to round 2. He could be there at 39. I also think it is possible that Levis falls to the end of round 1. If I have a top 10 pick, I doubt I want to take the fourth or even fifth best QB in the draft.

He is QB 3, and the best athlete in the draft--at any position--(Thinking who is better--nothing comes to mind). Combines and pro days should make you salivate. His tools are incredible--the perfect qb, but he does not have the resume. He played spot duty in years 1 and 2 at the Swamp, and all three seasons combined? 24 TDs-15 int. 54% completion percentage? Cam was over 60% at Auburn, However, Lamar Jackson was 59% his last season at Louisville. Here is another thing to consider--AR-15 will be 21 next month--with his stats, why did he not stay in college for another season? Sure, he can get drafted in the top 10 by a team willing to take a flyer on him, but you are really asking a team to lose for a season or two before realizing the return on the first round investment--and without a resume or solid stats, that would be a huge gamble. Secondly, QBs like Jackson, Cam, and AR15 are not accurate passers, so they compensate for the loss of production with their legs. When the legs start diminishing, so do they. So if you draft this project, you are HOPING for 8 years as a dual threat QB. I am not convinced that he is worth the investment. Sure, he is great in shorts and a t shirt, but put him against an NFL pass rush with 2.4 seconds to throw it to the right WR? I see nothing that makes me feel confident that he can do that on a regular basis.

He was expected to do well at the combine with his athleticism, but the NFL.com report says that it does not translate well to the tape. I am OK with this on day 3--but with Hurst, Thomas, Tremble (I expect this to be his breakout year if he has one) and Ricci, I am not sure TE is a need. I see it this way: Edge CB WR DT OL Depth LB Depth With cap room, I sincerely hope that we address one or two more needs before the draft.

And his reason for picking Stroud referenced knowledge that was on TV--where is your insider info, man?

His experience as a starter and college statistics/tape does not qualify him to be the first overall selection--not when 2 others are sitting there with all boxes pretty much checked. Yes, he is a great athlete. Many great athletes in the NFL bust. Killing the combine and pro days is not where gems are found, it is where fool's gold is found. Buyer beware. I want a fast processor, not a track star at QB. That's just my preference.

She could be BSing. Network television does not validate research--you are assuming that her research is valid. That is called, "bias." as long as there is bias, and all research has some margin for error, you should not assume its legitimacy. So just because she mentions some statistic on which to base her projection, she does not discuss other variables, etc. It is good, fun TV, and without fantasy football, she would not exist. Amusement purposes only, until she has been peer reviewed and validated. I am explaining my opinion, and why I am unwilling to accept all she reports at face value. Without my background in research, I would go along with it--and there are times I want to believe it. But the secret to research is identifying the central problem and acknowledging variables that may impact the treatment---if she is providing statistics related to the symptoms of that problem, then her outcome will be skewed. You have that option to believe it, and Freland may be undertaking thorough, proper research, but I have no way of knowing that. She is just a hot babe with data--and that makes for good TV.

By the way, she did bring up some interesting points--and I used them in my original response. I have tried to be objective--on the fence--resisting picking the next QB as long as I could--arguing for both sides, etc. After reading this, I am convinced it should be--will be--Stroud. That bit about drop back makes sense--a bigger drop back and 3 seconds to throw---what a huge advantage for a short/small QB--one that he will not have in the NFL. As I stated, most passes are between 2.4 and 2.7 seconds, and a deeper drop back gives an NFL DB a split second more time to recover. That is a concern--and it could be nothing, but she brings up something that directly addresses how Young is adjusting to overcome his limitations--very valid points.

