Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

REAL offseason discussion
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 16, 17, 18, 19, 20  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Carolina Panthers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
iknowcool


Joined: 15 Apr 2009
Posts: 17978
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 12:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't get the infatuation with taking Barnett at #8 or trading up for him. I think he gets overrated by a lot of people because of the numbers he put up (Michael Sam was a SEC Defensive Player of the Year and he sucked). From what I have seen so far, it looks like he mainly gets his production through timing the snap count. Considering he isn't that good of an athlete, his over-reliance on simply trying to turn the corner on OTs is going to be a problem against NFL OTs, whom are either great athletes, great technicians, or both. On top of that, he has little to no pass rush moves. If he doesn't beat the tackle, he doesn't have a way to get back inside and ends up getting washed out of the play.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEDD4bmYHIg

At the :13 second mark is when you first see him try and use his dip maneuver, to no success. At the 1:25 mark, he tries it again and they throw an easy screen. If there is power to his game, he doesn't show it. At 2:24, he is easily pushed off the LOS, giving Florida the easy first down. For the most part, he's just invisible. He shows 0 anticipation for playing quick passes/screens. He's not all bad of course (I wouldn't mind taking him in the second round, although part of me would rather still pass), but he's a limited pass rusher with average athleticism. IMO there will be so many better players on the board.

This is a good article on his strengths and limitations and the film backs it up.

http://www.cincyjungle.com/2017/2/12/14554500/derek-barnett-scouting-report-production-vs-potential
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zithers


Joined: 15 Aug 2010
Posts: 3103
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 1:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lasus83 wrote:

Sounds like a side-bet. I'll bet 2 QBs go in the first (via trade or otherwise). Glennon is not the answer in Chicago. He is a stop-gap vet to groom a young QB.

Mitch fits that mold perfectly. Only thing he lacks is the experience. It would be an ideal scenario for him to be able to hold a clipboard for a couple years while watching a Vet. The only question would be, for me, is if the current regime has enough job security to hold out during that period. Signing Glennon means they are NOT in win-now mode.


I didn't say two wouldn't go in the first. I said two wouldn't go in the first seven picks. It just isn't going to happen. There's too much top talent to settle on a question mark rookie QB. And John Fox will do everything in his power to make sure he isn't stuck with a rookie QB. We all know he hates rookies and especially young QBs who are developmental.


Quote:
Like I said... "I got love for Howard. I am just not 'in love' with him".

He would be an awesome addition to our team... but his value is in the 20's. There are a bunch of players, who will be there at 1.8, that should be higher on our board.

... maybe not a bunch... but enough to make him not the top guy. Ideally, if we KNEW that Fournette and Adams were not going to be there at 1.8, I would like to see a trade down/trade-up scenario. That is, we move 1.8 down and we move 2.8 up simultaneously. Somehow acquire two picks in the teens... Get Howard and Barnett... would be amazing.

But I think Fournette is going to be there....


Who would you have higher on your board? Don't include Garrett, Fournette, Cook, Thomas, Lattimore, Allen, Foster, Hooker, or Adams because they're all going to be gone or we aren't going to draft them for other reason. I'm guessing you would have Barnett ahead of Howard. Who else? I don't know what the "value" (which you are focusing way too much on - who cares about analyst big boards?) difference is for you between those two but it can't possibly be that much.

And we aren't going to trade down because Gettleman has said he doesn't believe in trading down.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zithers


Joined: 15 Aug 2010
Posts: 3103
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 1:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iknowcool wrote:
Here is my main issue with taking OJ Howard:

How many more drafts can we go where we take a player whose main purpose is to wait in the shadows of a better player?

We did it with Thompson. We did it with Butler. It isn't necessarily that I have an issue with that approach in doses; after all, I liked the Butler pick a lot and think he will eventually develop into a solid player), but I'm not sure we can keep going down that road. I certainly don't want to see this team have to wait 4-5 years before our top ten pick is finally #1 at his position on the depth chart.

I'm all for a long-term approach, but I think we are in position to take someone who helps us long-term while also being able to make a huge impact within their 1st two years. Unless we transition our offense to something along the lines of the Patriots where we heavily utilized two tight ends, I'm not sold we should use the pick we have on a tight end.

