Panthers having buyer's remorse?

[CR91]

 

[crazycolt1]

There will be more lying before the draft. 

[colts89]

I for one would be okay if the Colts offer something to get up to #1 still if they are adamant for one of the QBs. The Panthers aren't going to get all the package they sold to get that pick, but if they are okay getting back something like two seconds and a decent player that Frank likes, I'm cool with that.

 

I'm pretty sure that the trading back rumor is just a lie though.

[crazycolt1]

I wouldn't take anything said or reported as had been said with much merit. 

[coltsfanej]

It would make sense if the panthers traded up to one in order to take control of the draft and not necessarily because they had a#1 QB in mind. 
 

I don’t think it would be crazy for them to finish their evaluations and decide they like a few guys about the same and decide to trade back to recoup some of that capital. Moving up to one gave them options and control they never had at 9. That being said I doubt they move back but trading up early allows them to at least have the discussions they couldn’t have at 9. 

[crazycolt1]

Personally, I am pretty sure the Panthers will pick a QB with the 1st pick.  It really makes no sense to trade all that draft capital for any other position.  

[Yoshinator]

i would low-ball the Panthers and offer them something like the 4th pick, the 79th pick, and a player like Kelly or Moore to move up to 1 and see what they do. That'd be worth it to get our QB of choice IMO. 

[NewColtsFan]

10 hours ago, CR91 said:

 

No.   Not having buyers remorse.  
 

Makes sense to move back a little IF they can entice a team like the Texans or Colts to trade up and recoup some picks which would still allow them to still draft a QB they’d be happy with. 

[MikeCurtis]

12 hours ago, CR91 said:

 

The Panthers gave up a TON of picks and a good WR

 

I dont see any way that this is valid

 

 

[FalseStart]

Sounds like the Panthers are seeing the value of Ballard's draft practices... #4, #106 and Kelly. That's all I would give.  

 

Okay with trading back, Anderson, Richards, Young or Stroud at 4... nice to have options.  

[Gigc]

I don't think they have buyer's remorse at all. I think they're playing chess, not checkers. They don't have, and have been chasing, a stud QB for years. They were picking 9 in a draft where there are 4 "legitimate" QB prospects.

They knew that 2 of those teams, Houston and Indy, were bound to take a QB and were NOT going to trade with them. 

That left two open slots, the 1st pick, and 3rd pick. Chicago at 1 wanted to trade out, but it would cost a bundle.

So. They made the trade to 1 and gave up a lot to do it, knowing they just wanted one of those top four guys.

NOW, they figure, we can still get one of the top four guys AND recoup some of the draft bounty we gave up to do it. If they can get draft capital back, great for them

I think what it really says is they're good with any of those 4 QBs...

[CR91]

55 minutes ago, Gigc said:

I don't think they have buyer's remorse at all. I think they're playing chess, not checkers. They don't have, and have been chasing, a stud QB for years. They were picking 9 in a draft where there are 4 "legitimate" QB prospects.

They knew that 2 of those teams, Houston and Indy, were bound to take a QB and were NOT going to trade with them. 

That left two open slots, the 1st pick, and 3rd pick. Chicago at 1 wanted to trade out, but it would cost a bundle.

So. They made the trade to 1 and gave up a lot to do it, knowing they just wanted one of those top four guys.

NOW, they figure, we can still get one of the top four guys AND recoup some of the draft bounty we gave up to do it. If they can get draft capital back, great for them

I think what it really says is they're good with any of those 4 QBs...

 

And if none of them bite? You're stuck holding the bait. If the teams don't see much separation in the QBs, their not gonna give assets to get one.

[Gigc]

5 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

And if none of them bite? You're stuck holding the bait. If the teams don't see much separation in the QBs, their not gonna give assets to get one.

again, the ultimate goal was to at least one of the four. if no one bites and you stick at 1? you have you pick of the litter.

if someone in the top 4 trades with you, you still get one of them. 

you weren't going to get one of them at 9...

strategory...

[CR91]

30 minutes ago, Gigc said:

again, the ultimate goal was to at least one of the four. if no one bites and you stick at 1? you have you pick of the litter.

if someone in the top 4 trades with you, you still get one of them. 

you weren't going to get one of them at 9...

strategory...

 

I guess it's more to do with the compensation. Two firsts and your top playmaker? That's just hard to comprehend. They must have thought they could atleast get back one of those assets and doesn't seem like the Texans or Colts are interested. If the colts are ok with either Young, Stroud, or Richardson then getting to 3 would make better sense and be less costly 

[FalseStart]

Watching decades of drafts, only bad organizations (Ownership/GM) get desperate. Can anyone remember a time where a big move up in the top 5-10 picks for a QB ended up working out…working out in the long run?

