Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Panthers Well Represented at Fields 2nd Pro Day

ncfan

By ncfan,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, ForJimmy said:

This makes the most sense. I don’t know why people are struggling with this. We got Darnold because there was significant doubt Fields will be there at 8. After the draft, Darnold’s price could go up for desperate teams. We went ahead and secured our backup plan for little draft cost.

The article you linked in the next post contradicts your take on Darnold.

Quoting:

The real question is: does it make sense to still take a quarterback? Giving up three draft picks, although not a huge haul, are still three draft picks at the end of the day. You don't just give that kind of draft capital for a guy you hope can be the answer and maybe be a backup to the guy you draft in the first round. That's a type of move that shows you have confidence in the player that you're trading for. 

Could this just be the Panthers bluffing to get teams from behind them to trade up into Carolina's spot? Possibly. Then again, if Brady, Rhule, and Fitterer truly fall in love with Fields maybe they do draft him and let he and Darnold compete. It's all a game of unknowns right now and one that we likely won't know the answer to until draft night. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ForJimmy Grand Master

ForJimmy

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

The article you linked in the next post contradicts your take on Darnold.

Quoting:

The real question is: does it make sense to still take a quarterback? Giving up three draft picks, although not a huge haul, are still three draft picks at the end of the day. You don't just give that kind of draft capital for a guy you hope can be the answer and maybe be a backup to the guy you draft in the first round. That's a type of move that shows you have confidence in the player that you're trading for. 

Could this just be the Panthers bluffing to get teams from behind them to trade up into Carolina's spot? Possibly. Then again, if Brady, Rhule, and Fitterer truly fall in love with Fields maybe they do draft him and let he and Darnold compete. It's all a game of unknowns right now and one that we likely won't know the answer to until draft night. 

It takes both sides hinting at it’s all a games of unknowns. That’s the whole point of the article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

It takes both sides hinting at it’s all a games of unknowns. That’s the whole point of the article.

It allows that the Panthers could draft Fields and allow he and Darnold to compete for the starting job.

But this...

Giving up three draft picks, although not a huge haul, are still three draft picks at the end of the day. You don't just give that kind of draft capital for a guy you hope can be the answer and maybe be a backup to the guy you draft in the first round. That's a type of move that shows you have confidence in the player that you're trading for. 

... directly contradicts this:

We got Darnold because there was significant doubt Fields will be there at 8. We went ahead and secured our backup plan for little draft cost.

As I've said previously, Darnold is not a "just in case". The team legitimately views him as a starter.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tijo Newbie

tijo

Posted
Posted

We would be stupid if Fields fell, and he was the best option left but we passed on him because we didn't have our people look at him.

I think he'll be better than Wilson or Lance or Jones. And I think that if he's there, we should take him, unless Sewell is there.  If Sewell is there you turn in the card with 9:59 left.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ForJimmy Grand Master

ForJimmy

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

It allows that the Panthers could draft Fields and allow he and Darnold to compete for the starting job.

But this...

Giving up three draft picks, although not a huge haul, are still three draft picks at the end of the day. You don't just give that kind of draft capital for a guy you hope can be the answer and maybe be a backup to the guy you draft in the first round. That's a type of move that shows you have confidence in the player that you're trading for. 

... directly contradicts this:

We got Darnold because there was significant doubt Fields will be there at 8. We went ahead and secured our backup plan for little draft cost.

As I've said previously, Darnold is not a "just in case". The team legitimately views him as a starter.

So the real catch is what the writer thinks a future 2nd and 6th, 4th round picks are valued. Do I value them as strong enough capital to pass on a potential franchise QB if he happens to fall to us at 8? Absolutely not. I think it was used to move on from Teddy (apparently Tepper wants this) and secure a young QB with potential in case the one we like isn’t there at 8 (which he very well might not be). Do they think Darnold can be a starter? Yeah I think they believe that. A top 10 drafted QB is viewed at as more than just a starter. They can be franchise changers. Alex Smith was a solid starter yet the Chiefs still traded up for Mahomes. It all boils down to how they view Fields and none of us know the answer nor should we at this point. 

Here is a great example. We viewed Teddy as a starter and gave him a solid contract showing our confidence in him. They have stated if Herbert fell to them he would have been the pick. Imagine if he did fall and we didn’t draft him because we had a potential starter in Teddy and too many needs in other areas...

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PantherPhann89 Mentor

PantherPhann89

Posted
Posted

It's hard to get a bead on what direction our current staff will go with their decision making. It's easy to get caught up in the past regimes, but as far as this draft goes:  I think that Sam Darnold was our trade/starter/fill in.

Meaning if we can't draft who they want, Sam is the starter and we'd draft accordingly.

If we can draft the QB we want, we'd draft him and continue to let Darnold start and fill in till he's/draft pick is ready.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • BullCityP
      What top 10 prospect do you absolutely NOT want?

      By BullCityP · Posted

      Nah I wanna see these NFL evaluators talking about his prospects at WR aren't good because I would LOVE to see thier explanations 
    • tukafan21
      What top 10 prospect do you absolutely NOT want?

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      You do realize that raw stats don't make someone a better or worse player, right? To begin with, the last time I checked, 1,319 is more yards than 1,258, so T-Mac had more yards (but I'll forgive you as a typo there and say you meant catches lol), but that's before even factoring in that Hunter did his in 13 games vs 12 for T-Mac because Arizona didn't make a bowl game. It's also completely ignoring the team around each player.  If you think Hunter having the 8th place finisher in the Heisman voting at QB isn't going to result in helping his top WRs stats, then you're sticking your head in the sand to purposefully not see it. Hunter's QB had 353 completions for 4,134 yards and 37 TDs vs T-Mac's QB who had 260 completions for 2,958 yards and 18 TDs. But sure, let's rank NFL prospects by their stats and say the guy with more catches and TDs is the better prospect.  So on that note, I now change my mind, T-Mac is no longer the best WR in the draft, it's Nick Nash who had 104 rec, 1,382 yards, and 16 TDs, all numbers better than Hunter's... because that's how this is done, right? As I've said before, if someone wants to like a player better than someone else that's totally fair, but come with real reasons, talk about their play, but to talk about things like stats as your reasoning, when you ignore the obvious and massive flaws in using those stats in that way, just makes you look dumb.
    • BullCityP
      What top 10 prospect do you absolutely NOT want?

      By BullCityP · Posted

      Nah you don't go out and put up the numbers he did without being able to run routes dude is a football junky so he works on his craft he isn’t THAT much more athletic than other players to just be able to go out and do whatever and succeed at that level 
×
×
  • Create New...