Christensen ...

[ForJimmy]

3 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

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.

You are talking about drafting another RB to install our double trouble run heavy offense. Both players got plenty of touches. It doesn’t really work that way with QBs and some other positions. You can double down on WRs too in the right offense. Most teams don’t ignore glaring needs to have these luxury picks. I kept hearing that TE Pitts was the best player in the draft, yet he went 4 because the top 3 teams had more pressing needs.

So if the Jags acquired Watson in the offseason with no legal issues they still take Lawrence? We obviously value Darnold very highly and feel he addresses our need at the position. If we didn’t acquire him we could have drafted a QB. Had we had the 3rd overall pick maybe we would have waited on the draft and not traded for him. 
So you don’t think off-season additions (especially via trade) don’t change a team’s draft board? That seems ridiculous…

[LinvilleGorge]

4 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

You are talking about drafting another RB to install our double trouble run heavy offense. Both players got plenty of touches. It doesn’t really work that way with QBs and some other positions. You can double down on WRs too in the right offense. Most teams don’t ignore glaring needs to have these luxury picks. I kept hearing that TE Pitts was the best player in the draft, yet he went 4 because the top 3 teams had more pressing needs.

So if the Jags acquired Watson in the offseason with no legal issues they still take Lawrence? We obviously value Darnold very highly and feel he addresses our need at the position. If we didn’t acquire him we could have drafted a QB. Had we had the 3rd overall pick maybe we would have waited on the draft and not traded for him. 
So you don’t think off-season additions (especially via trade) don’t change a team’s draft board? That seems ridiculous…

Pitts went #4 because QB >>>>> TE in terms of importance. Three QBs were drafted in front of Pitts. He was the first non-QB selected.

No, the Jags would not have selected Lawrence in that situation. Primarily because that #1 overall pick would've been part of the package to get Watson. In the event they still held that pick, they would've put it on the auction block and shipped it off to the highest bidder for a king's ransom.

We could be very high on Darnold... or we may have just not been all that high on Fields.

[ForJimmy]

35 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. 

If Darnold busts they clearly overvalued him. Overvaluing a player at a position as important as the QB will lead to a lot of “dumb” decisions at least in appearance to us fans… 

[LinvilleGorge]

1 minute ago, ForJimmy said:

If Darnold busts they clearly overvalued him. Overvaluing a player at a position as important as the QB will lead to a lot of “dumb” decisions at least in appearance to us fans… 

If Darnold busts and Fields looks promising, it's going to put a big bullseye on this current staff as to whether or not they have any clue on how to effectively evaluate QBs. To have that situation happen right on the heels of the failed Teddy experiment... oh wee mayne. People who think that Rhule's seat wouldn't at least be starting to warm up in that scenario just aren't being realistic IMO. Honestly, depending on how the rest of the team is performing and what the W-L record looks like, Rhule's seat could be red hot in that scenario. If Darnold busts, IMO I think Rhule and company are probably down to their last swing at solving . the QB position. That's why I think we'll swing big if Darnold does bust.

We'll just have to wait and see. We'll have a pretty good indication in a couple of months.

[ForJimmy]

8 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Pitts went #4 because QB >>>>> TE in terms of importance. Three QBs were drafted in front of Pitts. He was the first non-QB selected.

No, the Jags would not have selected Lawrence in that situation. Primarily because that #1 overall pick would've been part of the package to get Watson. In the event they still held that pick, they would've put it on the auction block and shipped it off to the highest bidder for a king's ransom.

We could be very high on Darnold... or we may have just not been all that high on Fields.

Agree completely. AU was just showing an example of a team passing on a player they previously had ranked higher than he fell. He brought up needs being met in the offseason. I was just backing him up because it was getting dismissed but made sense to me.

[AU-panther]

10 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.

You trying so hard to prove a point you are arguing something that people really aren't saying.  Nobody, or at least I'm not, is saying that the team traded for Darnold just to be a back up incase a QB didn't' fall in the draft.

Actually what you are saying backs up what I said.  Once the team traded for Darnold he was the center of their plans as you say.  At that point QB isn't really part of their drafting plans.

It is very possible for the team to have liked Fields but not to draft him since they had Darnold.  Those two facts can exist together.

