Rookie QB or Veteran QB for "Next Season"??? (I didn't bump this, but I ended up being wrong anyway....)

[Skinsinparadise]

4 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

The value of the picks LA sent for Stafford was equivalent to a 2021 2+2+3 and that’s generously valuing the 2023 1st as a 2nd instead of a 3rd since it’s 2 years out. 
 

not to mention taking on Goff’s contract. 
 

so WFT could have offered #19 and a 2022 2nd and it would be a “better offer” than what the Lions got. Unless the Lions truly view Goff as a + in that deal v. The negative many assign due to the contract. 

 

Yeah and what you put here would be my guess.  It's clear we had a #1 as part of the offer -- that's easy to piece together.  And if we supposedly had the best offer, I'd guess a 2nd in the mix and probably in 2022. 

[drowland]

3 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

half kidding, but I would call Philly and tell them you’ll take Wentz contract off their hands in exchange for their 2nd round pick. But I can’t imagine the Eagles would trade in division. If Wentz gets moved it makes sense to send him to Indy. 
 

my sense is that’s the next move. Philly sends Wentz and a pick to Indy 

 

In that scenario the Colts would have to send something back so it's not a straight salary cap dump move.  

[JamesMadisonSkins]

Trading up for a QB in the draft ... I think you gotta go to 4 with Atlanta. They may be more apt to trade out if they want to keep Ryan for a couple more years and build assets for a future QB move. Offer 19, 51 and a 2022 1st for #4 and get back Julio. 
 

Atlanta may want to dump Julio’s salary since they’ve got cap problems. Add assets for a future QB move next year with extra 1st. 
 

we get 4 (QB) and Julio for 1-2 years before we dump is salary. 
 

no clue if that makes sense or is realistic. 

[Riggo#44]

38 minutes ago, DWinzit said:

Make's some sense. I have seen some recent projections that have Lance going 3rd and Fields falling a little. Either way it may truly mean you need to get to the 4th pick to insure a top 4 QB.  I for one am scared and scarred from Ohio State QB's.

Just as I am trading for 33 yr old QBs.

 

To @Skinsinparadise point--I am fully on board with whatever Rivera wants and he's got this organization going in the right direction (I was fully on board with keeping Kyle Smith, but if Ron says he goes, there must be a reason). Trey Lance is my preference, but if Rivera wants Watson, I'll buy a #4 jersey (although I am leaning #99 or #93...possibly #94. Love our big boys!)

 

This will be a very interesting offseason!

[glongest]

I am not expert like some on this forum and certainly don't know much about the cap hits etc. etc. etc.  When I first heard the trade, I thought WOW!  That is heavy for that guy.  But then as I thought about it more here is what I came up with.  This trade was all about dumping Goff and contract.  This would be the Rams logic in my opinion.  Probably banking on Stafford being better but at worst equal to Goff.  Those two cancel.  Goff 42 M cap hit Stafford 25 M cap hit (could have that number slightly wrong) Advantage LA, nice pick up.  3rs round pick this year.  Who cares?  What is the odds a late third round pick becomes a major contributor to your team.  I don't know maybe 50%, probably not that much.  Two 1st round picks in 22 and 23.  Probably going to be late round picks because LA is good.  Their team is already built so these picks don't have the same value to them as a team that is building.  Add it all up, makes sense for the Rams.  And if they think Stafford can lead them to the SB (Goff has at least to this point proven he can't at least win one) then for sure makes sense.  Cherry on top.  If LA wins a SB next year, everyone will being saying this trade was genius.  

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

Edited January 31, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[ColonialWBSkinsFan]

43 minutes ago, DefinitelyMaybe said:

I know lots that feel the same as this, I know it’s a big hit but think of the wonders it would have done for the players we already have, for the Allen’s, Payne’s etc. This was the first taste of success in the NFL and I think they’ll take a lot of confidence from it moving forward with us

 

I know it hurts us in the QB stakes but never regret winning football matches 

 

I know you're right, but it's just hard to swallow that of all years, this is the one where getting the answer at QB will likely prove to be too much to overcome... very concerned about wasting the "window" of all the young talent on rookie contracts while waiting to develop a drafted QB (Mac, Newman, someone like that) because we won't be able to get up high enough to draft one of the top 4

[RichmondRedskin88]

46 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN 74 said:

On the basis we were heavily in the race for Stafford, may as well get on with releasing Smith. He’s clearly history.

 

A Watson trade is highly dangerous. Massive potential risk, massive potential reward. Can’t see that one.

 

So it’s what, Jimmy G, Carr or finally Cam when all else fails?

Yeah but we put a better offer than the Rams out.  That says everything.

 

If you want to win there’s always a risk in the moves you make.  Playing safe rarely leads to fantastic results.  

