TD alt

Really, isn't that what I just said? Why would a QB be high on your board if you already have one? QBs may may be valued more overall, as they are central to a team's success, but they also have a high bust rate along with other premium positions, but the difference is is that you have to generally pay way more for them one way or another. So, you stay away, unless you just can't for whatever reasons.

I'll just take the super processor. If he could get to that, I think we'd all be feeling better about his future. Not holding my breath though. More likely to hold my nose. I haven't completely given up though.

Everybody has their wishlist, but I'm not sure that Fano is going to be better than Miller, Freeling or Proctor. Rodriguez is a dawg, but he's no Luke. I would love to get him though.

BPA is not a myth. You think that these teams don't have their boards up and ready to go on draft night? BPA is in reference to a team's board. The positional value, character, off-field concerns and all that other stuff is built-in. Hell, some players don't even make a team's board more than likely due to being questionable human beings. You see, I don't get the "Bryce argument." I think that's weak within this context. You do what's best for the team. Always! If you perceive that an OT is best for the team, you draft him. If you perceive a WR is best for the team, you draft him. If you perceive that a safety is best, you draft him, etc. Bryce, just by virtue of being on the team is going to be more successful.

Yeah, but being "even" is a different argument. Of course you're going to take the player that you need more if all things are equal. That's a no-brainer.

I just don't see that as being in the realm of reality, but in theory if the tackle is the BPA, then sure. Like I just said in another thread, sometimes it's not a matter of being right or wrong, but just putting the puzzle pieces together to make it work. All this sh¡t is guess work, it's just that the professionals have more educated guess work.

I don't know, nor did I say that. I said you don't reach down over a higher graded player to grab a lower graded player; it doesn't matter the position. It doesn't matter what any of us think when we're on the clock. The professionals are the ones getting paid to scout and pick. If we're all being honest, we think they're are better options available all the time. Hell, plenty of people thought there were better players than T-mac last year. I mean, sometimes it's still a debate over players' careers. I mean, sure the busts are obviously wrong, but sometimes there is no right and wrong, it's just a matter of putting puzzle pieces together and making it work.

What I am saying is that receivers will be on our big board, regardless. Big boards are obviously going to include players at positions of need, but it would be tantamount to sacrilege to reach down over a higher graded player to grab a lower graded player simply because you perceive that the lower graded player is a bigger need.

I mean, it's possible, but does Canales (and Dan and Brandt) really feel like investing a first in a guy that will likely ride the bench this season? I don't see him, or any of them really, taking any starter's job on the O-line.

You draft the BPA, the highest graded person on your board, period! It doesn't matter what the position is. It doesn't matter if it's three times in a row, particularly when you need a WR--particularly when one of them hasn't worked out. What you and others are suggesting from one perspective is to draft for need--exclude an entire position just because it's the first round, even though that position should rightly be in play just like all the other positions that could provide a valuable upgrade to your team, just because you drafted them in the first round for two seasons in a row. I hate to be blunt and it may appear disrespectful (but it's really not) but in my opinion that's just nonsensical. You draft the BPA/BAP regardless of any arbitrary notions because that's what leads to success, and that you used free agency to set yourself up so that you could do that very thing. That's just the way that I see it https://www.carolinahuddle.com/topic/480550-look-at-the-wrs-in-recent-drafts-around-19/?do=findComment&comment=7062085

You draft the BPA, the highest graded person on your board, period! It doesn't matter what the position is. It doesn't matter if it's three times in a row, particularly when you need a WR--particularly when one of them hasn't worked out. What you and others are suggesting from one perspective is to draft for need--exclude an entire position just because it's the first round, even though that position should rightly be in play just like all the other positions that could provide a valuable upgrade to your team, just because you drafted them in the first round for two seasons in a row. I hate to be blunt and it may appear disrespectful (but it's really not) but in my opinion that's just nonsensical. You draft the BPA/BAP regardless of any arbitrary notions because that's what leads to success, and that you used free agency to set yourself up so that you could do that very thing. That's just the way that I see it

B.S.

Dude, you're way off base. Concepcion had 440 yards after contact in 2025. Is it elite? No. Is it solid? Hell yeah. Even if I concede that he's not a home run threat, he not only returned two TDs to the house, but he also took a 48 yard screen pass to the house against a stout Mizzou defense. He also had a 45 yarder and a 34 yarder, both largely running after the catch. So you can take that however you want. Keenan Allen's career YAC average is basically half (and I'm being generous) of what Concepcion put up last year. Come on, man. They are entirely different receivers. Sure, he had some legit concentration drops, but it's like some analysts have said, a lot of times drops are overrated. Moreover, it's not like Concepcion is a finished product. I mean, it's easy to say most mocks have him outside the first round without realistically being able to look at all the mocks. I've seen him in the top 30 on big boards, so you take that as you will.

Pavia is short with good size. He's strong and he's durable. He has good vision as a runner. He is a true dual threat, but won't be running away from anyone. Still, you can at least run a credible QB sneak, probably.

Well, one thing about Pavia that is indisputable: he's got that dawg in him. His production can't be denied either.

Dude, a lot if not most receivers don't break tackles. What are you talking about? Some of the most dynamic receivers in the game are elusive as hell and don't break a thing. We're not discussing a running back, we're discussing a receiver. The litmus test for a first round receiver are things like whether they are a legitimate playmaker, are a threat to take it to the house on any given play, can get yards in chunks, and can have a marked impact upon the game more Sundays than not. Concepcion runs good routes, and wins at all three levels of the field, not to mention is a legitimate returner. Only wins one way? Come on, man. That's ludicrous within the context that you're trying to imagine.

Not in the slightest, my friend.

It ain't April 1st...

An even shorter midget. SMH

Of course. Why would any receiver who has the ability not be elusive and avoid the tackle? You're trying to make it seem like he's some week receiver that gets touched by an arm and goes down and struggles to make contested catches, but that's simply not the case. Is he more elusive than strong? Of course. But the fact is that most receivers aren't going to have a bunch of highlights breaking tackles. Steve Smith is not the norm, but even Concepcion has a few highlights, including where he wouldn't go down and basically dragged a defender in the end zone.

No mulligan for little time to develop? They barely got their feet up under them, but point taken.

Both of them were diminutive receivers. Concepcion is simply bigger.

I see you read Reddit... Anyway, there are different numbers floating around, not that YPRR against zone or man is the litmus test of how well a player will do in the pros, but I'll give you that about zone. Just keep in mind that he was a different receiver at Texas A&M. There's a bunch to like about his game. For you to look at a metric and draw a conclusion or parallels is just selling him short. No analyst I've listened to has drawn that conclusion. This link is specifically geared to Carolina (the vid is on top). https://sports.yahoo.com/video/why-kc-concepcion-makes-sense-for-the-panthers-130000882.html Matt Harmon of reception perception is really high on the kid, and he's another one (along with Josh Norris) that says it wouldn't be a surprise if Concepcion turns out to be the top receiver in the class.

We have Brandt Tilis now.