RUMOR: Panthers looking to move up to 16-20th pick

[CPantherKing]

The best WRs are not even in the first round. The 2015 season will prove that.

 

There are 2 to 3 WRs being overlooked. If they were in a system that puts these college WRs in the first round, they would be talked about as a top 15 pick.

[mbarbour21]

I have to disagree. My idea of "BPA" is waiting to see what falls to you and selecting from your board the best overall talent. If your trading up for anyone that's not BPA because everyone is available for a price if your willing to move up. It completely contradicts the idea of sitting back and taking the best player. Evem if it only costs you a 7th rounder your moving up because you believe that guy won't be there when you pick. Thats not BPA.

Don't really know what you would call it. You either sit and pick the BPA at 25, or trade picks and from that point, pick BPA. I slightly agree with you still. It's not true BPA because you didn't just pick the best player at your pick, but you still picked the BPA once you traded up.......weird

[MV%doe]

This may or may not be true.. Luke, Kalil, Beason, Stewart are some names that come to mind that probably werent our biggest needs at the time.

I've actually wondered if our drafts would be much different if Hurney were still here.. With Don Gregory and the other scouts still here, I've wondered how much they factor into the decision that gets made. I remember an interview with Gettleman saying that Don Gregory was a big part in the KB pick, and he predicted that KB would be available.

I'm not saying Gettleman isn't light years ahead of Hurney because I think that he is. Obviously, Gettleman is so much better at evaluating talent, not overpaying, building for the future, and building the lower half of the roster (which in my opinion is the biggest part of being a good GM), as well as every other aspect of being a GM.

I believe dave took need out of their grading formula, just my opinion. Sort a like building a bran new roster, who's the pick then? Then that opens up position value. OG, FB, long snapper don't have the value of QB, OT, or DE. Dave is a big believer in DL, most smart GMs are. DL are heavily rotated, so you do need more than two or even three. Same for other spots DBs, WRs, and RBs. Got two stud WRs, drafting another isn't going to prevent you form playing 3WRs sets. 3rd and 25, put 4 DEs out there to rush the QB. Snaps can go around and be shared.

Lastly injuries happen, sad part of the game. And with free agency there's so much turnover now. If you go back and look at the final 53 roster form 2012 to 2013, nearly 50% new players. Take the best player cause a pro-bowler beason can get hurt and greg hardys do leave via FA.

[MHS831]

Well Gurley is being projected around the 16th round pick too.

 

That is true.  I think, since RB has been devalued, that this fan base has forgotten what an elite RB can do because it has never really had an elite RB--Stew and DWIll had a few good seasons, but I am talking about AP/Beat Mode good.  You could argue that Stephen Davis was close to elite, and you see where that got us.

[MadHatter]

I have to disagree. My idea of "BPA" is waiting to see what falls to you and selecting from your board the best overall talent. If your trading up for anyone that's not BPA because everyone is available for a price if your willing to move up. It completely contradicts the idea of sitting back and taking the best player. Evem if it only costs you a 7th rounder your moving up because you believe that guy won't be there when you pick. Thats not BPA.

Then your idea of BPA is wrong.

BPA means that you take the best player on the board regardless of position. If a player you see at 19 is worth more on your board than those likely to be there with your two picks, then moving up to get them is still bpa.

[EightyNine]

I have to disagree. My idea of "BPA" is waiting to see what falls to you and selecting from your board the best overall talent. If your trading up for anyone that's not BPA because everyone is available for a price if your willing to move up. It completely contradicts the idea of sitting back and taking the best player.  Evem if it only costs you a 7th rounder your moving up because you believe that guy won't be there when you pick. Thats not BPA.

I don't understand your explanation of why trading up goes against BPA.  Trading has no effect on whether you select the player at the top of your board, or reach for someone that is lower on your board because they fill an immediate need.

 

I guess what you're saying is that by trading up, you arent selecting a player that would have been "available" to you.  But thats why you trade up.. So that those players would become available to you.  You move up because you think the value of the player you traded for is greater to your team than what you gave up to move up.  It still has no affect on whether or not you take the player at the top of your board.

 

All BPA means is that when youre on the clock, you arent going to pass up on your highest rated player just because you want someone who is rated lower that fills a need.  It would be possible to trade up and still not take the player at the top of your board because you want someone that fills a need and you think they wont be available when you pick.  That would go against BPA.  But as long as you take the player at the top of your board, you are sticking with the BPA philosophy.  If you are able to, try to give me an explanation of how making a trade would prevent you from taking the player rated highest on your board.