[Darrell Green Fan]

 Well this is very depressing.  All the good feelings I had from the end of the season have been tempered. Gone is the guy responsible for 2 really good drafts, gone is the hopes of getting a legit franchise QB which I believe is essential for lasting success. I don't believe Watson will be traded and I don't want to pay the price it would take. That playoff appearance costs us 9 spots in the draft, now we have no real plan other than a retread or a reach in the draft for the most important position in sports.  

 

 

[Est.1974]

10 minutes ago, RichmondRedskin88 said:

Yeah but we put a better offer than the Rams out.  That says everything.

 

If you want to win there’s always a risk in the moves you make.  Playing safe rarely leads to fantastic results.  

I’m not sure we did better their offer overall, but agree on the playing safe. 

[Skinsinparadise]

37 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

To @Skinsinparadise point--I am fully on board with whatever Rivera wants and he's got this organization going in the right direction (I was fully on board with keeping Kyle Smith, but if Ron says he goes, there must be a reason). Trey Lance is my preference, but if Rivera wants Watson, I'll buy a #4 jersey (although I am leaning #99 or #93...possibly #94. Love our big boys!)

 

This will be a very interesting offseason!

 

Yeah i think it will be fascinating.  

 

There four things i can say with confidence based on what beat guys have leaked, Rivera's own comments, and their move for Stafford

 

A.  They don't believe the answer is in house

B.  They don't buy the theory of build a big time supporting cast and then a game manager can then win you a SB 

C.  They do believe enough in their current roster that the time is now to add a QB.

D.  There is urgency to getting the spot fixed

 

This isn't directed to you.   My biggest pet peeve with some (not all) of those that make the point that the time isn't now and they need to fill other spots not just Qb is that while I don't mind the point it requires some nuance to it otherwise it rings a bit silly.   Otherwise, you'd think acquiring a Qb shuts down the rest of the off season.  No draft picks are left.  No cap room.  You can't get a Qb and a MLB and WR for example.      Look I get you won't get as much addressed but i'd address the point that way specificlly versus saying we need a MLB, WR  or whatever too so this isn't the time to get a QB.  

 

As an example, I think it would be if anything easy to address QB, WR, MLB in a single off season.  Piece of cake.  So the argument then to me is more well I'd still want a FS and depth at CB before I make a move or something like that.   Because the argument isn't truly QB and that's it.  The argument is QB and we can address various spots versus addressing even more spots. 

 

And if the idea is to wait until everything is addressed then you'd be waiting forever because no teams have zero weaknesses.  Every team has holes.  And the O line stuff argument which i see here and there just seems like a fallback old school refrain.  O line, O line, O line.  Nevermind that Rivera has alluded in interviews he feels like its a strength and PFF ranks it as ther 6th best in the league.  Yeah sure we can upgrade it.  But its not the #1 need.   This is the modern era where the refrain is you win with a QB.   

 

Naturally you need a supporting cast but getting James Bond is more important than Q and Moneypenny and M.  It's good to have that supporting cast but they are easier to find than the James Bond. 

 

Edited January 31, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Mooka]

4 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 Well this is very depressing.  All the good feelings I had from the end of the season have been tempered. Gone is the guy responsible for 2 really good drafts, gone is the hopes of getting a legit franchise QB which I believe is essential for lasting success. I don't believe Watson will be traded and I don't want to pay the price it would take. That playoff appearance costs us 9 spots in the draft, now we have no real plan other than a retread or a reach in the draft for the most important position in sports.  

 

 

 

Starting to feel that way.... it'll take a bounty to just trade up for the #4 QB on our boards. Trading up to the top 3 would be impossible.

 

Just no Cam Newton. Please. Id rather watch a Trubisky/Allen/Heinicke camp battle. 

[Skinsinparadise]

Ex-Houston sports reporter

 

 

 

[Burgold]

There's a part of me that is curious about Trubiski on a cheap, salvage deal if we can get it. I hear him bad mouthed a lot and I don't think he is a pro bowler (although he might have one under his belt,) but he helped get the Bear's to the playoffs twice. He seems to be one of those up and down QBs that when the light turns on he's pretty good, but that way too often he hasn't even screwed a lightbulb into the socket.

 

That said, if he signed a "prove-it" contract, I'd be curious what he could prove.

[Chump Bailey]

 

15 minutes ago, Burgold said:

There's a part of me that is curious about Trubiski on a cheap, salvage deal if we can get it. I hear him bad mouthed a lot and I don't think he is a pro bowler (although he might have one under his belt,) but he helped get the Bear's to the playoffs twice. He seems to be one of those up and down QBs that when the light turns on he's pretty good, but that way too often he hasn't even screwed a lightbulb into the socket.

