CBS Sports Mock Draft. Panthers pass on Lance for an OL guy. 49ers take Lance the next pick.

[Mage]

4 minutes ago, SetfreexX said:

Is it really? 

Yes?  There are talented QBs almost every year.  

By the same logic we are applying in this thread, the Browns made the correct decision drafting Johnny Manziel because you just got to take someone.

You take a QB in the 1st because you think he can be a franchise QB.  If you don't, then you don't take him.  That is all I am saying.  The idea that you have to take a QB just to take him (I know you didn't necessarily say this, but the other poster did) is stupid.  It's what bad organizations like the Browns do/have done.  

And we have Bridgewater for cheap as hell.  Another reason why this team, if it is picking outside of the top 10, should be in no hurry to draft a QB.  Not to the point where they feel like they have to pass on another top prospect.  Take Lance if and only if you think he can be the guy.

[mrcompletely11]

Cheap as hell?

[Mage]

13 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Nobody is saying that.   If Brady and co evaluate Lance (or whoever) and deem him an asset for the future then you pick him and go down the road.  You are just arguing Lance isnt going to be all that good and should be picked in the 2nd. 

 

59 minutes ago, theinstrumental said:

I'm gonna say once again that you can never have too much talent at quarterback and that even if you're not "sure" (whatever that means w/r/t projecting QBs) on a prospect, you should still take him. If they don't play, they retain some trade value, you always need a backup, and there's always the chance that he's a franchise guy or something approaching it. Let's not end up like Washington. 

That said, Pitts would be a lot of fun here, too. Get out of here with your first-round guard.

That is the person I was quoting when I made my point.  

And I have literally said if the Panthers think he can be a franchise QB, then they should take him.  I think you are missing my point, or misreading a lot of things.

[nctarheelreincarnated]

23 minutes ago, Mage said:

My point is it isn't just about taking QB QB QB QB until you find one.  It's about making sound decisions, good evaluations, and building a good roster.

The person I was quoting seemed to be implying that Washington neglected the QB position.  They didn't.  Their issue was they have built an unbalanced team and have chosen bad coaches.  Look at the Colts too.  They had Andrew Luck, who got them into the playoffs for a nice 3 year stretch, but they could never do anything because they built a bad team.

It starts at the top and the sooner the team realizes this (and I think that they are), the better we will be.  

Yes, if the Panthers come to the conclusion that Lance is worth it, then take him.  But if they aren't sure, then no, they shouldn't take him "just because."  That's what bad football teams do.  That is what Washington likely did with Haskins.  Actually, we know they did, because Jay Gruden didn't even want him.  

Panthers have good coaches in place.  I trust Matt Rhule.  This team needs to focus first and foremost on building a team that can win.  And if that includes a QB in 2021, then so be it.  But don't force it.  Because regardless of how you feel about Lance... he ain't that special.  

Oh yeah, it's just like outsiders saying we didn't try to address the WR position when Cam was here. When in all actuality, dip poo Gettlemen did. 

[Mage]

Just now, mrcompletely11 said:

Cheap as hell?

Yes, Bridgewater is a cheap starting QB.

[Mage]

Look, I am not saying Trey Lance is doomed to fail.  The talent is there.  And if there is anything I have learned over the past couple of years, it is that almost ANY quarterback can pan out with the right team and coaching staff.  Josh Allen, for example, is much better than I thought he ever would be.  And Ryan Tannehill looks like a near-elite quarterback in Tennessee.  Those teams have great coaches in McDermott and Vrabel.  They know what they are doing and how to build a team.

But that's also my point.  You don't reach for a QB you don't like just because.  That was the main thing I was disagreeing with, to the person I quoted.  Teddy allows us to be patient until we find a QB we really like in the 1st.  And if it's Lance, so be it.  If it isn't, it's okay.  We have time and most importantly, I think, we have a very good coaching staff.

In my personal opinion though, Trey Lance when compared to other 1st round QBs over the last 5 or so years would be at or near the bottom as a prospect.  I'd have argued the same for Allen.  And he worked out.  So I get why Lance is gonna be a 1st round pick, he's just to me more of a 2nd or 3rd round level-prospect with a lot of potential that will go in the 1st because he's a QB.  I didn't mean it to come across as me saying he sucks.  But him not being able to play this year really hurt him in my eyes.

[nctarheelreincarnated]

6 minutes ago, Mage said:

Look, I am not saying Trey Lance is doomed to fail.  The talent is there.  And if there is anything I have learned over the past couple of years, it is that almost ANY quarterback can pan out with the right team and coaching staff.  Josh Allen, for example, is much better than I thought he ever would be.  And Ryan Tannehill looks like a near-elite quarterback in Tennessee.  Those teams have great coaches in McDermott and Vrabel.  They know what they are doing and how to build a team.

