Don't believe that this is a weak WR class!

[carolinapanther]

2 minutes ago, steven8989 said:

There is no way we take WR at 16, right after we took wr first Rd last year. I don't think we get one if at all till 5th Rd or later.

I agree especially after signing Ross and Hogan. Probably won't use any drafts on a WR.

[Toomers]

1 hour ago, top dawg said:

I never said that there weren't other needs, but obviously the biggest two are Edge and OT. The other ones are arguable as far as importance.

Even with Edge (or, if you want to argue DL) and OT(or if you want to argue OL), there is a good chance that every one of the ones perceived to be sure things are gone. If that happens, then everything else is debatable in my mind. The pick could be a corner, perhaps a safety, a WR, or even a TE. I don't have a crystal ball, nor am I going to start whining about the pick. Some people apparently think that drafting is simply filling needs and putting the next plug-and-play player on your team to fill a void. It's about taking the BPA, especially at the top of the draft. The more it goes on, then maybe you can get a little "cute" and take a risk, but BPA should be the overarching guide (IMO). 

I still say WR is a need, and I believe it's a little presumptuous, if not foolhardy, when you consider our circumstances and history at the position to call it a strength. If you have a different opinion, so be it.

 Who are these perceived sure things? Who are the WRs we should hope for. How will they have more impact than a starting player at a position of greater need? 

 Some people have no understanding of the draft, value, need or any of the players being discussed. Just throw whatever they can read because they haven’t seen a down of 90% of the players involved. 

  You have included the entire OL and DL into one group rather conveniently. There are many holes in each group. And FS, NCB. So when we go WR and QB with our first two picks, what’s left to field a team? Which one of these is a not a greater need than WR. RB2, TE, and LB are even greater needs than a 4-5th WR. Especially when we have a 5M bargain claiming that spot. If he’s worth that, we have outstanding WR depth. I guess that “belief” in Torrey has faded? 

[top dawg]

27 minutes ago, Toomers said:

 Who are these perceived sure things? Who are the WRs we should hope for. How will they have more impact than a starting player at a position of greater need? 

 Some people have no understanding of the draft, value, need or any of the players being discussed. Just throw whatever they can read because they haven’t seen a down of 90% of the players involved. 

  You have included the entire OL and DL into one group rather conveniently. There are many holes in each group. And FS, NCB. So when we go WR and QB with our first two picks, what’s left to field a team? Which one of these is a not a greater need than WR. RB2, TE, and LB are even greater needs than a 4-5th WR. Especially when we have a 5M bargain claiming that spot. If he’s worth that, we have outstanding WR depth. I guess that “belief” in Torrey has faded? 

None of us on here are professional scouts, coaches, or front office people that I know of. The true professionals and experts have way more resources and information to ferret out perceived value and actual grades than fans. Even still, I will acknowledge that even the pros hit and miss. That's why you can have a player like Tom Brady, Steve Smith and a host of others missed all the time. However, that's also why teams pass up on players that fans swore were day one players until round three. You see, the difference between me and other huddle geniuses is that I defer to their expertise on drafting players and building the team how they think is best, until I actually see evidence that a gross misstep has occurred (which is generally months and months away). 

I never said that there was any WR or QB that were worth a first. As a matter of fact, I've consistently said that if it were up to me, if Jonah Williams slides, I'd probably take him. The only other player that I believe that has the possibility of sliding to us that I'd personally take without question is Montez Sweat. I don't believe any of the other top edge or tackles that I would take will be there. The Ferrells and Burns, Greedy Williams, Metcalfs, Browns, or whoever else are up to the ones actually making the decision to decide. The same goes for round 2, 3 and all the others.

I've also said that it makes plenty of sense to acquire a QB and another receiver at some point during the draft. It's all going to come down to perceived values and grades. As I am not the one making the decisions, nor am privy to all the information necessary to make those decisions, I am going  to trust, at least for the short term, that the professionals know what they're doing. It's as simple as that.

I'll leave all the whining, guarantees, crystal balls, and proclamations of surety for the Huddle know-it-alls.

[top dawg]

2 hours ago, steven8989 said:

There is where u messed up, you listened NFL.com, ESPN worldwide leader of not knowing poo, and Bleacher Report. Hey how about u go find some better media to listen to!

"Etc." does mean something. The fact is fans belittle many if not all of these guys, but fans are fans for a reason. As is the case for many incredulous opinions, this is the only place I have heard someone say that WR is a strength for us  

[Toomers]

52 minutes ago, top dawg said:

None of us on here are professional scouts, coaches, or front office people that I know of. The true professionals and experts have way more resources and information to ferret out perceived value and actual grades than fans. Even still, I will acknowledge that even the pros hit and miss. That's why you can have a player like Tom Brady, Steve Smith and a host of others missed all the time. However, that's also why teams pass up on players that fans swore were day one players until round three. You see, the difference between me and other huddle geniuses is that I defer to their expertise on drafting players and building the team how they think is best, until I actually see evidence that a gross misstep has occurred (which is generally months and months away). 