No--she is not--she uses concrete data to support her assumptions. She is into predictive analytics, analyzing patterns to predict outcomes--if you can share a statement of how accurate her predictions have been, then do so. Basically, she is a fortune teller who uses data to guess. I have yet to see a chart or data to determine her accuracy--but that does not mean it does not exist. My statement was to say that I am not sold on her--but I have not delved deep into researching her predictions and the alignment with outcomes. It is based in probability--and we all make decisions every day using the same strategies--I just have not seen her reliability examined--so until I do, I am not convinced--which does not mean there is not something to her work--it is simply not presented in a manner that research should be presented to establish validity--if they did that, they would lose their audience (me included--its boring!). That is the only reason I am skeptical. A palm reader may guess my dog's name, but until I see her methods of inquiry, I am skeptical. Cynthia is fun, and her rationale is very interesting, but there is some cherry picking going on, based on what I can tell.

Have you researched her, or are you basing your opinion on her hype/promotional information? I am basing my opinion on inconsistencies in her statements. She rarely provides the statistical makeup of her argument--but she has a background in research. So do I--so you should listen to me.

In my opinion, Frelend could be BSing the NFL world with most of her "analytics" but she does make some good points here that give us reason to consider different perspectives. For example, if Young is able to overcome his size and stay safe, the next question is "how?" A deeper drop. She mentions tackles, and that is a good point. A deeper drop makes the path the QB more linear for edge rushers, who are currently challenged with their bends. A deep drop lessens the angle, given the OTs the challenge of facing more power and speed. Although the difference is slight, it can be significant. To compensate, the OT also has a more linear drop, (an ideal OT drop is approximately 45 degrees outward) and this new challenge might cause that drop to increase to 55 degrees, for example). That reduces the size of the pocket because it causes the initial contact to be inside a smaller pocket. I think it was Byron Bell and Mike Remmers who were dropping at nearly the same angle of the QB--straight back--forcing Cam to step up or spin out. Problem was, Cam was not that deep and his athleticism could extend plays. However, Frelend hits on a great point without getting into the details. The impact on the OTs. In other words, if all this is true, it places a tremendous pressure on your OTs--something that may not be exposed in college, but in the NFL, it will be exploited--in my opinion. If you want to read a VERY THOROUGH statistical breakdown of "Time to Throw" (TTT) this Colts article is second to none: https://www.stampedeblue.com/2021/10/16/22727432/fine-lets-talk-about-time-to-throw Based on these stats, it sure seems as if the most pass attempts are between 2.4 and 2.7 seconds.

And where in my comment did I say, "we just watching the tape?" Read carefully before you criticize a statement that was not made by anyone other than you so you could argue against it.

watch the combine-watch the pro day-then watch the tape. The tape does not lie,

The STIGMA of smallish QBs (and running QBs for that matter) may influence a tough decision. That was the point--and it was a mere suggestion not intended to be submitted into state's evidence seeking a prosecution. It addresses human nature and bias---that's all.

yeah, the idea of getting a good QB on a rookie, seventh round contract for 3 more years has to be enticing---all things equal. They have gone budget QB this season--and they are all young QBs--Darnold is 25 (will be 26 in June)--about the same age and Tennessee's Hooker. Lance is only 22 (May 9), and Purdy is older than Lance (23-December). if lance does not win the job in year 3, bust,

If he was the #3 overall pick and he has barely played a down--while 2022 Mr. Irrelevant is now inked in as the starter for his performance in 2022--I would say that is not what SF hoped to get out of him. Bust status is probably determined when the team gives up on the player and moves him out.

The word was "smallish" which might imply that he is smaller than the average QB, which he is.

Tom Brady played in Charlotte.

With our OL, the rules to protect QBs, and our defense, you have to think this would be the best landing spot for Young. (If you are wondering how the defense protects Young, you have to consider situational football. If Young is not playing from behind, he can throw the ball away, slide, or hit the checkdown more often. Forcing things when you are behind is a way to get hurt.) That is not to say that I think they will take Young--it is to say that Young should be praying for Carolina over Houston.

i think they will draft stroud and we will cheer. Tua and Murray, both rather smallish QBs, getting hurt this year may be enough to sway them to take the safer (healthwise) pick over the best processor. We shall see.