Armanti Edwards....

[GSO_Pantherz]

?

Randy Moss, Chris Johnson, Joey Galloway.... I can name several more

Drew Carter beat defenses a couple times. He just wasn't consistent catching the ball

I guess I could have been more clear in that post. Those are all complete receivers/runningbacks who are not only fast but run great routes, have great hands, and have good field vision. Drew Carter was just a track star posing as a receiver.

[thefuzz]

He wasn't drafted in the second round, they just traded a future 2nd round pick to move up. You can call that a 2nd round draft pick, but technically he was a third rounder.

Who knows if he'll stick and make a huge impact? I certainly don't, but I will say that 4-5 days of training camp and at a new position is insufficient time to make a true determination. Hell, they're still giving Jarrett a chance who was a true second round pick and has always played WR (not considered a project). It's been long enough to call Jarrett a bust, but not long enough to call AE a bust. This isn't being an ASU homer, this is being logical.

BTW, most draft picks are projects. There are very few college players that can go right into the NFL and start right away. Even right now, Bradford hasn't been called the starter--though he probably will be. I think the gap from college to pro is the largest in football.

You can look at it like you want to, but he is a 2nd round draft pick, at least to the Panthers.

I have not called him a bust, nor will I, but I don't like using future draft picks on players. See my E. Brown posts.

It's not that i don't like the players, I just don't like the thought process.

[Yardbird]

I'm late to this party and haven't read the whole thread yet. But here are some thoughts before they escape.

Key hot topic: Edwards was drafted at too high a price because of the 2nd rounder given to the Pats.

It may be instructive to look at this move in light of other draft-day deals over the past three years. Doing so could provide insight into the Panthers' current draft philosophy as well as their business model. Two points:

1) I believe the Panthers are confident in the young, blue-chip talent currently on the roster.

2) Panthers were ranked 17th most valuable sports franchise in the world.

RE #1: The Panthers believe they have the high-level talent they need to succeed. Because of this, they are willing to take some calculated personnel-risks. When/if picks pay off (e.g., Captain, perhaps Hardy--fingers crossed) then the panthers strike gold. They get premium talent at a bargain price which enables them to finance contracts of proven long-term performers such as Williams, Gross, Smith, Gamble. They'll be adding players like Kalil (hopefully) and Beason to that list. Expensive first-round risks can compromise their ability to keep experienced, high-level players.

Comparing Bradford's recent contract to JaMarcus Russell's, Bradford got 18 million more in guaranteed money than Russell did a few years ago. Top 10 draft picks are extraordinarily expensive and can be risky value propositions. Missing on a top 10 pick can set a franchise back significantly. Later first round picks may not be as bad but they're still expensive. Mr. Richardson prizes the value of his franchise. At this point and time (read: pre-collective bargaining agreement) why would Richardson want to take risks in the first-round? He has talent, he wants to keep developed talent, and he wants to maximize the value of his franchise. Later round picks offer greater potential value.

RE#2: The Panthers are a small market team. Their rank indicates they've been managed with a plan and through discipline. Small market teams don't crack a global top 20 list by accident or through sheer luck.

When it comes to drafting, they prefer to play with house money. What do I mean and how does this relate to Edwards?

If management believes they have the appropriate amount of top-level talent on their roster (and this talent is expected to stick around) then they might be hesitant to bet on first round talent when better value (and potential home-runs candidates) could be available in later rounds.

With regard to the Edwards' pick, they saw great value in his potential. They dealt a second for him but don't be surprised if they trade next year's first to recoup this second and pick up a later pick.

They don't want a first rounder in today's economic climate. The value proposition doesn't fit their business model nor where they are in terms of their player development cycle. If they lose on Edwards, too bad. They'll recoup the Edwards pick on a draft-day trade. As fans it might be hard to imagine giving up a first but we don't manage the books nor are we responsible for a 3-5 year strategic vision.

The operative personnel philosophy in Panthers-land is to maintain a healthy ratio of premium talent vs. value talent. They can maximize the value side of that spectrum through well-placed calculated risks and the occasional payoff. At this point and time, this strategy can be financed through giving up ultra-expensive first-round picks.

