Some insight into McCaffrey...

[Fox007]

2 minutes ago, cookinbrak said:

So, Chubba Hubbard is a starter again?

Him or Abdulla not that any of it matters much with this OL.

[frankw]

22 minutes ago, ChibCU said:

Stephen Davis played three seasons with us and spent 33% of that time on IR.

For context Davis was 29 when he got here that's when most rbs begin to break down unlike McCaffrey who is only 25. But knock the man if you want he had a key role in one of only two Super Bowl runs for this franchise

[Fox007]

15 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

Injuries are often just bad luck.

 

You guys know this right?

Well I don't personally think CMC is injury prone I think RBs are prone to injury. Its the position. Derrick Henry is out too, Ravens have like 3 RBs out.

Its only the main reason you don't pay/highly draft RBs.

[mrcompletely11]

1 minute ago, Fox007 said:

Its only the main reason you don't pay/highly draft RBs.

Or give them over 700 touches in meaningless seasons.  

[thennek]

CMC was a great pick. Unfortunately the Panthers gave him a new contract that was preemptive and they grossly overpaid. If I recall correctly, CMC had at least 1-more year on the original rookie deal. His body breaking down with injuries should have happened on the last year of his rookie contract….then the Panthers would not be in this situation. 

[frankw]

The lone winning season with CMC he wasn't even the teams leading rusher. But pile in wearing those mint #22 jerseys fellas.

[mrcompletely11]

1 minute ago, thennek said:

CMC was a great pick. Unfortunately the Panthers gave him a new contract that was preemptive and they grossly overpaid. If I recall correctly, CMC had at least 1-more year on the original rookie deal. His body breaking down with injuries should have happened on the last year of his rookie contract….then the Panthers would not be in this situation. 

He had one year plus the 5th option.  It was monumentally retarded to extend him when we did.  There was literally no benefit or positive in making that move.   

[Rocky Davis]

CMC had no issues before he signed that extension, he was seen as one of the premier RBs and offensive players in the league, but since that extension he had become fragile and easily injured. 

I don't know if it is bad luck, but it has really hurt the Panthers over the last couple of years.

[Catsfan69]

5 minutes ago, frankw said:

For context Davis was 29 when he got here that's when most rbs begin to break down unlike McCaffrey who is only 25. But knock the man if you want he had a key role in one of only two Super Bowl runs for this franchise

Yes Davis already had bad injuries before he got here but he was a key piece for us.

That guy could read a block like nobody's business. 

[Catsfan69]

1 minute ago, Rocky Davis said:

CMC had no issues before he signed that extension, he was seen as one of the premier RBs and offensive players in the league, but since that extension he had become fragile and easily injured. 

I don't know if it is bad luck, but it has really hurt the Panthers over the last couple of years.

Hasn't hurt us a bit.

 

We've had zero chance to win the Superbowl with our front 12 the last few years.

[Mr. Scot]

21 minutes ago, Mage said:

Yes, but Fournette wasn't a good pick either.  The article is insinuating that Fournette was the better pick, hence the opening statement, "while McCaffrey was headed to the locker-room, Fournette was scoring the game-winning touchdown."

Yes, it is fair to argue that extending McCaffrey at that $ amount wasn't smart.  But it is hard to take the article seriously when it largely seems to be suggesting that the Panthers would have been better off with Fournette.  We all saw what Fournette was in Jacksonville, and they moved on from him.  He's effective now because he plays with Tom Brady and a godly group of receivers.  I'm sure if the Panthers had Brady, Evans, AB, Godwin, Gronk, Brate, Howard, and two great book-end tackles, we'd be getting more consistent results too.

The article should have focused on the contract and taking McCaffrey where we did.  But I have no earthly clue as to why it is trying to compare McCaffrey and Fournette.  Fournette wasn't very good in Jacksonville beyond one year.  And he isn't good now - he just plays for a far, far better team.  McCaffrey was clearly the better player and the better pick (VS Fournette).  Any other suggestion is nonsense.  

I mean, the pre-extension article comes down pretty hard on the side of McCaffrey being the right choice.

The second one? I don't know if you can say he's suggesting that we should have taken Fournette (he doesn't say that anywhere) but he does criticize the extension, including pointing out that Fournette is still going and at a much lower price.

Much as I hate to say it, that's a valid point.

[Rocky Davis]

Just now, mrcompletely11 said:

He had one year plus the 5th option.  It was monumentally retarded to extend him when we did.  There was literally no benefit or positive in making that move.   

In that 4th year does he continue to increase his value or does he fall apart?  Panthers made the decision he was going to cost more if they didn't extend him...they rolled the dice and lost at least these past two years.  Can he come back and be the player he was those first 3 years?  Possibly....but being comfortable with that money can cause players to avoid playing hard, taking hits/chances, and really being 100% dedicated when it is game time. 

 

[Mr. Scot]

16 minutes ago, Mage said:

See, the problem with the whole "don't draft a RB in the 1st round" argument is that it tries to say every situation is the same.

Should the 2021 Lions draft a RB in the 1st round?  Hell no

But why shouldn't the 2021 Bills draft one?  Why shouldn't the 2021 Patriots draft one?

Elite RBs are a difference-maker.  Yes, they have relatively shorter playing careers as an elite player than other positions, but the league changes way too much in 5 years IMO to not draft a guy just because he won't be good 5 years from now.  If the Bills were in a position to take a McCaffrey in the draft, they absolutely should take him.

I think a better way is to say bad teams shouldn't draft RBs in the 1st round, because it'll take too long to rebuild before RB is able to contribute to a winning team (in all likelihood).  Good teams absolutely should take a RB if it is a need and will make an immediate difference.

I tend not to buy into absolutes when it comes to the draft (this one included).

[mrcompletely11]

1 minute ago, Rocky Davis said:

In that 4th year does he continue to increase his value or does he fall apart?  Panthers made the decision he was going to cost more if they didn't extend him...they rolled the dice and lost at least these past two years.  Can he come back and be the player he was those first 3 years?  Possibly....but being comfortable with that money can cause players to avoid playing hard, taking hits/chances, and really being 100% dedicated when it is game time. 

 

Cost more?  We made him the highest paid RB.  How could he possibly cost more?  We were dummies to run him like we did in a poo season so he could get some 1000/1000 number only to turn around and reward him for it.  We are truly fuged with this type of leadership.

 

I thought Tepper was all analytics but so far he has just been poo in making decisions