I have no problem moving into the first round to take him though, although this tight end class is so deep we could snatch someone up in the 2nd or 3rd round.


This is a good point. But I remember Bill Voth saying that Shula had desperately wanted to move to a 2TE offense after the SB50 embarrassment. As we all know we went after Jared Cook and Hunter Henry was at the top of our board (thinking Butler would be gone). It makes a lot of sense that we would take one early and head towards a heavy 2TE offense.

As far as other TE prospects, a lot of them just appear to be very large wide receivers. Howard isn't afraid to block, which i something the FO obviously loves. Njoku and Engram (who looks 220 lbs) don't seem to do much of that and Leggett has been accused of not being motivated enough which makes me weary of him.

Also I dug this video about Howard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlYbWrNF-9Q[/i]
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lasus83


Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 3360
Location: Charlotte, NC
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 2:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Zithers wrote:


I didn't say two wouldn't go in the first. I said two wouldn't go in the first seven picks. It just isn't going to happen. There's too much top talent to settle on a question mark rookie QB. And John Fox will do everything in his power to make sure he isn't stuck with a rookie QB. We all know he hates rookies and especially young QBs who are developmental.


Apologies... I meant to type that 2 QBs would go in the top 10... but I'll limit that to Top 7. That's my "side bet" and an area where I'm sure you will take "the action".

Zithers wrote:

Who would you have higher on your board? Don't include Garrett, Fournette, Cook, Thomas, Lattimore, Allen, Foster, Hooker, or Adams because they're all going to be gone or we aren't going to draft them for other reason. I'm guessing you would have Barnett ahead of Howard. Who else? I don't know what the "value" (which you are focusing way too much on - who cares about analyst big boards?) difference is for you between those two but it can't possibly be that much.

And we aren't going to trade down because Gettleman has said he doesn't believe in trading down.


You know you typed 9 names that will be gone?
Garrett - Gone for sure barring some insane event
Allen/Cook - Do not want (Scheme fit)
Hooker - Do not want and feel he is over-hyped, injury riddled and could go much later than a lot are expecting... I've seen him drop out of the 1st entirely in a couple mocks.

1. Garrett
2. Fournette
3. Adams/Barnett
5. trade down - but we are eliminating that, for this discussion, right?

Then it gets down to positional value vs. what is available in this draft. CB/TE/RB/DE are "deep" in this years draft. So.

5. Foster
6. Thomas (deep at DE but plays a higher positional value than TE)
7. Davis (not Williams - we've already got too many of them)
8. Lattimore (deep at CB but plays a higher positional value than TE)

There. That is 8 guys who all hold more value, regardless of where the experts pick them, than Howard.

Some are there because of a positional premium on where they play and them being the best at their position, some are there because they fit the aforementioned and a need.

No OTs at 8, although some would argue Ramczyk should garner consideration.

I don't think we can say that DG "won't" trade down. I can agree that it is unlikely. But he said that he takes BPA, also, and who is gonna argue that a CB was BPA 3 times in a row last year?

Lastly... I am not saying that Howard can't be a good player. But he plays TE, has only recently made it into the discussion in the top 10 and is at a position where we can look later in the draft. The same can be said for Fournette... after him, I'm not concerned about RB until late day 2 or day 3.
_________________
Carolina Panthers

FFMD 15 - General Manager
FFMD 16 - Asst. General Manager
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Lasus83


Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 3360
Location: Charlotte, NC
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 2:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iknowcool wrote:
I don't get the infatuation with taking Barnett at #8 or trading up for him. I think he gets overrated by a lot of people because of the numbers he put up (Michael Sam was a SEC Defensive Player of the Year and he sucked). From what I have seen so far, it looks like he mainly gets his production through timing the snap count. Considering he isn't that good of an athlete, his over-reliance on simply trying to turn the corner on OTs is going to be a problem against NFL OTs, whom are either great athletes, great technicians, or both. On top of that, he has little to no pass rush moves. If he doesn't beat the tackle, he doesn't have a way to get back inside and ends up getting washed out of the play.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEDD4bmYHIg

At the :13 second mark is when you first see him try and use his dip maneuver, to no success. At the 1:25 mark, he tries it again and they throw an easy screen. If there is power to his game, he doesn't show it. At 2:24, he is easily pushed off the LOS, giving Florida the easy first down. For the most part, he's just invisible. He shows 0 anticipation for playing quick passes/screens. He's not all bad of course (I wouldn't mind taking him in the second round, although part of me would rather still pass), but he's a limited pass rusher with average athleticism. IMO there will be so many better players on the board.

