"Everyone I've talked to, thinks and believes the Panthers will trade back"

[Pejorative Miscreant]

I like the thought of trading back and accumulating more picks but is a mediocre Qb w/ upside + a decent LT > a top tier LT?  I think that’s the calculus.  
 

if the FO believes the answer is yes and we have a dance partner, we will trade back. 

[Lurk21]

I think this week we could know more about our faith with the 6th pick. The annual league meetings start today and some talks will be made about qbs.  I expect  to hear more trade ramblings this week on all things that has been touched basis on. 

[John_Sutter]

Ideal trade back targets imo are Green Bay and Kansas City. With two picks in the late 20s we could go LT and QB, or LB and QB. Then in the 2nd or 3rd  take a LT like Tyler Smith or Faalele, or a LB like Chenal, Christian Harris, or Troy Andersen. 
 

The way to do this though is to be okay with not getting maximum “trade value” for pick #6. Both of those teams need a WR, so they may see #6 as higher than they need to go (vs #8 or #10) to grab Wilson or London. In that case, it might be the most optimal outcome for the Panthers to accept equivalent value to the #8 pick to trade back and get more NFL-ready prospects at positions of need instead of squabbling over an extra 3rd in next year’s draft. 

Because even if we don’t get maximum value for #6, it’s still better return on the pick than taking Pickett or Willis, in my opinion. 

[unicar15]

13 hours ago, Panthero said:

I’d love this scenario. Basically get 20, 53, 2023 1st. It’d be a dream scenario and the Steelers under Tomlin haven’t been shy about big swings for players they want (Minkah Fitz). 
 

If Fitt was able to move down to 20 and stockpile another 1st for next year. He could potentially find his QB and have a 2 firsts next year to keep building. Or…finds the OL that we need and swings at a QB next year. 

[MHS831]

6 hours ago, AceBoogie said:

You forget they have Mitch who is pretty decent 

That makes it complicated--and why they probably won't "sell the farm" this year for a QB.  Some think MT is terrible, but I think he needs the right system- Pittsburgh is a nice fit for him, IMO

[stirs]

Saw this on another website, but could not substantiate.  Maybe in the pay part of PFF?  If true, then Pickett does not look that bad.  Hope someone can find it.  Probably also depends on the type offense a team is going to run.

 

Lowest % of uncatchable targets on throws 10+ yards downfield among FBS quarterbacks in 2021, per
@PFF
:

2. Kenny Pickett (26%)
5. Carson Strong (29%)

16. Bailey Zappe (32%)
22. Matt Corral (34%)
34. Sam Howell (36%)
50. Desmond Ridder (38%)

61. Malik Willis (40%)

[MHS831]

1 hour ago, unicar15 said:

I’d love this scenario. Basically get 20, 53, 2023 1st. It’d be a dream scenario and the Steelers under Tomlin haven’t been shy about big swings for players they want (Minkah Fitz). 
 

If Fitt was able to move down to 20 and stockpile another 1st for next year. He could potentially find his QB and have a 2 firsts next year to keep building. Or…finds the OL that we need and swings at a QB next year. 

People say, Pittsburgh is "conservative" during the draft, but if Tomlin is in love with Willis and Willis is there, they might make a move.  When was the last time Pittsburgh did not have a franchise, elite QB?  Imagine how nice it is to not have to develop a QB?  They could want to develop WIllis this year while playing Trubiski until Willis is ready--I doubt Trubiski is the solution.   I dunno--but if you love Willis and see him as a project, you want to get him in the fold now--not later when you do not have a QB to bridge the gap.

[Panthero]

1 hour ago, unicar15 said:

I’d love this scenario. Basically get 20, 53, 2023 1st. It’d be a dream scenario and the Steelers under Tomlin haven’t been shy about big swings for players they want (Minkah Fitz). 
 

If Fitt was able to move down to 20 and stockpile another 1st for next year. He could potentially find his QB and have a 2 firsts next year to keep building. Or…finds the OL that we need and swings at a QB next year. 

[stirs]

1 hour ago, MHS831 said:

People say, Pittsburgh is "conservative" during the draft, but if Tomlin is in love with Willis and Willis is there, they might make a move.  When was the last time Pittsburgh did not have a franchise, elite QB?  Imagine how nice it is to not have to develop a QB?  They could want to develop WIllis this year while playing Trubiski until Willis is ready--I doubt Trubiski is the solution.   I dunno--but if you love Willis and see him as a project, you want to get him in the fold now--not later when you do not have a QB to bridge the gap.

Trubisky is only on a 2 year deal and if the present crop of QB's need a year of so of seasoning, then no reason Tomlin would not still be in the QB market.  I agree they probably like him (Willis) but they will wait it out.

I am sure they will talk w Fitt before the draft just to have their ducks lined up.

[kungfoodude]

23 hours ago, MHS831 said:

Isnt this a contradictory statement?

Yeah, the odds of just simply being able to magically trade down in the span of the time we have picked is fuging moronic.

Even if we have an existing deal in place, the other team could just start to negotiate for a lower price because at that point we'd just be fuged.

I think if we trade down it will be before the draft.

[stirs]

11 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Yeah, the odds of just simply being able to magically trade down in the span of the time we have picked is fuging moronic.

Even if we have an existing deal in place, the other team could just start to negotiate for a lower price because at that point we'd just be fuged.

I think if we trade down it will be before the draft.

I actually think it will be the opposite, but I am normally wrong.

The fact that there are no clear number 1 and 2 and 3 picks make everything up for grabs.

[LinvilleGorge]

When you're already short your 2nd and 3rd round picks, trading down makes all the sense in the world if there's not a "run to the podium" type prospect available. Doesn't mean you definitely do it but I do think that it means you should definitely listen to any and all potential offers coming in.

 

[Basbear]

24 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

When you're already short your 2nd and 3rd round picks, trading down makes all the sense in the world if there's not a "run to the podium" type prospect available. Doesn't mean you definitely do it but I do think that it means you should definitely listen to any and all potential offers coming in.

 

Also missing our 4th, got the Rams 4th, thats SB winning waaay back pick. My simple line of thought is its either Neal or trade back for a juicy haul. 

It feels this year the late 4th-7th has the best "value". No cream, but the bottom bun is heavily heaven...Once its over the UDFA may be the best in recent history as well. Lots of teams have turned in the most scouting reports ever. That means they feel theres more draftable players and not to mention coofus had a effect, bigger than some are seeing. I hope Tepper doesnt hold back for the UDFA pool, like he did for Watson...

[kungfoodude]

45 minutes ago, stirs said:

I actually think it will be the opposite, but I am normally wrong.

The fact that there are no clear number 1 and 2 and 3 picks make everything up for grabs.

Trading up is usually driven by the chance to snag a QB or an elite player. If the top DE's and LT's are off the board, who is there to trade up for? And who is giving up a real haul??

I think this idea is fun to thing about but much harder to pull off. Consider that we were in prime trade down territory last year and wanted too much. That was with two QB's on the board.

I suspect that we will see that again but that we are reduced to having to waste a pick at 6 on a poor quality QB prospect.