[top dawg]

Tomatoe or tomato on that BPA argument. It's only worth arguing about in April, three weeks before thle draft.

Technically, effectively, philosophically, theoretically, or whatever, the goal is to get the player that you think is the best. If we trade up to do it, then I trust that Gettleman knows what he wants and what he's doing.

[MadHatter]

Tomatoe or tomato on that BPA argument. It's only worth arguing about in April, three weeks before thle draft.

Technically, effectively, philosophically, theoretically, or whatever, the goal is to get the player that you think is the best. If we trade up to do it, then I trust that Gettleman knows what he wants and what he's doing.

Well said.

I just want a good player brought in that will help this team....don't give a damn WHY they selected him.

[EightyNine]

Tomatoe or tomato on that BPA argument. It's only worth arguing about in April, three weeks before thle draft.

Technically, effectively, philosophically, theoretically, or whatever, the goal is to get the player that you think is the best. If we trade up to do it, then I trust that Gettleman knows what he wants and what he's doing.

Yes, well..be that as it may.. I'm still gonna argue that "tomatoe" is incorrect..because it is.

[Cpt slay a ho]

I have to disagree. My idea of "BPA" is waiting to see what falls to you and selecting from your board the best overall talent. If your trading up for anyone that's not BPA because everyone is available for a price if your willing to move up. It completely contradicts the idea of sitting back and taking the best player. Evem if it only costs you a 7th rounder your moving up because you believe that guy won't be there when you pick. Thats not BPA.

this

The above is usually what's considered a bpa draft, and much of what I think DG has stated

[Bartin]

this

The above is usually what's considered a bpa draft, and much of what I think DG has stated

So giving up a 7th to get Bene early in the 5th means Gettleman doesn't draft BPA?

[MHS831]

The only thing I can add to the thought process is this (assuming it has not already been stated) :  There are usually only a few positions people are willing to move up for in the first round of the draft--they are the positions that are hard to find--LOT, QB, pass rushers, shut-down CB, and that is about it.  If you look at this draft, there is one CB who may be worth moving up for, but doubtful he is there at 16-20 (Waynes).  We don't need a QB, and again, no way one is there at 16-20.  So, my theory would suggest that they have their eye on a pass rusher or LT.

 

When a 4-3 team says, Pass rusher, we are thinking DE.  I see the 3-4 DEs and OLBs, but who are the 4-3 DEs who will be there at 16 but not at 25?   I just don't see one that they would covet that much.

 

If correct, that leaves OT--Left Tackle.  As far as projecting people to either side of the ball, we can't say--the crackheads with blogs and websites (no offense, Jeremy) don't know either.  In this draft, 3 of the top LT candidates were ROTs for the most part in college.  Last year, the only first round draft pick LT to play well was a RT at Tennessee. So we should forget about assuming we know best--we don't.

 

Personally, I think the Tackles will drop and the panthers will never make the trade.  Let's look at the top T prospects:

Scherff (could he be the guy?  He is being projected as a G and most are saying top 10, but that is what they said about DeCastro a few years ago, who was also a top 10 projection.  He fell to about 23) may not even be the first OL to go.  I do not see Flowers or Peat in the top 15, and I genuinely think Collins falls into the later picks of the first.  If the OTs start coming off the board around 15, then there are 10 selections before the Panthers pick.

 

Peat

Flowers

Collins

Scherff

 

Is Sherff on our board?  I have no idea, but I don't get why everyone calls him a G and Collins a T.

 

Then you have the second wave, if you can call them that:

 

Clemmings

Ogbuehi

Humphries

Fisher

 

So Hatter seems to be all over it---it just makes sense that they are after Peat or Flowers, but I think Peat is the better player.

[jdpanther5]

What if we acquire a pick or trade up days before the draft? Is the player we select not BPA?

What if we acquire a pick for a player without giving up picks of our own? Is the player selected not BPA?

It's all semantics.

[Cpt slay a ho]

So giving up a 7th to get Bene early in the 5th means Gettleman doesn't draft BPA?

We also drafted kug in the 4th the year before, he wasn't the bpa at that pick(IMO)

 

but so many things to factor into that i wouldn't know the answer, but i'm sure when he drafted bene he was the bpa on our board otherwise we wouldn't have taken him.

 

 

that's why bpa is a myth IMO and hard to break down when you don't know how high a team rates a player, my only gripe is the whole don't draft for need when considering bpa, but again it depends on the gm and their draft board.

 

BPA is a good debate but in all honesty it's hard for anyone to pinpoint the concept