This is a good article on his strengths and limitations and the film backs it up.

http://www.cincyjungle.com/2017/2/12/14554500/derek-barnett-scouting-report-production-vs-potential


I don't think anyone suggested we trade up for Barnett. The trade up scenario was based on an article that suggested we trade up for Fournette.
_________________
Carolina Panthers

FFMD 15 - General Manager
FFMD 16 - Asst. General Manager
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
burnoutonme


Joined: 02 Mar 2007
Posts: 1619
Location: Charlotte, NC
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 2:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Zithers wrote:
iknowcool wrote:
Here is my main issue with taking OJ Howard:

How many more drafts can we go where we take a player whose main purpose is to wait in the shadows of a better player?

We did it with Thompson. We did it with Butler. It isn't necessarily that I have an issue with that approach in doses; after all, I liked the Butler pick a lot and think he will eventually develop into a solid player), but I'm not sure we can keep going down that road. I certainly don't want to see this team have to wait 4-5 years before our top ten pick is finally #1 at his position on the depth chart.

I'm all for a long-term approach, but I think we are in position to take someone who helps us long-term while also being able to make a huge impact within their 1st two years. Unless we transition our offense to something along the lines of the Patriots where we heavily utilized two tight ends, I'm not sold we should use the pick we have on a tight end.

I have no problem moving into the first round to take him though, although this tight end class is so deep we could snatch someone up in the 2nd or 3rd round.


This is a good point. But I remember Bill Voth saying that Shula had desperately wanted to move to a 2TE offense after the SB50 embarrassment. As we all know we went after Jared Cook and Hunter Henry was at the top of our board (thinking Butler would be gone). It makes a lot of sense that we would take one early and head towards a heavy 2TE offense.

As far as other TE prospects, a lot of them just appear to be very large wide receivers. Howard isn't afraid to block, which i something the FO obviously loves. Njoku and Engram (who looks 220 lbs) don't seem to do much of that and Leggett has been accused of not being motivated enough which makes me weary of him.

Also I dug this video about Howard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlYbWrNF-9Q[/i]


I'm with you on Howard, I wouldn't particularly mind him at 8. I'm curious what your knock is against Njoku's blocking and weight, though. For me, it seems like he and Howard (and Olsen, for that matter) have very similar physiques.

I admittedly haven't really watched tape on Njoku, and I consider Howard to be the superior prospect, but everything I've read about Njoku says that he's a willing, adequate blocker, but that he needs to add lower body strength to improve in that area. I don't particularly mind that in a prospect. I like the fact that he's characterized as willing.

I'd be interested in seeing what we think of Jeremy Sprinkle. Seems like our kind of guy, if he hadn't done the knuckleheaded shoplifting thing pre-Belk bowl.
_________________

TCMD 2017 Carolina Panthers GM
FFMD 2016 Carolina Panthers GM
FFMD 2015 Carolina Panthers AGM
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
Drics13


Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Posts: 98
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 2:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Does anyone think we take a WR in the first 2 picks? KB hopefully will have a turnaround season. Other then that we are hoping one of the new guys has an unexpected season, not saying that cannot happen.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
iknowcool


Joined: 15 Apr 2009
Posts: 17978
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 2:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lasus83 wrote:
I don't think anyone suggested we trade up for Barnett.


You did in the mock draft thread, unless you took it as me saying trade up for him in the top 10. I don't think we should trade up for him at all.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lasus83


Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 3360
Location: Charlotte, NC
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 2:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iknowcool wrote:
Lasus83 wrote:
I don't think anyone suggested we trade up for Barnett.


You did in the mock draft thread, unless you took it as me saying trade up for him in the top 10. I don't think we should trade up for him at all.


Oh, hah. I thought you meant trade up with 1.8...

Maaaan... If you don't think he is a first rounder than I'm gonna be hard pressed to work on convincing you of that.

