A Joe Person production: Panthers 53-man roster projection August 12th new edition primetime let's go

[frankw]

16 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

TBQH, I don't think we are capable of developing a late round QB prospect, even given their limited ceilings.

I would also say that's fairly rare in the last 30+ years of the NFL for basically any NFL franchise. The percentage of guys taken in the 5th round or later that even become 2nd string QB's is likely very small.

At this point I'm not even worrying about odds based on past drafts. We just need to keep shooting our shot. That's all we've got.

I agree we've been abysmal at development. But it's our only path forward. And we've also been relying on con artists like Matt Rhule who never wanted to develop a young rookie quarterback in the past. Eventually we have to stumble upon someone that actually knows what they're doing. That's the hope I guess. I like Canales overall and think perhaps he could be the answer for us in this regard. I just don't know how rough the adjustment to being a first time HC is going to be for him. There's so many different needs and inner workings going on with this franchise. So far he's just trying to keep everyone upbeat and positive. That's great for July and August. But we'll see how that demeanor is working come November.

[Panthering]

On 8/13/2024 at 7:06 AM, SCO96 said:

It's funny that you mentioned Spencer Rattler. He was the 150th overall pick in the 2024 draft and wasn't taken until the 5th round.

After we picked Legette at the end of the 1st, I was of the opinion that Carolina should have strongly considered taking him once he dropped out of round 3. Rattler & Legette had a great connection at USC. Rattler also has a better arm than Bryce Young. If the team struggles out of the gate in 2024 (a definte possibility after watching how poorly Bryce performed last season), I think having Rattler on the roster  would at least give the Panthers the possibility of attacking downfield and keeping the defenses honest.

Argh I was pounding the table for Rattler but I'm biased. He could develop into something and of course he got drafted in division. No chance he'll be cut though, a half decent QB on a rookie contract is one of the best value contracts in the league. They'll trot him out there when the Aints are 4-10 and they're done with Carr forever. 

[strato]

Yeah I would think they are doing what we wish our team would do. People say it’s sort of a fantasy to think that way but The Saints QB room beats the hell out or ours and it is done to that model. 

If they don’t keep Rattler long term they can possibly get something for him, depending on how he comes along.

It is unquestionably the highest valued position. People fall not as much because their ceilings are too low, more that their floor is not high enough to bet on earlier.

Buying the highest valued position super low, you have opportunity to profit. 

To me it is kind of like a small side bet on a huge pot. 

Edited August 14 by strato

[PNW_PantherMan]

28 minutes ago, Panthering said:

Argh I was pounding the table for Rattler but I'm biased. He could develop into something and of course he got drafted in division. No chance he'll be cut though, a half decent QB on a rookie contract is one of the best value contracts in the league. They'll trot him out there when the Aints are 4-10 and they're done with Carr forever. 

Yeah teams don't just cut rookie QBs they drafted that play well in preseason.  That would be really surprising.

I didn't like Rattler in college, but I would been in support of taking him in the 5th or later for sure.

[Waldo]

If a team is worried about the pressure that a late round draft pick at QB would create then they have the wrong QB already. 

If they have an epically bad QB performance the year before and don't try to bring in more options than you have the wrong people running the team. 

Both can be true. 

[PNW_PantherMan]

6 minutes ago, Waldo said:

If a team is worried about the pressure that a late round draft pick at QB would create then they have the wrong QB already. 

If they have an epically bad QB performance the year before and don't try to bring in more options than you have the wrong people running the team. 

Both can be true. 

In the offseason of 2012, the Seahawks went out and gave Matt Flynn a huge bag.  He was supposed to be the starter.  They overpaid him, and he was already penciled in as the dude.  But they took a QB in the 3rd round because they liked him.  Independent of the signing they had just made.  Russell Wilson played so much better than Matt Flynn in the preaseason, that nobody even knows who the hell that guy is today.  That's how you run a football team.  You keep looking until you find the guy.  If you're not sure, then you haven't found him.

Edited August 14 by PNW_PantherMan

[kungfoodude]

1 hour ago, strato said:

Won’t argue that much, but no one down there has a recognized high floor. So you really have to look at that compared to just the one position. And see the difference. I haven’t done that work, but my guess is that more position players pan out into something usable than do QBs* but then you have to also figure in positional value. Wouldn’t you? (higher for QBs)

 

edit: * which is something like taking the field vs one player in a bet. The real analysis would have to go by position and how often drafting that position was a success, right?

And there may be a position that has the higher success rate in those late late rounds. I would probably guess kickers and cornerbacks, maybe a tackle you can make into a guard... something like that. But it could be QBs too. 

I think I did a limited look at this data some years ago and QB's were fairly low in terms of panning out. I would have to do that again. I can relatively easily just boil it down to GS and CarAV. 

[strato]

Yeah well that is not a surprise, most are fliers at that point. 

And if I wasn’t already behind from messing around the football internet stuff, I would look up the percentages of all positions. 

Intuition based on years of following says small school players in general live down there. They either have intelligence challenges, size challenges, they are missing or have yet to demonstrate skills in probably a couple of the ‘tools’ areas.

Guys with discipline or maturity issues, down there. 

Non 5 tool players that have borderline tools on their best areas, down there. 

Undersized players that still show something... down there.