skinny21

My impression is the team trading back usually wants to know who the team trading up is going for? Maybe I have that wrong. But if that is the case, to your point, if Washington says they’re interested, that likely tells NE we aren’t taking their guy and so they can afford to stay put. Of course, things could get a bit more interesting if another team is in the mix (ie if we tell NE we’re in talks with the Vikings as well and they both want the same guy). I love the idea of pulling off a trade - adding picks and still getting our guy - but it seems highly unlikely… One scenario I could see (although doubtful) is Minnesota trading up to 5 ahead of time, then trying to get to 2 or 3 so that us or NE don’t have to drop as far. The trading back team is still in front of the Giants and Arizona isn’t likely to trade out (though they might with the Giants at that point, lol).

In terms of the quote you posted, it’s fascinating because with every other position, it’s coaches telling the GM/scouts what they’re looking for and the staff finding the best fit (factoring in value, etc). I can’t imagine the Niners GM saying “I know you asked for an athletic guard for your zone scheme, but nah, we’re giving you a slow-footed, gap scheme type. So it’s kind of a BS (fictional) statement, but if there’s any position it could/should apply to, it’s qb. And of course, there’s the HC angle - as we know, a team with an offensive minded HC is more likely to see continuity in the offense, putting them in better position to play the long game (IMO). Good news for us is that Quinn/Peters went into this with succession planning in mind, which is pretty awesome (maybe somewhat novel even?). The myriad of coaching backgrounds should also allow them to better craft a scheme around their rookie qb, vs trying to force the qb into their scheme. I don’t quite subscribe to Going Commando’s take that franchise qbs are made, but I do think there’s a lot of truth to it, and I see potential for this group to get that side of it right (though it’s a lot of cooks in the kitchen). On a separate, but related note, while I prefer Maye due to traits, upside, a bunch of analytics, as well as his experience with a subpar supporting cast, all of the more nebulous factors of top flight qbs, the intangibles like processing, growth mindset, leadership, grit, coachability, and work ethic - aren’t things I’m equipped to judge. A lot of “experts” weigh in on these things, but I don’t think they have anything like the full picture. Although, to be fair, I don’t think even staffs doing tons of behind the scenes work have a full picture either. As has been said, gotta get the guy in the building and see. I could easily see a mock redraft a few years down the road looking wildly different than how this draft shakes out. Here’s hoping our guy would go #1 with hindsight.

Two random things on my mind. 1) Let’s say the choice is between Daniels and May (I know, I know… McCarthy), which of those do you think is more likely to sign a second contract with us? Tons of unknowns there, but Maye has shown loyalty staying with UNC, and would be pretty close to home in DC. Perhaps the NIL money for his OL factor shows an additional loyalty to his teammates too. 2) How would you defend Daniels? IMO, you want to keep him in the pocket, and you’re running a risk playing man coverage. Obviously you can use things that still allow your DEs to rush upfield, or use a spy in conjunction with man coverage, but really, I think Daniels is the qb most likely to make defenses more… static? One dimensional? Not sure the best term. And if that’s the case (big if), I think zone might suit out pass catchers a bit more - it’s more about route running and savvy with the current group than burst/quick separation.

There’s a part of me that doesn’t want us to draft Daniels simply because it feels like some of the posters vehemently opposed to him might have trouble supporting him, including being hyper critical in-season. And that likely carries over to the staff as well. It’s kinda dumb (for me to feel that way), but that’s where I’m at. Really want us to be able to get behind whoever we draft, and continue the feel good vibes toward the coaches/FO. To be fair, the same could be said about the other qbs, but the negativity seems a bit more subdued as far as I can tell.

Yeah, looking at the class (and Robinson specifically), this makes sense. Now, one could argue that Obada and Ferrell are on one year deals and we have Fowler, Henry and Jones to fill more of a pass rushing role, at least in the short term (along with Luvu/Davis/Chinn rushing), but overall I’m with you. There’s some quality depth in the class though - Braswell, Kneeland, Trice, Isaac, Booker and others, so it might behoove us to take advantage somewhere on day 2, depending on how it shakes out at other positions. I could see something like a small trade back in round 2 for a 4th, then packaging the 4th and a 5th for a 3rd. Would give us 6 day 2 picks, and a blend of guys that can compete for playing time (some combo of FS, OT, WR, DE and corner), and guys for the future (at spots like TE, ILB, G/T, etc), including perhaps double dipping (wr, corner, OT). Generically speaking, I love the idea of taking 2 OTs, taking a linebacker to learn behind Wagner, a TE to understudy to Ertz, a DE with high end pass rushing potential, and a receiver that can separate quickly. Gonna be an exciting draft regardless. Also, way down my list, but I could see the logic in grabbing a DT at some point.

