Jawaan Taylor - Visiting Today*

[JARROD]

1 hour ago, 45catfan said:

I know Hurney is just doing his due diligence, but Taylor should be long gone before #16.  At this point, it's looking like Dillard will be too as the only pure LT in first round.  Several solid RTs like Taylor, but a team desperate for a LT will bite on Dillard even at the expense of a slight reach.  The Bills seem high on this guy, so it wouldn't shock me if they snag Dillard.  It seems like 'Panthers North' draft to not only improve themselves, but also to screw up our draft board as well.  That does leaves us with the possibility of Jonah Williams.  This could serve a duel role.  Keep Moton at LT permanently and Williams can serve as the LG plug for this season.  I fully expect Daryl Williams to be moving on in 2020.  Then move Jonah Williams to RT (where I believe he began his Crimson Tide career) and hopefully by that time the umpteen guards we have auditioning for a reserve role this season will develop into a starter.  If not, we can draft one.  Either way, we still have our bookend OTs.

I would be totally on board with that. I’ve been a Jawaan Taylor followed by Jonah Williams fan for our 16 pick for months even when Jonah was slated much higher than Jawaan. I admit it’s probably because all of the first few months lists and mocks had Jonah gone top 10 and Jawaan being the guy getting to us— but then there was primarily Greg Little being mocked— just not a fan.

im in the if Jonah and Taylor and Sweat are really all gone at 16, I’m wanting to trade back. I know first pick is just a game but I’ve had probably 40+ mocks now of trading back and then taking Christian Wilkins or Ferrell or Ford and lately believe it or not McGary in the first— he’s rated there now.

then the extra picks give the ability to pick up all the DE/OLB clones in the 2nd and 3rd— and there are plenty or if I took Ferrell first I may take another like Chase or one of the others or I may take Risner or Little(still not a fan but maybe he’s a RT option).

OG OT WR FS CB I smash with the middle picks, often Savage, Hooker and JoeJuan and plenty of others are there for DB and I look for Deiter and a slew of other OG, Bobby Evans, Powers who is listed as OG now—

my WR pick is Dillon Mitchel— he’s fast, great cone time, catches great, is perfect to chunk Torrey— theres also a few others I like— 4-5 actually including Jazz Ferguson.

anyway because I see so many of these go this way I kind of see it that way in real life— teams take the elite ones but then go offensive line a lot because the DT and OLB/DE are stacked in the 2-4th rounds with minimal drop off, can be double dipped. Christian Miller is a Hightower clone for example.

we will be fine

[Shocker]

On 4/12/2019 at 10:03 AM, Pantha-kun said:

Wouldn't be surprised if all the DEs fly off the board before 16 and we end up getting the best available OT. 

Most likely scenerio IMO.  

[45catfan]

1 hour ago, JARROD said:

I would be totally on board with that. I’ve been a Jawaan Taylor followed by Jonah Williams fan for our 16 pick for months even when Jonah was slated much higher than Jawaan. I admit it’s probably because all of the first few months lists and mocks had Jonah gone top 10 and Jawaan being the guy getting to us— but then there was primarily Greg Little being mocked— just not a fan.

im in the if Jonah and Taylor and Sweat are really all gone at 16, I’m wanting to trade back. I know first pick is just a game but I’ve had probably 40+ mocks now of trading back and then taking Christian Wilkins or Ferrell or Ford and lately believe it or not McGary in the first— he’s rated there now.

then the extra picks give the ability to pick up all the DE/OLB clones in the 2nd and 3rd— and there are plenty or if I took Ferrell first I may take another like Chase or one of the others or I may take Risner or Little(still not a fan but maybe he’s a RT option).

OG OT WR FS CB I smash with the middle picks, often Savage, Hooker and JoeJuan and plenty of others are there for DB and I look for Deiter and a slew of other OG, Bobby Evans, Powers who is listed as OG now—

my WR pick is Dillon Mitchel— he’s fast, great cone time, catches great, is perfect to chunk Torrey— theres also a few others I like— 4-5 actually including Jazz Ferguson.

anyway because I see so many of these go this way I kind of see it that way in real life— teams take the elite ones but then go offensive line a lot because the DT and OLB/DE are stacked in the 2-4th rounds with minimal drop off, can be double dipped. Christian Miller is a Hightower clone for example.

we will be fine

I'm fine with a trade down, especially if the best edge guys remaining are Ferrell and Burns.  Depending on how far down, there's a possibility we could still get one.