 

[LinvilleGorge]

1 minute ago, AU-panther said:

It is very possible for the team to have liked Fields but not to draft him since they had Darnold.  Those two facts can exist together.

 

It's possible. I'm simply saying that if that's what we did then we're really dumb and this current crew is highly unlikely to end up working out. I'm really hoping that's not the case.

[ForJimmy]

13 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

If Darnold busts and Fields looks promising, it's going to put a big bullseye on this current staff as to whether or not they have any clue on how to effectively evaluate QBs. To have that situation happen right on the heels of the failed Teddy experiment... oh wee mayne. People who think that Rhule's seat wouldn't at least be starting to warm up in that scenario just aren't being realistic IMO. Honestly, depending on how the rest of the team is performing and what the W-L record looks like, Rhule's seat could be red hot in that scenario. If Darnold busts, IMO I think Rhule and company are probably down to their last swing at solving . the QB position. That's why I think we'll swing big if Darnold does bust.

We'll just have to wait and see. We'll have a pretty good indication in a couple of months.

Hopefully Darnold plays well and it won’t matter. However if you can’t evaluate QBs you won’t have a very long career as a head coach…

[AU-panther]

54 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. 

 

3 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?)

Poeple are saying two different things in this thread. 

Did we pass on Fields because we didn't like him or because we had already invested in Darnold?

I believe we liked Fields, but we were not sure if we could get him so we traded for Darnold, who we also liked, which was a sure thing.  At that point fields was no longer really an option on draft night.  We didn't like him so much more than Darnold to give up on Darnold already.

Simple question, if the trade for Darnold had not gone through do you believe we still would have picked Horn at 8? or drafted a QB?

 

 

[ForJimmy]

2 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

It's possible. I'm simply saying that if that's what we did then we're really dumb and this current crew is highly unlikely to end up working out. I'm really hoping that's not the case.

Unless Darnold turns out to be solid.

[AU-panther]

3 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

It's possible. I'm simply saying that if that's what we did then we're really dumb and this current crew is highly unlikely to end up working out. I'm really hoping that's not the case.

You and I probably would have picked Fields anyway, but it didn't surprise me that the team didn't. 

Most teams aren't going to spend multiple picks to trade for a guy, especially a QB, and then a few weeks later draft a guy for the same position.  They almost feel like they are wasting the sunk cost so to speak.

 

 

[CRA]

16 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

You and I probably would have picked Fields anyway, but it didn't surprise me that the team didn't. 

Most teams aren't going to spend multiple picks to trade for a guy, especially a QB, and then a few weeks later draft a guy for the same position.  They almost feel like they are wasting the sunk cost so to speak.

 

 

Correct.  I think the right call was to still draft Fields. 

But even I thought (for me it was a fear) they were going to draft Horn leading up to the draft.  

Adding Darnold simply changed things.  I think they simply took all top QBs off their board.  And it wasn’t because they think Darnold was a better option than them in a vacuum.  It’s was because the smart move at the time was to get Darnold.   And they did it.  So they adjusted their plans. 
 

 

[ForJimmy]

1 minute ago, CRA said:

Correct.  I think the right call was to still draft Fields. 

But even I thought (for me it was a fear) they were going to draft Horn leading up to the draft.  

Adding Darnold simply changed things.  I think they simply took all top QBs off their board.  And it wasn’t because they think Darnold was a better option than them in a vacuum.  It’s was because the smart move at the time was to get Darnold.   And they did it.  So they adjusted their plans. 
 

 

Bingo. Darnold was a guarantee and relatively cheap from a draft capital point of view. If he was evaluated anywhere close to a Fields or Jones I would think acquiring him for certain while keeping your 1st round picks was the right call. If they waited the guy they want may not have been there at 8… 

[LinvilleGorge]

4 minutes ago, CRA said:

Correct.  I think the right call was to still draft Fields. 

But even I thought (for me it was a fear) they were going to draft Horn leading up to the draft.  

Adding Darnold simply changed things.  I think they simply took all top QBs off their board.  And it wasn’t because they think Darnold was a better option than them in a vacuum.  It’s was because the smart move at the time was to get Darnold.   And they did it.  So they adjusted their plans. 
 

 

All in on Sam Darnold?