What would you ask from Houston?

[tukafan21]

9 minutes ago, JawnyBlaze said:

Yes they would, it’s standard. If you trade up, you tell the team you’re trading with who you’re taking. No team is trading down if there’s a chance you’re taking their guy

I don't think that's a thing in the way you do.

Do I think there are times that the team trading up tells them who they are taking?

Sure, possibly if the GM's have a good relationship.

But there is literally a 0% chance that it's a "rule" that is followed when teams do pick swaps of back-to-back picks.  Mainly, because when that happens, the team trading down knows for certainty that the team trading up isn't taking the player they plan on taking.  Not because the other team tells them, but because they know the team trading up is doing so for a specific position that the team trading down wasn't going to be taking.

Remember, the only reason a team would ever trade up 1 spot is because they are being threatened that the team above them is going to trade the pick to a 3rd team who would then be selecting the player that 2nd team wants to take.  It's always, "I have X team going to trade for this pick unless you want to give us something to make a swap with us", and that isn't a bluff you can make when there is a 0% chance that we'd be trading back with someone below 2.  

I'd also venture to guess that there has never been a situation in NFL draft history that two teams who are both 100% taking QB's swapped back-to-back picks.  And if that did happen, it likely wasn't the 1-2 draft picks, and again, if it did happen, there is almost no chance the team trading up would honestly tell who they are selecting as it just wouldn't make any logical sense to do so.

Your own post includes the proof as to why it isn't possible.

"No team is trading down if there's a chance they're taking your guy"

Again... just think about it logically... if the Texans said, "we're taking Young" and we still say we want to do the trade.  Then that means we prefer Stroud, and if the Texans then know we prefer and would take Stroud, in what world do they have any motivation to give us anything to move up when they then know for 100% certainty that we're not taking the guy they want?!?!?!

The lack of logic here is astonishing 

Edited March 11, 2023 by tukafan21

[JawnyBlaze]

1 minute ago, rayzor said:

I'd have a meltdown because considering all they did to trade up to #1 it would be stupid to trade back down. 

Seriously, I would in an instant lose faith in this coaching staff. That just would serm like a move by a group that was more interested in playing with draft picks like they were a game than building a team. 

You trade up to #1 because you've got a damn plan for the player you have in mind. 

The truth is they already know who they want. They knew at the combine. Any comments to the contrary from the team is just at playing the game. They may have some durme diligence they feel they need to go through, but I don't doubt for a minute they know in their gut who it is they want.

I’m sure they do know who they want and the comment about “still liking two guys” is just gamesmanship in the off chance they can hustle an extra mid to late pick out of Houston. There would be absolutely no risk if they do trade down though because they’d know who Houston is taking.  

[Basbear]

 

 

Panthers trade the 1st to Indy for 4th and two future 1st and 6th this year

Indy drafts levis.

Texans drafts young.

Zona trades 3rd to panthers for 4th, panthers include late 3rd zona tosses in their 7th.

Panthers draft stroud. lost late 3rd gained 2023 6th and 7th along with two future 1st in the process....

Sorry to ruin the draft.......

[Brooklyn 3.0]

I don't see Houston doing anything. I think they'll be fine with either Stroud or Young. The Colts would be the one to look at ... but all they'd need to do is trade with Arizona to get Levis. Now ... if Atlanta, Tampa, or Vegas wanted #1 that's a different story ... but one we wouldn't do.

We're picking first.

[tukafan21]

1 minute ago, JawnyBlaze said:

I’m sure they do know who they want and the comment about “still liking two guys” is just gamesmanship in the off chance they can hustle an extra mid to late pick out of Houston. There would be absolutely no risk if they do trade down though because they’d know who Houston is taking.  

I know my last post contained it, but it was long and at the bottom so putting it here again....

YOU'RE LOGIC IS UTTERLY AND SEVERELY FLAWED

Again, think about it the other way around, from the Texans standpoint based on your argument that no team would trade down without the team trading up being honest who they'd pick.

So for the sake of argument here, the Texans tell us they're taking Young, and we say we want to make the trade still.  In that scenario, we then also just told the Texans that we prefer Stroud.

So if we then told them we're taking Stroud, why would they then give us additional assets to move up to #1 to take Young when they would then know 100% that they could keep all their assets, stay at #2, get their #1 guy, and pay him less money at the same time?!?!?!

If you still can't understand that, then I'm at a loss

[TLGPanthersFan]

27 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I don't either, but I don't discount it. And if it did happen I'd be fine with it.

After reading some of the responses here though, it sounds like a pretty good portion of the Huddle would have a total meltdown

While I would be happy with Young or Stroud, I prefer Stroud. I agree with people saying why take a chance with the Texans screwing us, when we just spent a ton of resources moving up to the 1st pick? If we can 100 percent make sure the Texans won’t take who we want I am all for moving back, but if there is even a shadow of a doubt. Just stay put, imo. 
I still think the Panthers will stay pat unless something changes. 

[Jon Snow]

2 minutes ago, JawnyBlaze said:

I’m sure they do know who they want and the comment about “still liking two guys” is just gamesmanship in the off chance they can hustle an extra mid to late pick out of Houston. There would be absolutely no risk if they do trade down though because they’d know who Houston is taking.  

You are under the assumption that Huston is obligated to pick who they say they will select.  You are putting your franchise in the hands of another team who has a conflicting interest in the same goal, a franchise qb. That is the most bizarre thing I can think of. Man up and make your selection. 