It's like a car negotiation where I'm selling the car for 10k and they offer me 5k. The discussion is pretty much over there.
_________________
Carolina Panthers

FFMD 15 - General Manager
FFMD 16 - Asst. General Manager
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
iknowcool


Joined: 15 Apr 2009
Posts: 17978
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 2:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lasus83 wrote:
iknowcool wrote:
Lasus83 wrote:
I don't think anyone suggested we trade up for Barnett.


You did in the mock draft thread, unless you took it as me saying trade up for him in the top 10. I don't think we should trade up for him at all.


Oh, hah. I thought you meant trade up with 1.8...

Maaaan... If you don't think he is a first rounder than I'm gonna be hard pressed to work on convincing you of that.

It's like a car negotiation where I'm selling the car for 10k and they offer me 5k. The discussion is pretty much over there.


What makes him a top ten talent to you? He has serious technique flaws, limited athleticism, and relies on one move which teams will easily counter.

I can see thinking he's a first round caliber talent, although I would disagree. He's too average for me. But you have called him a top ten talent which I'm just not seeing. Nothing about his film or athleticism supports that in my opinion. He's going to fall the same way overhyped pass rushers always fall before him.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lasus83


Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 3360
Location: Charlotte, NC
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 7:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iknowcool wrote:
Lasus83 wrote:
iknowcool wrote:
Lasus83 wrote:
I don't think anyone suggested we trade up for Barnett.


You did in the mock draft thread, unless you took it as me saying trade up for him in the top 10. I don't think we should trade up for him at all.


Oh, hah. I thought you meant trade up with 1.8...

Maaaan... If you don't think he is a first rounder than I'm gonna be hard pressed to work on convincing you of that.

It's like a car negotiation where I'm selling the car for 10k and they offer me 5k. The discussion is pretty much over there.


What makes him a top ten talent to you? He has serious technique flaws, limited athleticism, and relies on one move which teams will easily counter.

I can see thinking he's a first round caliber talent, although I would disagree. He's too average for me. But you have called him a top ten talent which I'm just not seeing. Nothing about his film or athleticism supports that in my opinion. He's going to fall the same way overhyped pass rushers always fall before him.


The dude kick the crap out of SEC Talent his entire college career.

There's no stops, no question of motor, no question of intangibles...

He is the real deal Holyfield.

Anyone that thinks otherwise is looking at revisionist history or is caught up in combine performances


[urlhttps://youtu.be/ZkkJsrCURnc][/url]
_________________
Carolina Panthers

FFMD 15 - General Manager
FFMD 16 - Asst. General Manager
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Zithers


Joined: 15 Aug 2010
Posts: 3103
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 10:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lasus83 wrote:

Barnett
Foster
Davis
Lattimore

There. That is 8 guys who all hold more value, regardless of where the experts pick them, than Howard.

Some are there because of a positional premium on where they play and them being the best at their position, some are there because they fit the aforementioned and a need.

No OTs at 8, although some would argue Ramczyk should garner consideration.

I don't think we can say that DG "won't" trade down. I can agree that it is unlikely. But he said that he takes BPA, also, and who is gonna argue that a CB was BPA 3 times in a row last year?

Lastly... I am not saying that Howard can't be a good player. But he plays TE, has only recently made it into the discussion in the top 10 and is at a position where we can look later in the draft. The same can be said for Fournette... after him, I'm not concerned about RB until late day 2 or day 3.


Well, I'd argue that Gettleman does Best Value Available, not BPA, considering we took three corners last year, a position we desperately needed. We probably had a bunch of players rated the same and just went with the corner in the group due to need. Same thing with Vernon Butler over Hunter Henry because was had him rated a top ten player or whatever and just couldn't pass him up.

Anyway... I would be pretty mad if we took Reuben Foster, a LB (just about the last thing we need to draft high), instead of Howard. Or a MAC WR who isn't a super freak like Randy Moss. I could deal with Lattimore since our corner situation is dire (I like Bradberry and Captain, Worley is a bit more of a ? and we have zero depth to speak of). And obviously I prefer Howard to Barnett.

Also, one last thing, it is not classless to make fun of the Falcons blowing a 25 point lead. Wink
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
iknowcool


Joined: 15 Apr 2009
Posts: 17978
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 2:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lasus83 wrote:
iknowcool wrote:
Lasus83 wrote:
iknowcool wrote:
Lasus83 wrote:
I don't think anyone suggested we trade up for Barnett.


