Christensen ...

[Mr. Scot]

3 hours ago, ForJimmy said:

You are missing a huge part of his equation in Sam Darnold. Not thinking a QB like Fields would be there at 8 could have been part of the equation that got us Darnold making the need for a young QB no longer a need. If we had the pick at 3 we would have known Fields would be there (assuming the Jets were as public about Wilson as they were) so we wouldn’t have traded for Darnold. It’s not that hard to grasp what he is saying. 

Except it's deeply flawed.

If a team genuinely thought a guy was worth a third overall pick, there's no way in hell they'd bypass that guy at number eight. The whole idea is just plain goofy.

But the reason this goofy idea keeps getting pushed is so that people can continue to tell themselves that Darnold was only insurance just in case we couldn't get somebody better.

He wasn't. The Panthers genuinely valued him enough to make him the center of their plans.

I know that idea causes wailing and gnashing of teeth, and yes, some people on here are going to be pining for Justin Fields forever, but suggestions like this lead to a pretty stupid narrative.

Again, I don't know if they're going to be proven right. None of us do. Hell, that question may not even be answered by next offseason.

But this whole thing of trying to spin it's so that the Panthers were somehow forced to stick with Darnold despite having their hearts set on Fields is one of the most dumbass things I've seen on here in a long time.

They didn't want him, people.

Get over it.

Edited August 12, 2021 by Mr. Scot

[Panthers8969]

On 8/9/2021 at 4:41 PM, BrianS said:

Why is age relevant at all to a rookie?  Yea, it sucks for the player, it means his potential football career will be shorter.  But for the team?  There is no downside.

You're getting a player who is, in theory, mentally more ready to put in work and learn.  One who will likely only need one more contract done in his entire career.

BC either works out or he doesn't.  Like any rookie.  But his age isn't really a negative as some folks would like to make it out to be.  If he takes a year or two to acclimate to the NFL, and we then get five productive seasons of a "good" NFL lineman, it's a pick well spent.

Younger players naturally have higher ceilings. Breakout age his shown to be a statistically significant and predictive metric for WRs. When BC finally earns a starting job in his 4th year, he’ll be 28/29 and a looming FA. The teams done with the player at that point. 

[AU-panther]

4 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

Fields vs Horn or Darnold or frankly anybody else doesn't even enter into the equation.

If you like a player enough that you would take him with the number three pick, then not only are you going to take him at the number eight pick, but you're going to be thrilled out of your mind that he fell to you at that spot.

That's why the notion that we would have taken Fields at number three but didn't take him when he fell to number eight is basically ridiculous.

That's no different than saying "yeah, we would have taken this guy number one overall but since he fell to the number five spot we weren't interested anymore".

Do you honestly think we haven’t passed on players in the past in the draft,that we have liked, because we didn’t have a need at that position? 
 

Need factors into drafting regardless of what people claim.  With Darnold on the roster the desire to draft a QB was considerable less.  If Darnold had not been on the roster the desire would have been higher.  Simple concept.

How often have you seen a team trade multiple picks for a  starting QB and then 3 weeks later draft one in the first round? Think about it…

 

[ForJimmy]

5 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

Except it's deeply flawed.

If a team genuinely thought a guy was worth a third overall pick, there's no way in hell they'd bypass that guy at number eight. The whole idea is just plain goofy.

But the reason this goofy idea keeps getting pushed is so that people can continue to tell themselves that Darnold was only insurance just in case we couldn't get somebody better.

He wasn't. The Panthers genuinely valued him enough to make him the center of their plans.

I know that idea causes wailing and gnashing of teeth, and yes, some people on here are going to be pining for Justin Fields forever, but suggestions like this lead to a pretty stupid narrative.

Again, I don't know if they're going to be proven right. None of us do. Hell, that question may not even be answered by next offseason.

But this whole thing of trying to spin it's so that the Panthers were somehow forced to stick with Darnold despite having their hearts set on Fields is one of the most dumbass things I've seen on here in a long time.

They didn't want him, people.

Get over it.

It’s really not flawed you just aren’t grasping the full concept. The Bucs would have probably drafted a QB before they signed Brady, the Colts before they signed Wentz. It’s why every analyst didn’t think the Bengals were a threat to draft a QB. They may have liked Mac or Fields, but did not have a need for a QB since they have Burrow. Do you think there was no RB we liked until we drafted Hubbard later in the draft, or maybe we didn’t want to spend an early pick on one since we have CMC there already? He wasn’t even saying their hearts were set on Fields. AU simply stated if we were picking 3, we may not have traded for Darnold knowing a top 3 QB would definitely be there. All he was saying is us picking at 8 vs 3 probably changed out approach to acquiring a QB. Stop being so defensive over every Fields comment. His had logic behind it.

[Mr. Scot]

32 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

It’s really not flawed you just aren’t grasping the full concept. The Bucs would have probably drafted a QB before they signed Brady, the Colts before they signed Wentz. It’s why every analyst didn’t think the Bengals were a threat to draft a QB. They may have liked Mac or Fields, but did not have a need for a QB since they have Burrow. Do you think there was no RB we liked until we drafted Hubbard later in the draft, or maybe we didn’t want to spend an early pick on one since we have CMC there already? He wasn’t even saying their hearts were set on Fields. AU simply stated if we were picking 3, we may not have traded for Darnold knowing a top 3 QB would definitely be there. All he was saying is us picking at 8 vs 3 probably changed out approach to acquiring a QB. Stop being so defensive over every Fields comment. His had logic behind it.

I fully grasp the concept.

I think the concept is stupid.