Male bag-checkers don’t need an angle, they’re natural troublemakers

I’ve really appreciated the knowledge you’ve brought to the board. I often go back to your debates with @Skinsinparadise about McLaurin. I think having those analytic benchmarks in place, if they increase your odds even a little bit, they can give you a huge edge. Sure, you’ll miss some, but you’ll likely miss fewer than those that ignore the benchmarks. So I dig your process in that sense. Now, the flip side of the argument is if everyone uses those same bench marks, that edge goes away. However, if someone uses them, but also factors in context (like with Terry), they’re more likely to find a diamond in the ruff. Taking this back to the qb topic, this - using benchmarks, but also factoring context - is where our FO has to earn their keep. Most of the negative analytics for Daniels might have context mitigating them. For me, that “might”, coupled with his size makes me nervous.

Just want to point out that a couple/few times now you’ve responded to someone making a general statement to say that it’s inaccurate because it doesn’t fit you. To be clear, that’s not meant to be a dig, I’m just saying there are people who absolutely fit the description (IMO). I want to be clear though, I love your posts - your reasoning, analytics, stories, clarity, thoughtfulness, intelligence, etc.

In other words, he doesn’t fail “like every advanced metric”. I hear you though, there are a lot of concerns. Similar to parsing out context based on his receivers, part of the problem I have is how to factor in coaching/scheme/etc from the other metrics you’re talking about. Was he coached to run when he broke the pocket? I don’t know (though Herm did at ASU). Did they not use the middle of the field much in terms of scheme/play calling? I don’t know, though that’s what Gruden said (and he produced when he did throw to the middle). Was his huge bump in production due to his supporting cast or due to things like scheme continuity, the VR tool, and his change in study habits? No clue, though he and his coaches seemed to rave about the VR, his teammates seemed to embrace (and join in to some degree) his change in study habits. And of course he had really good receivers in ‘22. There are enough pieces of context to give me hope the pertinent advanced stats are misleading/incomplete, but of course, that’s just hope. There’s a lot of risk in waving those stats off. Hopefully our FO, if we draft Daniels, feels comfortable that they’ve verified the contextual factors.

You keep saying this, but it’s not really true, is it? He’s near or at the top in a number of advanced metrics that have been posted here. Now, with that said, he looks bad in a number of metrics in a way that’s pretty scary. Personally, looking at his negatives, I’m really worried about some things, somewhat concerned about some, and not too worried about others. Really worried: frame, taking unnecessary hits (though he improved here in the 2nd half of ‘23), throwing with anticipation. Somewhat concerned: p2s ratio, explosion in production, lack of creativity, his lack of velocity on out routes, paucity of throws to the middle of the field, number of scrambles turning into runs vs passes. Aside from the velocity issue, the rest of these could potentially be explained (ie were possibly exacerbated) in part by coaching/stylistic/schematic factors. Depending on how they’re addressed/explained by Daniels and his previous coaches, my concern level could be moved up or down. Not too worried about: his demeanor/shyness, his mom (lol), his agent, his age. Overall, my biggest question becomes “what made him so much better in ‘23”? Depending on that answer, plus the intangibles our FO (hopefully) is able to suss out, he could be qb 1 for me, he could be qb 5. Right now, Maye is my number one (ignoring Williams) because his red flags aren’t nearly as concerning or numerous, and those flags are all intangibles that can be improved/worked around (vs Daniels’ size).

You keep saying this, but it’s not really true, is it? He’s near or at the top in a number of advanced metrics that have been posted here. Now, with that said, he looks bad in a number of metrics in a way that’s pretty scary. Personally, looking at his negatives, I’m really worried about some things, somewhat concerned about some, and not too worried about others. Really worried: frame, taking unnecessary hits (though he improved here in the 2nd half of ‘23), throwing with anticipation. Somewhat concerned: p2s ratio, explosion in production, lack of creativity, his lack of velocity on out routes, paucity of throws to the middle of the field, number of scrambles turning into runs vs passes. Aside from the velocity issue, the rest of these could potentially be explained (ie were possibly exacerbated) in part by coaching/stylistic/schematic factors. Depending on how they’re addressed/explained by Daniels and his previous coaches, my concern level could be moved up or down. Not too worried about: his demeanor/shyness, his mom (lol), his agent, his age. Overall, my biggest question becomes “what made him so much better in ‘23”? Depending on that answer, plus the intangibles our FO (hopefully) is able to suss out, he could be qb 1 for me, he could be qb 5. Right now, Maye is my number one (ignoring Williams) because his red flags aren’t nearly as concerning or numerous, and those flags are all intangibles that can be improved/worked around (vs Daniels’ size).

I personally don’t mind that piece too much - qb evaluation is so dang difficult and the league’s track record is shaky - as much as how entrenchment has lead some to turn on any and all sources/resources that disagree with their take, including many that we (the board) have lauded/referenced in the past. And the downstream effect of that entrenchment could quite possibly lead to dissatisfaction with our FO along with a focus on picking apart the rookie (if it’s not the guy the poster(s) wanted) on game days. I hope I’m wrong about that, because that sounds like a miserable experience when we’re looking at such a long overdue, positive position in terms of the state of the franchise. Of course, it’s human nature - it sucks to be wrong and it’s great to be right, lol.

