Some Media Panthers Draft Grades & Some Thoughts

[TD alt]

Our Panthers reporter, Anthony Rizutti of Panthers Wire (of USA Today) provides us with a few grades. I've added a couple of more snippets of analyses from some NC guys, including our friend Scott Fowler in Charlotte and a vid from Panthers Playbook's Dennis Cox and Chris Lea in Raleigh.

It is food for thought. Of course we all have our opinions, but, me personally, I tend to giive the opinion of hardcore fans and people that actually follow the team a little more weight. 

Touchdown Wire:     B

Draft Wire:                B+

USA Today:               C

NFL.com:                  B

ESPN:                        B-

PFF:                          C

Yahoo Sports:          C

CBS Sports:             C+

If you want to read their little summaries, hit the link. But as you can see, the national types have largely graded the draft average. There seems to be an acknowledgement of the fact that Morgan and company were in a hard place due to the malfeasance of the previous administrations, but that our FO did the best it could. One of the "experts" mentioned the "boom-or-bust" nature of our draft, which is an interesting way to characterize it, but I'm good with that. And Charles McDonald of Yahoo Sports may have put it best, which basically alluded to the fact that so much of the grade is simply based upon the unknown:

"Even though they’re getting a C, it’s hard not to be caught by the allure of the unknown here. It’s a really interesting class."

https://pantherswire.usatoday.com/lists/panthers-nfl-draft-grades-experts-2024/

 

Tony Pauline, another national talking head, took his page straight out of Debbie Downer's playbook, but it's all about perspective, right? Here's a bone for those that are decidedly negative about the outcome:

"You could brand the Panthers as this year’s losers before the event began, considering they frittered away the first pick of the draft last year to select Bryce Young. Trading up one spot for the final selection of Round 1 to select Xavier Legette, a Day 2 receiver prospect, kept things going in the wrong direction for Carolina."

 

One person who has been---perhaps what has been perceived as negative about the direction of the franchise---decidedly sober-minded and what I consider fair about the way things have been going under the Tepper era has been Scott Fowler. By now, everyone should have heard of the contentious relationship that he and David Tepper have. Fowler has called Tepper out on his decided malfeasance (labelling it inTeptitude as I recall), and Tepper, the owner that is a somewhat contentious all own his own by the simplest of "slights," has outwardly acted inappropriate (in my opinion, toward Fowler. But Fowler was decidedly positive about this year's draft.

"While nationally the Panthers didn’t get nearly the same amount of attention in this draft as they did in 2023, owing to the controversial big-splash trade and the ensuing selection of Young a year ago, this group may be more significant as a whole."

Fowler gave the draft a B+

"This team is going to be more exciting. In particular, I have high hopes for Legette and Sanders. Carolina didn’t get everything it wanted — an edge rusher in the first two days of the draft would have been nice, for instance. But overall, I’m giving the Panthers a grade of B+ for the 2024 NFL Draft. Which, given the team as a whole got an F last year, is quite an upgrade."

You may hit a paywall:https://www.heraldonline.com/sports/nfl/carolina-panthers/article287830040.html#storylink=cpy

 

And finally, here is Dennis Cox And Chris Lea. I thought they were fair and thoughtful in their assessment. They call Dan and Dave (and company) "The Alignment," because of being on the same page.  For me, that alone, is worth the listen.

 

Edited April 28, 2024 by TD alt

[chknwing]

I watched a few of the main media outlet grades and none of them really took into consideration that this draft includes a 2nd next year carolina didnt have

[Jon Snow]

Just now, chknwing said:

I watched a few of the main media outlet grades and none of them really took into consideration that this draft includes a 2nd next year carolina didnt have

Yeah that's kinda important. 

Edited April 28, 2024 by Jon Snow

[TD alt]

6 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

Yeah that's kinda important. 

Yeah, I didn't even catch that.

[TD alt]

I forgot to mention that overall we probably received a B. Like some said in the other thread, the real or practical grade comes after the season. 

[DaveThePanther2008]

Actually pretty shocked we go decent grades for these picks because there were other high profile names still on the board and would have thought we'd get lambasted for our picks.

[WhoKnows]

18 minutes ago, chknwing said:

I watched a few of the main media outlet grades and none of them really took into consideration that this draft includes a 2nd next year carolina didnt have

Well if you have to do that then you also have to take into consideration that Brooks and that 2nd came by trading Burns. I think ignoring the 2025 2nd and then ignoring the loss of Burns makes it fair to grade without both.

[WhoKnows]

4 minutes ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

Actually pretty shocked we go decent grades for these picks because there were other high profile names still on the board and would have thought we'd get lambasted for our picks.

Overall, we really didn’t get decent grades. In everything I looked at C or C- were the lowest grades given out. Seemed like Atlanta was universally the bottom grade and we were usually tied with several teams in the tier above that. I’d say we were universally bottom 10.

[TD alt]

2 minutes ago, WhoKnows said:

Well if you have to do that then you also have to take into consideration that Brooks and that 2nd came by trading Burns. I think ignoring the 2025 2nd and then ignoring the loss of Burns makes it fair to grade without both.

Burns was another issue. 

[WhoKnows]

Just now, TD alt said:

Burns was another issue. 

But 39 was due to trading him. I’m saying you can’t just count the 2025 2nd in the grade without also counting losing Burns. I think grading the draft with the guys we actually took this year is fair. People were complaining that our grades ignore the 2025 second and ignoring how we got 39.

[TD alt]

7 minutes ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

Actually pretty shocked we go decent grades for these picks because there were other high profile names still on the board and would have thought we'd get lambasted for our picks.

I think that sometimes fans get caught up in the names and media-driven hype, while the more analytically minded, and the experts---including GMs, team scouts and coaches realize that team building isn't about that. 

[DaveThePanther2008]

1 minute ago, WhoKnows said:

But 39 was due to trading him. I’m saying you can’t just count the 2025 2nd in the grade without also counting losing Burns. I think grading the draft with the guys we actually took this year is fair. People were complaining that our grades ignore the 2025 second and ignoring how we got 39.

If you're going to bring up the Burns trade you have to include the players we were able to sign with the money we saved by trading Burns.  We got three positions of need with the money we saved by trading him. 

[jfra78]

4 minutes ago, WhoKnows said:

But 39 was due to trading him. I’m saying you can’t just count the 2025 2nd in the grade without also counting losing Burns. I think grading the draft with the guys we actually took this year is fair. People were complaining that our grades ignore the 2025 second and ignoring how we got 39.

You can add that to the assessment of the whole offseason, but not the draft itself

[chknwing]

44 minutes ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

If you're going to bring up the Burns trade you have to include the players we were able to sign with the money we saved by trading Burns.  We got three positions of need with the money we saved by trading him. 

and two 2nd round picks