[Gigc]

1 hour ago, CR91 said:

 

I guess it's more to do with the compensation. Two firsts and your top playmaker? That's just hard to comprehend. They must have thought they could atleast get back one of those assets and doesn't seem like the Texans or Colts are interested. If the colts are ok with either Young, Stroud, or Richardson then getting to 3 would make better sense and be less costly 

they valued a QB over the assets they gave up. If Stroud is Justin Herbert, or Young a mini-Mahomes, or Richardson Cam Newton like, they won't care.

 

[CR91]

47 minutes ago, Gigc said:

they valued a QB over the assets they gave up. If Stroud is Justin Herbert, or Young a mini-Mahomes, or Richardson Cam Newton like, they won't care.

 

 

Then they should know who their picking. 

[NewColtsFan]

2 hours ago, FalseStart said:

Watching decades of drafts, only bad organizations (Ownership/GM) get desperate. Can anyone remember a time where a big move up in the top 5-10 picks for a QB ended up working out…working out in the long run?

You mean other than KC moving up for Mahomes at 10 and Houston moving up for Watson at 12?     In the same draft, 2017. 

[FalseStart]

2 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

You mean other than KC moving up for Mahomes at 10 and Houston moving up for Watson at 12?     In the same draft, 2017. 

Gotcha. The Chiefs heeded Mahomes' advice, trading the 27th overall pick, the 91st pick and their 2018 first-round pick to the Buffalo Bills for the 10th overall selection. 
 

so 2 RD1 and a 3rd RD

[NewColtsFan]

51 minutes ago, FalseStart said:

Gotcha. The Chiefs heeded Mahomes' advice, trading the 27th overall pick, the 91st pick and their 2018 first-round pick to the Buffalo Bills for the 10th overall selection. 
 

so 2 RD1 and a 3rd RD

Yes.   I wasn’t trying to give you a hard time.   But I think the Mahomes and Watson stories are very important. 
 

And that Quarterback is the hardest position in sports to judge.  It’s not just the first round picks who bust that get attention.   But it’s first round picks and lower who exceed expectations.   Guys like Allen and Jackson from the 2018 class.   Mahomes and Watson from 2017.   Wilson and Cousins from 2012.   Of course there’s Brady and for at least a season — Purdy. 
 

Plenty of good teams made plenty of mistakes on guys who both really good and really bad.   Getting it right is easier said than done. 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

First, I don't think the Panthers gave up a huge haul as most do..  They in reality only gave one first and that is in 2024. The second rounder isn't until 2025. This years first rounder is only.a.swap, moving up from #9 to #1. 

I guess DJ Moore was a loss but its not like he's a Chase, Tyreek Hill, Hopkins, Kupp etc..... 

From all the pre trade rumors it seemed the Bears would have received more..

 

I think it would be puzzling if they traded back but the NFL is a puzzling place. Lol

[ColtV]

On 3/19/2023 at 3:27 AM, crazycolt1 said:

I wouldn't take anything said or reported as had been said with much merit. 

Yeah this one especially. The draft isn't like that horrible Costner movie, Carolina isn't moving up to 1 to then trade down again

[crazycolt1]

23 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

First, I don't think the Panthers gave up a huge haul as most do..  They in reality only gave one first and that is in 2024. The second rounder isn't until 2025. This years first rounder is only.a.swap, moving up from #9 to #1. 

I guess DJ Moore was a loss but its not like he's a Chase, Tyreek Hill, Hopkins, Kupp etc..... 

From all the pre trade rumors it seemed the Bears would have received more..

 

I think it would be puzzling if they traded back but the NFL is a puzzling place. Lol

Two #1s, two #2s, DJ Moore and the Panthers ate the 14 million in dead cap on Moore. So it's a little more than what you are advertising.  

[Moosejawcolt]

On 3/18/2023 at 8:14 PM, CR91 said:

 

This isn't Draft Day the movie lol

[CR91]

32 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

This isn't Draft Day the movie lol

 

Can I be sunny so I can say you pancake eating SOB

[Defjamz26]

On 3/19/2023 at 8:30 AM, crazycolt1 said:

Personally, I am pretty sure the Panthers will pick a QB with the 1st pick.  It really makes no sense to trade all that draft capital for any other position.  

Moreso it doesn’t make sense to trade all the draft capital and a really good proven player just to bluff and actually just trade back down. That would look really bad on their part.

 

Also someone correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t believe there is a precedent of a team trading for the number 1 pick, only to then trade out of it.

[Hawkeyecolt]

I do think it’s a possibility they were trying to dupe Houston into moving up.