Yeah, this was my biggest takeaway from the presser. That and the positive energy and synergy going on.

We’re either lacking or have question marks at FS, OT and corner. 2 of our DEs, 2 of our backers, our top TE, and our SS (or whatever Chinn’s going to play) are on one year deals. Guard is interesting, especially with Cosmi set to hit FA next year. While DE is the more important position (especially financially), the idea of drafting a backer to learn behind Wagner is super appealing, and that (to me) is a spot where picking up another 3rd or a 4th can have an impact. Similar with TE. And both are positions that seem to often have a bit of a learning curve. Of course, I’m a big proponent of taking advantage of deep position in a draft class. So for me, it’s wr, corner and OT (like you said), plus DE. Yeah, the Frazier pick in particular is an odd one.

Somewhat ironically given this ^, I’ve been meaning to tell you that recently I’ve been leaning more towards your opinion of going wr in the 2nd and waiting on corner until the 3rd. I think the corner depth is deeper than I realized (I thought it was mostly slot corners in the 3rd). I do still think DE is a solid possibility in the 2nd (along with OT), with FS as a wildcard. Needless to say, I’m loving our options. I could definitely see landing two receivers, particularly if we trade back from one of our 2nds to gain a late 3rd or 4th.

I’m sure you know all about this having lived through it, but I just learned the other day that Shakespeare’s The Tempest was about a resupply ship to Jamestown. Also… I too had a power struggle recently. One of my kids asked for a second helping of dessert. I said “No, you had plenty”, and they said “ok”. It was wild.

Is that a problem?

Ok, so against my better judgement, I’ve got two supremely oddball, (dare I say ‘uncharacteristic of me’) thoughts, mostly for the sake of levity: First, all my life I considered a qb “scrambling” to mean leaving the pocket, and then they either throw or run. The term has become a bit muddied though (or my understanding was always wrong, lol), including the Ringer having an “escaping” and “scrambling” stat. So, to distinguish the meaning, I propose we turn to nature. 1) Use the obvious comparison - kangaroos. A joey scrambles out of the pocket and then bounces (I’m digging the slang symmetry of “bouncing” here). 2) As an optional bonus - we refer to running qbs as “Joeys” (or, alternatively, “Bouncers”). And of course, we can nickname olines “Roos”… as they’re the ones forming the pocket and protecting the “Joey”. The NFL ecosystem can thank me later. Second, while obviously I highly doubt it happens, if we were to trade out of #2, what about going after a 2026 1st round pick instead? Gives us two years to evaluate whichever qb we end up with, then we have two 1st round picks that could be ammo to go for another qb in 2026 if this one busts. I’d think the Pats (for example) would be far more likely go along with that kind of deferred payment. Wish I could use a @clskinsfan style “I’ve been drinking since Sunday” statement here, but alas, I have no such reputation-saving disclaimer. 😔

Yeah, landing a franchise qb that puts you in the contender group covers a multitude of sins. With that said, doing something that shady can absolutely cause trust issues, and not just with Washington, but any team that wants to do business with you, not to mention (potentially) players/agents. And the NFL is a relatively small circle of people.

Wow, you’re really going against the grain with Thrash, Worthy, Mitchell and maybe Polk (not that I disagree with you, I don’t have a take there) Edit: I’m curious about the breakout age factor. @The Consigliere - how much does that affect your thoughts on Thomas and others? How do the (pertinent) analytics stack these guys?

Oh I know, and that’s why I’ve refrained from bringing it up previously. But there’s a pretty common word that fits far better… “seasons”. And frankly, I tend to doubt Maye was crowned qb 2 after his first game or first few games of ‘22, so even “two full seasons” is a bit of a stretch. It’s dumb though, I know, it just bugs me in terms of accurate communication. (and this has nothing to do with how I feel about Maye or means I disagree with the thrust of the point)

I’ve moved past other such comments, because it’s kind of nitpicking, but the article above saying Maye has been qb 2 for “two full years” - man, those 10 throws from 2021 must have been truly amazing…

Having the two 2nds gives us some serious flexibility, particularly when looking at OT. If that next group of tackles are all still available, you can move off 36 and then draft one at 40 (especially if one or more go before 40). If they’re all still there at 40, you could wait to see who lasts to wherever you traded back to, assuming the team like more than one of these guys. And that depth applies to other positions I assume we’re going to look closely at - DE, corner, wr, S and perhaps ILB. And acquiring (even) more ammo in the 3rd-5th would be helpful in our situation. Obviously it depends on who might fall to you (particularly at other positions) and whether you find a trading partner.

That’s my stance exactly. His statement to his recruiting class (and subsequently losing one game in 2 years, along with winning a title) showing he’s wired differently - that’s an added bonus that is really compelling for me. While I lean toward Maye and think Daniels could be a stud for us, I can’t say I’d mind if McCarthy was our pick (as unlikely and against the grain as that is).

Man, as a dad of 3 teens, this breaks my heart. Love that you have wonderful memories though. You aren’t kidding about training….