After looking at a trade chart, the only one that makes sense to me is the Texans at #23.  If Dillard, Ford or Williams are remaining, they may be tempted to jump up to #16 to give Deshaun some protection.  That's if WE aren't sold on those guys.  As far as the making sense of the numbers, the Texans have back-to-back picks in the second round.   Based off the trade chart I looked at, we lose 240 points moving back to #23.  Their second pick in round two is 350 points.  We still would have to give them our comp pick worth 100 points to mostly balance the equation.  So would it be worth moving back 7 spots in round one for an extra second rounder (#55 overall) and lose our #100 pick?

[45catfan]

19 hours ago, stbugs said:

A trade like that doesn’t have to be perfect value. Some teams that trade up give up a premium to be able to move up.maybe we give back a fifth but making it perfectly even isn’t necessary. That’s of course assuming they really want to move up.

110 points is too much meat on the bone not to give something in return.  I agree a trade doesn't have to be balanced; a net zero, but with over 100 points lingering out there I doubt they make that trade with nothing else forthcoming from the Panthers.  Even a 4th rounder leaves 45 points out there for the Texans, which is feasible.  A 5th round pick from the Panthers leaves 80 points unaccounted for.   To me, that would be a bad deal, but it could happen.  Anything is possible.

[45catfan]

10 minutes ago, stbugs said:

As I said, depends on how much the Texans actually want to move up in this clearly hypothetical move. Moving up in the first typically means the team moving up is giving up more total value. If the Texans want to move up 7 picks it’s because there is a guy they want more than that 100 points. 100 points isn’t much when you are talking about getting a pick worth 1000. Why would we move down and get no actual bonus?

Unless I'm not following you, the "bonus" would be pick #55 in addition to the #47 we already have.  So the Panthers pick up a 2nd second rounder.  You could be right though, they may deem the need so much that they may not ask for anything else in return for #16.  I simply stated in my last post that I thought it would be a bad trade not to get something else in return and that a 5th rounder or later shouldn't suffice.  I'm not the Texans GM, so I don't know his thoughts.  

The whole idea came from someone mentioning a trade down and on the surface, the Texans have the second round capital to pull off such a move.  It probably won't happen, but that's why we prognosticate about the draft anyway, right?

[JARROD]

You guys are arguing on points on a theoretical system that everyone still believes everyone still uses from 30 years ago and that the values are the same today as 30 years ago.

at the end of the day, regardless,... if a team wants to move up for a player they want to negotiate. If the deal works you take it and trade back assuming you are ok with the choices that may or may not be there.

the team trading up is the one wanting, so what are they willing to give up to get their guy? 

For Texas as example, saying there is a still 100 points or whatever, they want— we don’t have to give. So I would tell them to give up the 2nd round and another pick, we give up nothing.

take it or leave it. We don’t have to give up anything to move back.

[JARROD]

2 minutes ago, stbugs said:

Exactly my point. Still completely hypothetical but the team asking us to do something for them can’t expect not to give a premium. If we are calling around to move down then I’d expect us to give a little bit of a premium. It’s kind of unrealistic to assume two teams will try to creat an equal value trade because one team is always coming to the other with a request. Unless the requestee is a moron, they should get a premium.

That said, we have to use a chart to have a discussion to at least try and formulate more realistic trades. 

Of course, but it’s always what and who is doing the wanting.

if a team wants to move up and wants to give up a minimum, it’s a luxury to move up. If we are trying to sell picks to move back, that would be silly.

While I think we can advertise we are willing to drop back— ultimately the team wanting move up will have to decide how much to give up if they want their guy.

if Hurney has, and I expect he will, guys picked out they are comfortable drafting if someone doesn’t give a great deal for us to skip out, we will stay put. 

A team like the Steelers jumping up for a Christian Wilkins or Ferrell for example when we would be happy with one of them for example would have to decide if giving us their 2nd with nothing else coming from us would be good for them. 

[JARROD]

13 minutes ago, stbugs said:

No, you are missing my bonus point. Pick 55 is nice but we also lose pick 100. You can’t ignore that as if it won’t be a player.

In that scenario, the Texans are asking us to move down because they want someone who won’t make it to pick 23. I’m saying that we don’t have to give them back even money on the trade if they want to move. They have to make us want to move. Pick 23 and 55 is 1120 value points which is an 11% bonus for us. If we give back pick 100, we are getting a 2% premium. IMHO, that isn’t enough to drop down 7 picks in the first.

I agree— and that’s been my point. There has to be a clear gain to drop back. We gain a pick, but overall clear value between what we drop back to and pick up versus what we gave up.

why would we drop back and pick up a pick to have equal metric value and take a less valued BPA without better value overall?

personally I would tell the Texans their 2nd and a 4th for example. To bad so sad. We gain 2 players in exchange for taking a much less valued 1st round pick. The Texans get their guy.

[LinvilleGorge]

Burns is gonna be there and we're gonna pick him. I'm torn on whether or not I'm excited about this, but impossible to ignore our need and his potential.

[JARROD]

9 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Burns is gonna be there and we're gonna pick him. I'm torn on whether or not I'm excited about this, but impossible to ignore our need and his potential.

I totally wouldn’t cry. Burns will be good.

I’m kind of wanting us to drop back, and still pick up a great 1st round pick and then be able to get Chase Winovich or Gerald Willis or Parris Campbell with an extra 2nd. I think Chase will be every bit as good as Burns and maybe better—

With guys like Chase and then Polite dropping down boards and others like them it’s possible to get 2 pass rushers—theres also Christian Miller and other Hightower types in there to double up with.

if that makes it possible to get 6-7 good players that really make us better rather than 5 and leaving a gaping hole out there, I would rather drop back. ( I’m talking the first 4 rounds)

if Dillard is there and a team really wants him, take the extra 2nd,... 

ive seen a few were Gary falls along with Dillard and a few others,... sometimes Lock,.. then a team like the Raiders and the Giants and others will come out swinging. 

[ncfan]

16 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Burns is gonna be there and we're gonna pick him. I'm torn on whether or not I'm excited about this, but impossible to ignore our need and his potential.

Considering where our defense is going it would be the best pick we could make, woupd be a grand slam.

If we were a traditional 4-3, yeah would be a little torn.  But the kid is a beast, and if makes it to a 3-4 team, he could end up being one of the top 2 edge rushers from this class when its all said and done.

 

Dude is a freak athlete (if it weren't for Sweat, people would be drooling on him)

His combine #s were comparable to Von Millers and Kalil Mack.

His College stats were comparable to Von Millers.

Top talent talks about him (Taylor mentioned Allen and Burns the 2 toughest he's faced)

*here is Burns on Taylor, when Taylor had to step in at LT

People just cant get the mental block of Everett Brown out of their Heads

[45catfan]

Will he be an 3-4 OLB or 4-3 DE in our base defense?  If the team thinks he can be a 4-3 end, then so be it, but if they are projecting him to be a OLB in 3-4 sets, I think that's gimmicky especially if that formation ends up just being a wrinkle here and there. We drafted Marquis Haynes last year (another smaller DE) and he barely saw the field.  Not speaking for others, but I personally have always felt undersized DEs do poorly in our 4-3 defense.  I guess I would feel better about Burns if somehow it was magically known how often the 3-4 look will be used this season and how the team plans on using Burns.  Obviously that's not going to happen, therefore the uneasiness surrounding him.

[LinvilleGorge]

2 hours ago, ncfan said:

Considering where our defense is going it would be the best pick we could make, woupd be a grand slam.

If we were a traditional 4-3, yeah would be a little torn.  But the kid is a beast, and if makes it to a 3-4 team, he could end up being one of the top 2 edge rushers from this class when its all said and done.

 

Dude is a freak athlete (if it weren't for Sweat, people would be drooling on him)

His combine #s were comparable to Von Millers and Kalil Mack.

His College stats were comparable to Von Millers.

Top talent talks about him (Taylor mentioned Allen and Burns the 2 toughest he's faced)

*here is Burns on Taylor, when Taylor had to step in at LT

People just cant get the mental block of Everett Brown out of their Heads

Honestly, it's not just Brown. It's a long list of FSU edge rusher busts. I'm just gonna hope that he's the JuJu Smith-Schuster (USC WR) of FSU edge rushers if we draft him.

[Black&BlueBubba]

1 hour ago, 45catfan said:

Will he be an 3-4 OLB or 4-3 DE in our base defense?  If the team thinks he can be a 4-3 end, then so be it, but if they are projecting him to be a OLB in 3-4 sets, I think that's gimmicky especially if that formation ends up just being a wrinkle here and there. We drafted Marquis Haynes last year (another smaller DE) and he barely saw the field.  Not speaking for others, but I personally have always felt undersized DEs do poorly in our 4-3 defense.  I guess I would feel better about Burns if somehow it was magically known how often the 3-4 look will be used this season and how the team plans on using Burns.  Obviously that's not going to happen, therefore the uneasiness surrounding him.

We wouldn’t have been looking at Allen Bailey in a 4-3 defense. I think it will be how the draft pans out.  If we get Burns and another depth 3-4 DE we could go more 3-4 looks than 4-3.  That’s why I think we didn’t sign Bailey.  We have to figure out what pieces we have before we go full bore 3-4.