You did in the mock draft thread, unless you took it as me saying trade up for him in the top 10. I don't think we should trade up for him at all.


Oh, hah. I thought you meant trade up with 1.8...

Maaaan... If you don't think he is a first rounder than I'm gonna be hard pressed to work on convincing you of that.

It's like a car negotiation where I'm selling the car for 10k and they offer me 5k. The discussion is pretty much over there.


What makes him a top ten talent to you? He has serious technique flaws, limited athleticism, and relies on one move which teams will easily counter.

I can see thinking he's a first round caliber talent, although I would disagree. He's too average for me. But you have called him a top ten talent which I'm just not seeing. Nothing about his film or athleticism supports that in my opinion. He's going to fall the same way overhyped pass rushers always fall before him.


The dude kick the crap out of SEC Talent his entire college career.

There's no stops, no question of motor, no question of intangibles...

He is the real deal Holyfield.

Anyone that thinks otherwise is looking at revisionist history or is caught up in combine performances


[urlhttps://youtu.be/ZkkJsrCURnc][/url]


Plenty of awful pass rushers did good in the SEC. Sam, J Jones, hell we just released one.

And considering what you said seemed to have nothing to do with what he shows on the field, I'm willing to bet you have never actually seen him play, especially based off your previous posts about projection vs actually watching them play.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lasus83


Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 3360
Location: Charlotte, NC
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 7:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Zithers wrote:
Lasus83 wrote:

Barnett
Foster
Davis
Lattimore

There. That is 8 guys who all hold more value, regardless of where the experts pick them, than Howard.

Some are there because of a positional premium on where they play and them being the best at their position, some are there because they fit the aforementioned and a need.

No OTs at 8, although some would argue Ramczyk should garner consideration.

I don't think we can say that DG "won't" trade down. I can agree that it is unlikely. But he said that he takes BPA, also, and who is gonna argue that a CB was BPA 3 times in a row last year?

Lastly... I am not saying that Howard can't be a good player. But he plays TE, has only recently made it into the discussion in the top 10 and is at a position where we can look later in the draft. The same can be said for Fournette... after him, I'm not concerned about RB until late day 2 or day 3.


Well, I'd argue that Gettleman does Best Value Available, not BPA, considering we took three corners last year, a position we desperately needed. We probably had a bunch of players rated the same and just went with the corner in the group due to need. Same thing with Vernon Butler over Hunter Henry because was had him rated a top ten player or whatever and just couldn't pass him up.

Anyway... I would be pretty mad if we took Reuben Foster, a LB (just about the last thing we need to draft high), instead of Howard. Or a MAC WR who isn't a super freak like Randy Moss. I could deal with Lattimore since our corner situation is dire (I like Bradberry and Captain, Worley is a bit more of a ? and we have zero depth to speak of). And obviously I prefer Howard to Barnett.

Also, one last thing, it is not classless to make fun of the Falcons blowing a 25 point lead. :wink:


Christ... you pulled out the trump card.

You know I got banned for that?

Ok... I now immediately surrender all of my positions and will go sit quietly in the corner.
_________________
Carolina Panthers

FFMD 15 - General Manager
FFMD 16 - Asst. General Manager
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Cypher


Joined: 04 Mar 2008
Posts: 2737
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 9:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lasus83 wrote:

1. Garrett
2. Fournette
3. Adams/Barnett
5. trade down - but we are eliminating that, for this discussion, right?

Then it gets down to positional value vs. what is available in this draft. CB/TE/RB/DE are "deep" in this years draft. So.

5. Foster
6. Thomas (deep at DE but plays a higher positional value than TE)
7. Davis (not Williams - we've already got too many of them)
8. Lattimore (deep at CB but plays a higher positional value than TE)


I'm really, really curious why you have Thomas so low on your boards. I've asked you several times, but you don't really seem to have a concise answer. Having a player who is fairly similar to the play we got from Hardy is a wonderful thing.

Granted, 99.9% chance he won't be there at 8, but seriously? Foster over him?
_________________

AkronsWitness wrote:
The Browns are a football team, run by baseball people, making smart basketball trades...#Analytics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Carolina Panthers All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 16, 17, 18, 19, 20  Next
Page 17 of 20

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group