[NanuqoftheNorth]

1 minute ago, rayzor said:

You trade up to #1 because you've got a damn plan for the player you have in mind. 

Fitterer at the NFL Combine:  

"You go get the guy you want. If you have conviction, you go get him. It's pretty simple that way. If you don't know and you're going to give all these resources to go up and get it, you're hurting your team in the long run. You better be right. You better have conviction if you do move up."

https://www.si.com/nfl/panthers/gm-report/quick-hits-everything-scott-fitterer-said-at-the-nfl-combine-2023

Fitterer today (supposedly):

Meh, six of one, half a dozen of the other, doesn't make all that much difference either way.

[tukafan21]

2 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

You are under the assumption that Huston is obligated to pick who they say they will select.  You are putting your franchise in the hands of another team who has a conflicting interest in the same goal, a franchise qb. That is the most bizarre thing I can think of. Man up and make your selection. 

While this is an accurate post, it's still the secondary argument to it all.

First is just assuming the absurdity that teams "have to tell you who they're taking if you do a back-to-back pick swap" is an actual thing (which it's not).

And second, even if it was a thing, and something the other team couldn't then go back on, it then becomes asinine to think that the Texans would make the trade.  As if we knew all that information and we'd still make the trade, it's a clear sign to the Texans that we wouldn't be taking the player they wanted at #1 anyways.

It's honestly just the most asinine argument ever, I'm angry at myself of continuing to get into this same argument, but it's just legitimately too stupid for me to ignore it.

Scot's argument about us being okay with either QB and trading back to get more assets, while still not something I'd do as I'd rather take our top choice and not let someone else dictate that, is at least a real thing.  But thinking the Texans would be honest in telling us who they'd take, us agreeing to that, and then the Texans still going through with it knowing we didn't plan on taking their guy, is just beyond absurdity.

[tukafan21]

As someone else already said, the only legitimate way we trade with the Texans at this point is if we draft who they want at #1 and they give us an offer good enough at that point to trade back to #2.

And really, the only way that happens is if we gamble on taking the guy we don't prefer, thinking it's who the Texans want and would then send a trade offer for.

But that would be beyond stupid, as if the Texans then just took their #2 guy and kept their assets, we then traded a haul up to #1 to take our #2 ranked QB, which isn't happening.

[KatsAzz]

2 hours ago, Jon Snow said:

You are sacrificing your chance to choose the first qb and quite possibly the one you wanted. That's a big something that is being ignored. To hell with extra picks. Don't overthink this.

Exactly. There would be nothing to keep the leaping froging, trading team, from selecting the QB the Panthers traded up to # 1 for.

The Panthers would have to trust the trading teams word that the QB they leap froged for was not the one the Panthers desired, which in itself would be a gamble that could back fire.  

[JawnyBlaze]

11 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

I know my last post contained it, but it was long and at the bottom so putting it here again....

YOU'RE LOGIC IS UTTERLY AND SEVERELY FLAWED

Again, think about it the other way around, from the Texans standpoint based on your argument that no team would trade down without the team trading up being honest who they'd pick.

So for the sake of argument here, the Texans tell us they're taking Young, and we say we want to make the trade still.  In that scenario, we then also just told the Texans that we prefer Stroud.

So if we then told them we're taking Stroud, why would they then give us additional assets to move up to #1 to take Young when they would then know 100% that they could keep all their assets, stay at #2, get their #1 guy, and pay him less money at the same time?!?!?!

If you still can't understand that, then I'm at a loss

One last time because you obviously don’t understand how these things work and have no interest in knowing. The trade would depend on the Panthers making the Texans think we could go either way and therefore a risk of taking the guy they want. The Panthers taking the trade would just tell the Texans that we’d be ok with either guy.  That’s it. I’m done trying to help you understand a point other people were making, especially since I don’t really think this trade will happen because it has too many points of failure. But it IS possible if you understand how NFL draft trades work. 

[JawnyBlaze]

13 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

You are under the assumption that Huston is obligated to pick who they say they will select.  You are putting your franchise in the hands of another team who has a conflicting interest in the same goal, a franchise qb. That is the most bizarre thing I can think of. Man up and make your selection. 

There’s no chance they wouldn’t. If a team were to lie about that, it would destroy their credibility to every other team and GM and no one would ever trade with them again. They would get the NFL scarlet letter.  There’s no legal way to force them to take who they said they’d take, but the fallout from the deception would ruin careers. 

[tukafan21]

2 minutes ago, JawnyBlaze said:

One last time because you obviously don’t understand how these things work and have no interest in knowing. The trade would depend on the Panthers making the Texans think we could go either way and therefore a risk of taking the guy they want. The Panthers taking the trade would just tell the Texans that we’d be ok with either guy.  That’s it. I’m done trying to help you understand a point other people were making, especially since I don’t really think this trade will happen because it has too many points of failure. But it IS possible if you understand how NFL draft trades work. 

No dude, you're just being dumb now, because your other posts are also saying any trade is contingent on the Texans being honest on who they'd pick and that they couldn't then go back on it and take the other player.

Which literally negates what you just said, it's one or the other, not both.

What you're arguing here is what Mr Scot has been arguing, that we'd be okay with either player and that's why we'd make the trade.  Which in itself is a totally fair and valid argument to take, just not a trade that I'd personally make in the end.

I was responding to you saying that we'd only make the trade if the Texans told us who they'd take, and then we'd only make the trade if it's not the guy we prefer... literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on a message board, and that's saying something.