REPORT: Panthers to aggressive pursue trade up to get a QB

[45catfan]

2 hours ago, jayboogieman said:

 

I haven't read the next five pages yet, but your second comment applies to your first. There is no guarantee that any draft pick will be a starter, much less a cornerstone piece regardless of position.

True and why giving up 3 chances at a home run in favor of 1 doesn't sit well with me.

[CamWhoaaCam]

31 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

wait, I got a warning for this post?  what the hell?

lol Damn bro what you do to the mods?

[Hoenheim]

3 hours ago, Xtreme said:

I remembered when I got shitted on when I said it was stupid to try and make a playoff push. We needed to tank, but NOOO, we just had to win some shitty games against other shitty teams. How did that work out for us?

The thing is it's neigh impossible to make players tank because they're mostly playing for their jobs and how much money they can make In the future. 

An organization can tank by trading away good players I guess. But that doesn't ever guarantee wins and losses.

Even if you as a fan want the team to tank it doesn't really affect whether they win or lose. But I agree that fans shouldn't be vilified for wanting a high enough pick for a franchise QB because that's the fastest route to correcting our consistent losing seasons for the last 5 years. 

[ForJimmy]

24 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Opportunity costs.  It's a real thing.  Zach Wilson is one of many, many, many examples.  Yes, it takes about 3 years to find out if the QB is a bust or not, in the mean time we are given up 1st round talent that's not a QB with the trade collateral.  Franchise-type talent isn't only found in QBs and the type of talent we forfeit trading away with the next 3 years worth of first rounders.

Yeah it’s a big loss, but it’s also an opportunity to add a staff-viewed top talented QB. Something (in theory) we won’t be in a position to do for a long time assuming our staff does it’s thing. That’s unfortunately the opportunity cost.

[Jon Snow]

Aggressive would be to trade for the 1st overall pick and taking Richardson after you've signed Carr to a 3 year deal.  If you are going to swing, swing for the fences.

[ForJimmy]

29 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

True and why giving up 3 chances at a home run in favor of 1 doesn't sit well with me.

That 1 can have a bigger impact than the other 3 especially if the next two years aren’t top 10 picks. It’s Cam’s impact vs Brown/Horn/CMC plus two later 1st round picks like Shaq or Benjamin. QBs are just that valuable anymore. I know you have to still build a team around them and missing those next 2 firsts will impact that greatly. The good news is we should be able to sign FAs with a rookie pay scale QB and out cleared up cap space the next two years.

[ForJimmy]

3 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

Aggressive would be to trade for the 1st overall pick and taking Richardson after you've signed Carr to a 3 year deal.  If you are going to swing, swing for the fences.

If you are investing all that money in Carr I think we would use the picks for weapons to help him excel. Drafting a QB could also piss him off. It would be VERY aggressive though!

[45catfan]

21 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

Yeah it’s a big loss, but it’s also an opportunity to add a staff-viewed top talented QB. Something (in theory) we won’t be in a position to do for a long time assuming our staff does it’s thing. That’s unfortunately the opportunity cost.

If you think that franchise QBs can only be had in the top 3 or 5 picks.  Total fallacy.

[AggieLean]

Just seen my boy in the bar who’s a panther fan too. Told him we about to give up 3 1sts for that #1 pick. He said go ahead and do it. It’s time  

[Byrdman4real]

3 hours ago, BeenPounding said:

Wow almost look just like the one I did

[CamWhoaaCam]

19 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

Aggressive would be to trade for the 1st overall pick and taking Richardson after you've signed Carr to a 3 year deal.  If you are going to swing, swing for the fences.

I don't know why people keep suggesting QB if we sign Carr.

 

Carr needs weapons!

 

If we still drafting a QB it makes no sense to spend big money on Carr. Either sign Carr and use #9 to get him a WR or TE. Or just trade up for a QB and sign a much cheaper bridge QB.

 

 

[CamWhoaaCam]

1 minute ago, AggieLean said:

Just seen my boy in the bar who’s a panther fan too. Told him we about to give up 3 1sts for that #1 pick. He said go ahead and do it. It’s time  

You have a good friend. It's time we sell out for a QB.

[ForJimmy]

5 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

If you think that franchise QBs can only be had in the top 3 or 5 picks.  Total fallacy.

I don’t. I think if our staff wants a top 3 talented prospect at the QB position that is the cost for it. They can hope another Mahomes or Jackson gets overlooked in a draft and they can develop that player also. I just think they are wanting to start this whole QB development process this year. Maybe they sign Carr tomorrow and this is all for nothing who knows?

[Ivan The Awesome]

Say good bye to Burns. LoL