I never said that there was any WR or QB that were worth a first. As a matter of fact, I've consistently said that if it were up to me, if Jonah Williams slides, I'd probably take him. The only other player that I believe that has the possibility of sliding to us that I'd personally take without question is Montez Sweat. I don't believe any of the other top edge or tackles that I would take will be there. The Ferrells and Burns, Greedy Williams, Metcalfs, Browns, or whoever else are up to the ones actually making the decision to decide. The same goes for round 2, 3 and all the others.

I've also said that it makes plenty of sense to acquire a QB and another receiver at some point during the draft. It's all going to come down to perceived values and grades. As I am not the one making the decisions, nor am privy to all the information necessary to make those decisions, I am going  to trust, at least for the short term, that the professionals know what they're doing. It's as simple as that.

I'll leave all the whining, guarantees, crystal balls, and proclamations of surety for the Huddle know-it-alls.

  But you can say WR is a huge need but not defend it one bit against any of the positions you dismissed. That’s the issue. And you throwing up a wall of text about what you’ve read doesn’t make a case either. 

 You don’t know the players. You WR point directly contradicts other arguments. But you don’t want to address any of that. Just the typical deflection from another failed theory.

[Toomers]

47 minutes ago, top dawg said:

"Etc." does mean something. The fact is fans belittle many if not all of these guys, but fans are fans for a reason. As is the case for many incredulous opinions, this is the only place I have heard someone say that WR is a strength for us  

It also the same place that thinks a team with a 5M 5th WR(who was well worth it one month ago) still needs MORE depth. Just don’t see how it works both ways. But continue to avoid it. 

[Moo Daeng]

One thing is for sure. Receivers will never be as important as lineman.

 

 

[steven8989]

1 hour ago, top dawg said:

"Etc." does mean something. The fact is fans belittle many if not all of these guys, but fans are fans for a reason. As is the case for many incredulous opinions, this is the only place I have heard someone say that WR is a strength for us 

This is why us fans no more than the media. Damn dumbass Jordan and the host talking about who the saints  want to play and then he said give me bears week 1. When they already came out and said Packers vs Bears. I rest my case!

[top dawg]

1 hour ago, Toomers said:

  But you can say WR is a huge need but not defend it one bit against any of the positions you dismissed. That’s the issue. And you throwing up a wall of text about what you’ve read doesn’t make a case either. 

 You don’t know the players. You WR point directly contradicts other arguments. But you don’t want to address any of that. Just the typical deflection from another failed theory.

I didn't say it was a huge need, I said it was a need, and I've done nothing but defend why.  If you can't see it, that's your personal problem. Personally, I don't give a fug what you think about whether I know the players or not, and I certainly know that you don't know the players better than a professional. It's the same old typical bullshit argument from you when someone disagrees with your opinion. I already said that you have a right to believe what you want. I understand why you believe what you do, I just don't agree with it, and not many outside of the Huddle do either, certainly not the experts.

[Trill OG]

11 minutes ago, top dawg said:

I didn't say it was a huge need, I said it was a need, and I've done nothing but defend why.  If you can't see it, that's your personal problem. Personally, I don't give a fug what you think about whether I know the players or not, and I certainly know that you don't know the players better than a professional. It's the same old typical bullshit argument from you when someone disagrees with your opinion. I already said that you have a right to believe what you want. I understand why you believe what you do, I just don't agree with it, and not many outside of the Huddle do either, certainly not the experts.

I agree WR is not a huge need, but we still need a big target. We have no jump ball type WR's. All of our WR's are the same type players. We need a big guy who Cam can throw it up for grabs and he go gets it. I think we can find a big athletic WR in the later rounds. I will be shocked if we go WR in the 1st 2 rounds though.

[top dawg]

1 hour ago, steven8989 said:

This is why us fans no more than the media. Damn dumbass Jordan and the host talking about who the saints  want to play and then he said give me bears week 1. When they already came out and said Packers vs Bears. I rest my case!

Since when is Jordan am expert? I don't have the time or wherewithal to list for you how many writers and analysts have determined that WR is a need for us (and certainly not a surefire look) , but you show me one national writer or analyst that says our wide receiving corps is actually a strength. That may help your "case," but you certainly aren't "resting your case" based upon a video that really ain't got poo to do with anything.

Like I said, there is a lot of projecting going on by Panthers fans based really on one receiver in D.J. Moore who had a decent year (but not necessarily one that indicates he is guaranteed or ready to shoulder the load). Samuel has flashed, but hasn't seen the field a lot due to injury and other reasons.

[top dawg]

1 hour ago, Moo Daeng said:

One thing is for sure. Receivers will never be as important as lineman.

 

 

Ha! 

[top dawg]

Yep. That's what I thought. Not one!

[top dawg]

To get back to the original point, it's not that this receiving group is weak, it's that it's a strong defensive class, and some like Smitty believe that some of the talented receivers will be pushed back. From an interview on WFNZ last week, 89 said:

 

"If you've got seven picks, seven rounds - Third or fourth round? You need to be looking for some guys. There are high quality guys that in another Draft, people would be clawing and crawling over themselves and moving up and trading future picks to get those guys. But there's so many defensive players out there right now that the second and third round receivers are moving back to the fourth and fifth round."

Mind you he was of the belief that Funchess and Byrd had to be replaced. Perhaps Hogan will suffice for one or the other, but I don't think that precludes us from grabbing one of these potentially talented receivers if one is deemed the BPA in a given round.