 

That said, if he signed a "prove-it" contract, I'd be curious what he could prove.

 

Perhaps. I'm normally aboard with the 'change of scenery' narrative for players but I've got major reservations about Mitch. We need a Justin Herbert type. We've got to attack the seams and we have 2 guys very capable of doing just that with Terry and Logan. I just don't see another trepid, dink and dunk, get what the defense gives you type of QB helping us and that is what I would personally align with Mitch. Just my 2 cents though Bur. He could just as easily be either a nice stop-gap or rise to the occasion and be the man.

Edited January 31, 2021 by Chump Bailey

[mhd24]

11 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Ex-Houston sports reporter

 

 

 

 

 

 

That would be (from us):  2019 1st+2019 2nd+2020 1st+2020 2nd+Sweat+Payne.

 

I'm NOT trading THAT!

 

Say Carolina does it...

 

That would be #8+2019 2nd+2022 1st+2022 1st+Derrick Brown+Chinn

 

I don't see them doing that either.

 

The Jets/Dolphins are the only teams with the draft capital and desire to make the move IMO.

[Darrell Green Fan]

I have no idea what signing Mitchell Trubisky would accomplish.  

[Burgold]

4 minutes ago, Chump Bailey said:

 

 

Perhaps. I'm normally aboard with the 'change of scenery' narrative for players but I've got major reservations about Mitch. We need a Justin Herbert type. We've got to attack the seams and we have 2 guys very capable of doing just that with Terry and Logan. I just don't see another trepid, dink and dunk, give what the defense gives you type of QB helping us and that is what I would personally align with Mitch. Just my 2 cents though Bur. He could just as easily be either a nice stop-gap or rise to the occasion and be the man.

You might be right. In fact, you probably are. I've only studied Trubisky from afar. Not really paying attention, he seems like one of those QBs everyone complains about that somehow does better than the other guys on their roster. He seems to win. I also remember seeing some good mobility out of him.

 

It's probably a bad sign that when I try to remember plays that made me take notice they are almost all with his legs and almost none with his arm.

 

Still, if he signed for effectively a vet min contract, I'd wouldn't be grabbing a pitch fork.

[Darrell Green Fan]

Those of you who were questioning the value of Mathew Stafford the Rams just parted ways with 2 future #1's and a 3rd and have taken on the largest dead cap hit in league history at $22 million by dealing Goff.  

 

So obviously Mathew Stafford had a lot of value around the league.  

Edited January 31, 2021 by Darrell Green Fan

[Andre The Giant]

 

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[LetThePointsSoar]

Hypothetically, if we could give 2 firsts, a 2nd, their pick of any QB on our roster and Montez Sweat for Houston to give us Watson, would you do it? 

 

I love Montez, but tell me where to sign. Periodt. 

[KDawg]

I haven’t caught up totally with this thread yet...

 

but I haven’t looked at the contract situation but is it possible the Eagles and Wentz come to an agreement to rework his deal and then they release him with less of a cap hit to them? I’m not great at the nuances of contracts like re-works and releases.

 

If that happens I wouldn’t mind taking a gamble on Wentz. I don’t think he’s the dude if reports the locker room didn’t love him are accurate... But I’m not sure he’s regressed as bad as he looked this year either. 
 

I guess there’s still a lot that needs to shake out.

 

And while I agree that I’m not against Rivera and him going after what he feels is best, and I support him in that effort...

 

If we are willing to trade the farm for Watson I think our current roster falls short of the goal (Lombardi) and the trade crushes our multi season outlook to do the same. 
 

I think he is blinded by the success and the fact that his GM reports to him means there is no one looking out for the long term health of the franchise.

 

Most would sacrifice multiple coming seasons for one trophy if we somehow get it done...and I get that... it would be beautiful...

 

But as you sit through the next 3-4 abysmal seasons remember that it’s what we as a fan base asked for. 

Edited January 31, 2021 by KDawg

[Mooka]

1 minute ago, LetThePointsSoar said:

Hypothetically, if we could give 2 firsts, a 2nd, their pick of any QB on our roster and Montez Sweat for Houston to give us Watson, would you do it? 

 

I love Montez, but tell me where to sign. Periodt. 

 

I don't think that's even a hypothetical though unless you throw in Chase Young.

 

Houston needs a top 3 pick in their haul for Watson. 

[Warhead36]

6 minutes ago, LetThePointsSoar said:

Hypothetically, if we could give 2 firsts, a 2nd, their pick of any QB on our roster and Montez Sweat for Houston to give us Watson, would you do it? 

 

I love Montez, but tell me where to sign. Periodt. 

I'd drive Montez to Dulles myself if that would be enough