Top 3 picks are elite players. Do you really believe if a team had a chance to get a player that good at a position that still didn't have an established player, they'd have passed?

Some people just can't handle the fact that they chose to pass on Fields.

As to the McCaffrey comparison, remember a guy named Jonathan Stewart? 

(or for that matter, two guys named Beason and Kuechly?)

Edited August 12, 2021 by Mr. Scot

[MHS831]

Are we really fighting over USC and Ohio State QBs?

In a thread about a BYU 25-year old rookie Mormon OL?

Edited August 12, 2021 by MHS831

[frankw]

Actually both ongoing convos here have relevance with one another. We passed on a qb because we have Sam Darnold even though his backups are Will Grier and a former XFL starter. We drafted a tackle in the third round to supposedly assist in protecting our starting qb who has yet to play more than 13 games in a season. Yet from the current looks of it Christensen will not be contributing much if at all in the short term. This is a gamble that if it pays off our coaches and gm look brilliant if not well there will be questions and none of them will be particularly sympathetic.

[ForJimmy]

2 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

I fully grasp the concept.

I think the concept is stupid.

Top 3 picks are elite players. Do you really believe if a team had a chance to get a player that good at a position that still didn't have an established player, they'd have passed?

Some people just can't handle the fact that they chose to pass on Fields.

As to the McCaffrey comparison, remember a guy named Jonathan Stewart? 

(or for that matter, two guys named Beason and Kuechly?)

Yeah Stewart was definitely young and in his prime when we got CMC…… talk about a stupid point. Beason lasted how long after Luke? Take Fields out of the picture for some reason that’s a weird issue for you. If a need is addressed in the offseason by a trade because of doubt that position would be there at your pick it absolutely changes your plans for the draft. If we traded for Orlando Brown because of doubt Sewell would be there at 8 and he fell to 8, I doubt we would have drafted him and had a young Brown, Moton, and Sewell with a ton of other needs. Had we had the 3rd pick maybe we don’t trade for Brown. 

You made a statement about why wouldn’t you draft someone at 8 you thought about at 3 and AU answered it. Draft positioning effects how you address needs in the offseason which in return changes your needs in the draft. Needs effect how teams draft. No one is even saying this is how it happened for us. It’s just an example of how quickly player ranking in drafts can change before and after free agency and how free agency is done in relation to draft picks. It’s all connected.

[LinvilleGorge]

2 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

Some people just can't handle the fact that they chose to pass on Fields.

I honestly think it's that simple. There were reasons to think that we would take Fields if he was there. There were "reports". Those reports were just incorrect. There are lots of reports leading up to every draft and a lot of them prove to be incorrect in hindsight. It is what it is. It's still fun to follow and discuss.

To argue that we would've taken Fields at #3 overall and chose to pass on him at #8 because of the trade for Darnold is essentially arguing that the Panthers' front office is dumb and incompetent. I really hope that's not the case. If Fields turns out to be great, I'm going to chalk it up as poor QB evaluation. 

[Mr. Scot]

12 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

Yeah Stewart was definitely young and in his prime when we got CMC…… talk about a stupid point. Beason lasted how long after Luke? Take Fields out of the picture for some reason that’s a weird issue for you. If a need is addressed in the offseason by a trade because of doubt that position would be there at your pick it absolutely changes your plans for the draft. If we traded for Orlando Brown because of doubt Sewell would be there at 8 and he fell to 8, I doubt we would have drafted him and had a young Brown, Moton, and Sewell with a ton of other needs. Had we had the 3rd pick maybe we don’t trade for Brown. 

You made a statement about why wouldn’t you draft someone at 8 you thought about at 3 and AU answered it. Draft positioning effects how you address needs in the offseason which in return changes your needs in the draft. Needs effect how teams draft. No one is even saying this is how it happened for us. It’s just an example of how quickly player ranking in drafts can change before and after free agency and how free agency is done in relation to draft picks. It’s all connected.

Uhhh, have you forgotten that Stewart was drafted when we already had DeAngelo Williams?

And see LG's response above.

Using AU's logic, a team that had a player rated as a #1 pick would pass on that same player at a later pick.

That's clearly ridiculous.

[CRA]

23 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I honestly think it's that simple. There were reasons to think that we would take Fields if he was there. There were "reports". Those reports were just incorrect. There are lots of reports leading up to every draft and a lot of them prove to be incorrect in hindsight. It is what it is. It's still fun to follow and discuss.

To argue that we would've taken Fields at #3 overall and chose to pass on him at #8 because of the trade for Darnold is essentially arguing that the Panthers' front office is dumb and incompetent. I really hope that's not the case. If Fields turns out to be great, I'm going to chalk it up as poor QB evaluation. 

Weirdest narrative for me is the one that if Jimmy Clausen was taken with out first pick…..it meant everyone loved him, wanted him in Carolina and thought that was the best option for us.   That’s rarely reality. 

I think the reports were likely correct some wanted Fields in Carolina.  All that matters though is what the final decision wants to do.    And we have seen a lot of final decisions in the NFL outsmart themselves.  
 

 

[LinvilleGorge]

Just now, CRA said:

 

I think the reports were likely correct some wanted Fields in Carolina.  All that matters though is what the final decision wants to do.    And we have seen a lot of final decisions in the NFL outsmart themselves. 
 

 

Yep. When you have a room full of people, opinions are inevitably going to vary.

[CRA]

Just now, LinvilleGorge said:

Yep. When you have a room full of people, opinions are inevitably going to vary.

Well, not according to some. 

[LinvilleGorge]

Just now, CRA said:

Well, not according to some. 

Some people just get irrationally upset by the reality that opinions can and do vary.