Remember, Richardson is at the helm trying to drive player salaries back into a manageable range. Once the collective bargaining reaches closure they'll probably re-evaluate their draft day strategies. I don't think it's an accident they've been allergic to first-round drafts for the past several years. They are fortunate that player development has put them in a position where they can be competitive without having to depend on first rounders. Of course, there may be some longer-term repercussions but we'll have to wait and see about those!

All that to say the Armanti deal might not have been as big of a risk to the Panthers as we think. It's all speculation and may not be worth what you paid to read it--but now I'm done.

Sheez. Had no idea my first post would be this long!

[pantherfan49]

1st round money isn't absurd once you get outside the top ten picks or so. The belief that teams are trading away first round picks just to get out of the rookie contracts is mostly BS IMO.

[Panthro]

I'm late to this party and haven't read the whole thread yet. But here are some thoughts before they escape.

Key hot topic: Edwards was drafted at too high a price because of the 2nd rounder given to the Pats.

It may be instructive to look at this move in light of other draft-day deals over the past three years. Doing so could provide insight into the Panthers' current draft philosophy as well as their business model. Two points:

1) I believe the Panthers are confident in the young, blue-chip talent currently on the roster.

2) Panthers were ranked 17th most valuable sports franchise in the world.

RE #1: The Panthers believe they have the high-level talent they need to succeed. Because of this, they are willing to take some calculated personnel-risks. When/if picks pay off (e.g., Captain, perhaps Hardy--fingers crossed) then the panthers strike gold. They get premium talent at a bargain price which enables them to finance contracts of proven long-term performers such as Williams, Gross, Smith, Gamble. They'll be adding players like Kalil (hopefully) and Beason to that list. Expensive first-round risks can compromise their ability to keep experienced, high-level players.

Comparing Bradford's recent contract to JaMarcus Russell's, Bradford got 18 million more in guaranteed money than Russell did a few years ago. Top 10 draft picks are extraordinarily expensive and can be risky value propositions. Missing on a top 10 pick can set a franchise back significantly. Later first round picks may not be as bad but they're still expensive. Mr. Richardson prizes the value of his franchise. At this point and time (read: pre-collective bargaining agreement) why would Richardson want to take risks in the first-round? He has talent, he wants to keep developed talent, and he wants to maximize the value of his franchise. Later round picks offer greater potential value.

RE#2: The Panthers are a small market team. Their rank indicates they've been managed with a plan and through discipline. Small market teams don't crack a global top 20 list by accident or through sheer luck.

When it comes to drafting, they prefer to play with house money. What do I mean and how does this relate to Edwards?

If management believes they have the appropriate amount of top-level talent on their roster (and this talent is expected to stick around) then they might be hesitant to bet on first round talent when better value (and potential home-runs candidates) could be available in later rounds.

With regard to the Edwards' pick, they saw great value in his potential. They dealt a second for him but don't be surprised if they trade next year's first to recoup this second and pick up a later pick.

They don't want a first rounder in today's economic climate. The value proposition doesn't fit their business model nor where they are in terms of their player development cycle. If they lose on Edwards, too bad. They'll recoup the Edwards pick on a draft-day trade. As fans it might be hard to imagine giving up a first but we don't manage the books nor are we responsible for a 3-5 year strategic vision.

The operative personnel philosophy in Panthers-land is to maintain a healthy ratio of premium talent vs. value talent. They can maximize the value side of that spectrum through well-placed calculated risks and the occasional payoff. At this point and time, this strategy can be financed through giving up ultra-expensive first-round picks.

Remember, Richardson is at the helm trying to drive player salaries back into a manageable range. Once the collective bargaining reaches closure they'll probably re-evaluate their draft day strategies. I don't think it's an accident they've been allergic to first-round drafts for the past several years. They are fortunate that player development has put them in a position where they can be competitive without having to depend on first rounders. Of course, there may be some longer-term repercussions but we'll have to wait and see about those!

All that to say the Armanti deal might not have been as big of a risk to the Panthers as we think. It's all speculation and may not be worth what you paid to read it--but now I'm done.

Sheez. Had no idea my first post would be this long!

I like this thought process

[panthers55]

I said project player not young players. By project I mean that he is learning to do something new.