But that's also my point.  You don't reach for a QB you don't like just because.  That was the main thing I was disagreeing with, to the person I quoted.  Teddy allows us to be patient until we find a QB we really like in the 1st.  And if it's Lance, so be it.  If it isn't, it's okay.  We have time and most importantly, I think, we have a very good coaching staff.

In my personal opinion though, Trey Lance when compared to other 1st round QBs over the last 5 or so years would be at or near the bottom as a prospect.  I'd have argued the same for Allen.  And he worked out.  So I get why Lance is gonna be a 1st round pick, he's just to me more of a 2nd or 3rd round level-prospect with a lot of potential that will go in the 1st because he's a QB.  I didn't mean it to come across as me saying he sucks.  But him not being able to play this year really hurt him in my eyes.

Right now, we have the coaching staff to make Trey Lance great man. I get it, we're used to our coaches turning our QB's into poo, or running them into the ground. But, Trey Lance I think can flourish here. Especially under Rhule and Brady. 

[theinstrumental]

1 hour ago, Mage said:

That's a terrible strategy.  You can't just take QBs just because.  If you don't think a guy is gonna work out, don't take him. 

And it's funny you say "let's not end up like Washington."  Washington drafted RG3 and Cousins, then traded picks for Alex Smith, then drafted Dwayne Haskins.  It isn't like they have ignored the QB position.  And where's that gotten them?  

You have to make good evaluations.  Not just taking QBs because of the position they play.  If your goal is to look for a back-up, then wait until the 2nd-4th rounds.

I meant that Washington passed on Tua because they "already had a guy" but that guy wasn't the long-term answer. I'd much rather be like Green Bay and take a QB earlier than we think we do than leave ourselves open to Teddy getting hurt or regressing or having to go into a future contract negotiation with a 30-year old QB and no leverage. 

Also, nobody's advocating taking a QB that you actively don't think is going to work out--they should not take Directional State's QB! But in general I think teams should draft quarterbacks with clear talent more often because we have a clear record showing that when it comes to evaluating QB's we only kind of know what we're doing and plans fall apart much more quickly than we think. Lance has tools, and if he hits, then he's going to be much more valuable than even the best guard of all time, and if he doesn't then we'll probably walk away with something like a third round pick anyway. 

[mrcompletely11]

5 minutes ago, theinstrumental said:

I meant that Washington passed on Tua because they "already had a guy" but that guy wasn't the long-term answer. I'd much rather be like Green Bay and take a QB earlier than we think we do than leave ourselves open to Teddy getting hurt or regressing or having to go into a future contract negotiation with a 30-year old QB and no leverage. 

Also, nobody's advocating taking a QB that you actively don't think is going to work out--they should not take Directional State's QB! But in general I think teams should draft quarterbacks with clear talent more often because we have a clear record showing that when it comes to evaluating QB's we only kind of know what we're doing and plans fall apart much more quickly than we think. Lance has tools, and if he hits, then he's going to be much more valuable than even the best guard of all time, and if he doesn't then we'll probably walk away with something like a third round pick anyway. 

Also if teddy balls out for 2 years in a row he is going to want a new deal.  Thats how things seem to work.  I would love for a top talent to sit behind him for a year and learn.  Thats ideal and then have 3-4 years of him on a rookie deal

[DaveThePanther2008]

Almost everybody has been screaming each week of how we need a MLB.  If one is available we should be filling that spot first.   I don't think QB should be a priority.   

These midseason mock drafts are about as useful as tits on a boar. 

[nctarheelreincarnated]

5 minutes ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

Almost everybody has been screaming each week of how we need a MLB.  If one is available we should be filling that spot first.   I don't think QB should be a priority.   

These midseason mock drafts are about as useful as tits on a boar. 

Almost everybody? More like everyone just hates Whitehead. LOL. 

[DaveThePanther2008]

1 minute ago, nctarheelreincarnated said:

Almost everybody? More like everyone just hates Whitehead. LOL. 

Like I said, Almost Everybody..... (joke)

[onmyown]

Would not be mad. The Panthers aren’t going to somehow all of a sudden defy history and be one of the only teams to win a super bowl without superior oline. It has to be addressed at some point. Probably smarter to do that somewhat before the next franchise QB instead of after...we already tried that.

[cardiackat88.]

With the luxury of this coaching staff I would say trade down and load up.

Teams like the Packers and Steelers never seem to pick big-named flashy guys on draft day, but then they turn into stars after playing a few games.

I am still convinced the Steelers have a linebacker and wide receiver cloning machine.