Thomas Davis was a project, but was drafted in the first round. Now some may say that he was successful and it is very true, but it is my opinion that it is easier to make a position transition on the defensive side of the ball versus the offensive. Defensive is partially instinctual and it helps to adjust, still TD took three years before he was playing at a high level.

Since I am using TD as an example I will also add that he played at the highest level of college competition and not the B league. So, compound Armanti's transition with a significant change in skill level of his peers is going to make this even harder.

Finally I am only commenting on ZOD's comment from Armanti's biggest proponent of all Darin Gantt. So, do not hate on me for giving my opinion, it is like yours, an opinion. Teams swing and miss sometimes and I hope that this will not be one of them. Armanti has talent,and that is undeniable. My argument simply was that for next years second round pick, was there someone else that could have came in and had a bigger impact?

If you remember Davis was not an instant success and didn't start his rookie year. Now we look at him as a pro-bowl player who unfortunately can't stay healthy.

I have no problem with you giving your opinion, you are surely entitled to it. My point was that passing judgment on him is very premature. My main issue is this constant focus on contributing immediately versus being more of a project with the potential of a much larger upside down the road. For me I like the fact that they first took LaFell who is more of a sure thing and then came right back and picked up Edwards who has a huge upside which we develop versus taking another WR who is more one dimensional who can contribute right away but may have a more limited upside. Edwards has a multitude of skills to be developed whether it is WR, returner, wildcat specialist or even quarterback. Hurney has always been willing to take a risk on a project with upside down the road. Look at Charles Johnson. He was a third round project we took a flyer on a few years and now is a starter. We all know that Smith was considered a third round prospect in 2001.

I am not an APP fan nor a great Edwards supporter in the past. But frankly I like the pick now and think this is another one of Hurney's picks that guys will complain about until Edwards shows us what the FO saw that we can't see yet.

Part of the reason we likely picked up Edwards over Gilyard is that we wanted more versatility down the road. We already have 4 or 5 guys who can return a punt or kickoff. We wanted to start him off there but I suspect we have bigger plans down the road.

[AceMan]

I would have loved to have drafted Mardy Gilyard or Golden Tate but I'm not going to trash on Armanti Edwards in five days. Zod had to have known the reaction this post would get considered how controversial the pick has been to many of you.

How many years did it take for DeAngelo Williams to become an every down back? Remeber he was a first round draft pick; I'm sure people on these very forums were calling him a bust! He didn't even have to learn a new posistion.

I'll tell you what I think of AE during the middle of next season.

No one was saying such a thing! :hand:

[Cat'sGrowl]

Yep, if only you had athletic ability, you could do a job that requires athletic ability. Your logic is sound.

Ah, but it is!

The point here is that maybe Edward's athletic ability isn't quite what we thought it is, eh?

My point is that the fundamentals of returning a punt are simple, so, from an athleticism standpoint, what's holding him back?

[CharlotteBeer.com]

Ah, but it is!

The point here is that maybe Edward's athletic ability isn't quite what we thought it is, eh?

My point is that the fundamentals of returning a punt are simple, so, from an athleticism standpoint, what's holding him back?

By your logic an athlete is an athlete, and the learning curve from one activity to another or one sport to another is negligible. Beason's a great athlete. Maybe we should have him returning punts?

Besides, it already sounds like he's making improvements catching the punts, which is the only knock I've heard on him whatsoever. He's impressed at receiver.

[Wither]

I like this thought process

My response to it:

TL;DR.

And I usually read every single post...

[panthers55]

Ah, but it is!

The point here is that maybe Edward's athletic ability isn't quite what we thought it is, eh?

My point is that the fundamentals of returning a punt are simple, so, from an athleticism standpoint, what's holding him back?

Maybe athletic ability at this level and dropping a few punts aren't that related. I would expect it is more mental than physical. Something he will work out.

[Zod]

I would expect it is more mental than physical. Something he will work out.

much much more.

[panthers55]

Ah, but it is!

The point here is that maybe Edward's athletic ability isn't quite what we thought it is, eh?

My point is that the fundamentals of returning a punt are simple, so, from an athleticism standpoint, what's holding him back?

Maybe athletic ability at this level and dropping a few punts aren't that related. I would expect it is more mental than physical. Something he will work out.

[panthers55]

much much more.

:cheers2: