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

[dyst]

18 minutes ago, heyholetsgogrant said:

Mariota fits the new NFL prototype more, a mobile QB who can extend plays. Carr is more of a pocket passer.

Fair enough but the pocket passer seems to be the better player between the two.

[TheShredder]

1 minute ago, heyholetsgogrant said:

Bust, Really?  We almost beat the best team in the NFC with a QB who was studying to take finials. 

The coaches didn't all of a sudden forget that.  Clearly Turner will point out this fact and push for a mobile guy who can run a version of that scheme.  There's a few NFL QBs that can do that and they've got 2 that are coming back.  I see them being aggressive early.  Were not blind to the fact there's holes all over the roster.  If they don't acquire a QB early, then it's fill holes and QB competition next year.  I don't see any indication that Houston is going to trade Watson unless some team offers the unthinkable.  The downside for Watson is he'll be swapping teams to get into another handicapped situation. 

[Skinsinparadise]

OK dug up the source on Carr.  The Junkies don't break much news but the few times they are on gossip stuff they are often right, they are the ones that broke that Alex's injury is really bad before it became common knowledge. 

 

 

 

[CapsSkins]

Here's the list of guys who have beaten Patrick Mahomes since he became a starting quarterback in the NFL:

 

Tom Brady

Jared Goff

Philip Rivers

Russell Wilson

Jacoby Brissett

Deshaun Watson

Aaron Rodgers

Ryan Tannehill

Derek Carr

 

Brady, Goff, Rivers, Russ, Tannehill aren't options.

 

Watson and Rodgers are targets but unlikely gets.  

 

That leaves Carr and Brissett. Carr is unquestionably better.

 

Just saying. If you want to talk about who can get you a SB, which really means who can beat KC, these are the only guys who have.

[heyholetsgogrant]

6 minutes ago, TheShredder said:

The coaches didn't all of a sudden forget that.  Clearly Turner will point out this fact and push for a mobile guy who can run a version of that scheme.  There's a few NFL QBs that can do that and they've got 2 that are coming back.  I see them being aggressive early.  Were not blind to the fact there's holes all over the roster.  If they don't acquire a QB early, then it's fill holes and QB competition next year.  I don't see any indication that Houston is going to trade Watson unless some team offers the unthinkable.  The downside for Watson is he'll be swapping teams to get into another handicapped situation. 

Well, my point is, giving up the farm for either Stafford/Watson guarantees nothing.  We nearly beat the best team in the NFC with player who was out of the league a few weeks back. Neither Stafford/Watson has been to the SB and one hasn’t won a playoff game.  No one has explained how Stafford or Watson instantly makes us a SB contender.  If either of them have been to the SB, I’d give you that point.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[CapsSkins]

1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

 

If the Rams gave up all that for Stafford, you can bet they made some stupid expensive offers for Rodgers. That GB said no signals to me that Aaron isn't going anywhere.

 

Honestly I would love to get Carr out of LV. Watson is the better player but will be extravagantly expensive. If you can get Carr for a 1st, that would be better IMO.

[Thinking Skins]

21 minutes ago, RWJ said:

I'm just putting this out there.  IF we do draft a QB and stay @ #19 and do so keep an eye on Jones or Trusk.  Just saying.  

Honestly if we go QB at 19 I think its Snyder picking somebody and my spider sense says it'd be Newman. 

[profusion]

It only makes sense for the WFT to trade massive assets for a QB if they believe it makes them a contender immediately.

 

The Rams gave up too much for Stafford, but are built to win now and can't wait for a guy to develop.

 

Trading up in the draft is the worst idea of all for the WFT unless they can get Lawrence.

[Dark Acre]

Sure, lose the last game to Philly to improve 9 draft spots.  We once lost the last game of the season -- a win-or-bust game -- that resulted in our star, mis-utilized HOF RB quitting football and the team falling from a very tough 10-6 to a 6-10 mediocrity who played so meh that people actually stopped watching.  We weren't in that ominous a position, but losing would have been a much bigger intangible negative than 9 draft spots would be positive.  I'm done with the tanking.  

[RWJ]

IF you want Carr, I'm guessing it will cost our #19, our early 3rd and 2022 2nd or possibly 1st.  Stafford's trade messed things up trade value wise.  

[JSSkinz]

I've never been a big fan of Carr but I like the fact he has 2 years left on his contract so as long as we don't have to extend him I would be ok with it, it gives us time to find our true future QB through the draft.

[RWJ]

Just now, JSSkinz said:

I've never been a big fan of Carr but I like the fact he has 2 years left on his contract so as long as we don't have to extend him I would be ok with it, it gives us time to find our true future QB through the draft.

True but your gonna have to pay up with draft picks to get him.  He'd need to be extended.  He's only 30 when he plays in 2021.  

[kingdaddy]

39 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Well, I'm certainly not saying that if we somehow fell backwards in to a SB win with a mediocre QB and a great defense I'd be displeased. It's a SB win...I'd be over the moon. I'm just saying I think assuming that that scenario is anything more than an incredibly unlikely event would be a bit naive. So while we obviously continue to build the team, I still think the major focus, even if it requires giving up some draft picks to move up and get a guy, needs to be a QB before all else. 

 

Also, sorry if I'm coming off as a jerk or snarky to you and @Burgold. Just having a frustrating day in general and realized that the tone of my posts hasn't been great.

We love you brother....hope your day gets better! 

[mhd24]

Carr isn't worth a 1st.  The Raiders need to move his contract to get cap flexibility to extend Waller and Mariotta (who is a FA after this year).

 

My offer would be our 2nd for Carr+4th.  Its Similar to the DeAndre Hopkins trade last year (where Houston inexplicably took on David Johnson's bad deal).  

[Dark Acre]

Just now, RWJ said:

IF you want Carr, I'm guessing it will cost our #19, our early 3rd and 2022 2nd or possibly 1st.  Stafford's trade messed things up trade value wise.  

Value is what you can get for it (absent collusion and whatnot).  What's striking is that this is the franchise that won 3 SBs with 3 different QBs, none of whom are going to sniff the HOF based on their entire body of work.  They weren't journeymen or "game managers" (in a pejorative sense) -- Mark Rypien wasn't capable of much else besides throwing the most accurate deep balls I've ever seen, during that 1991 season.  And none of them won the SB on their arm.  (Yes, Williams was the MVP and threw a bunch of bombs, but as Bostic said, the Hogs were opening holes so big, you could drive pickup trucks "threw" them (watch the film, it's true).  I would stock the team this year and then figure out who you want to carpet bomb with assets to get.

[mhd24]

6 minutes ago, RWJ said:

IF you want Carr, I'm guessing it will cost our #19, our early 3rd and 2022 2nd or possibly 1st.  Stafford's trade messed things up trade value wise.  

 

 

Nope.  Carr isn't held nearly to the same esteem as Stafford was.  The true price of Stafford was a 1st+3rd.  The Rams had to pay a 1st for a team to take on Goff.  Carr is worth a 2nd at best.

[RWJ]

Just now, mhd24 said:

Carr isn't worth a 1st.  The Raiders need to move his contract to get cap flexibility to extend Waller and Mariotta (who is a FA after this year).

 

My offer would be our 2nd for Carr+4th.  Its Similar to the DeAndre Hopkins trade last year (where Houston inexplicably took on David Johnson's bad deal).  

Love for that to happen but look at his stats.  Look at what the Rams did to the trade market on QBs for this year and the amount of teams looking for a QB.  It's nuts!

[JSSkinz]

4 minutes ago, RWJ said:

True but your gonna have to pay up with draft picks to get him.  He'd need to be extended.  He's only 30 when he plays in 2021.  

So I would do our #1 because its the 19th pick, I can deal with that or a scenario of multiple lower round picks but there's no way I add a 2nd or 3rd along with that 1st, maybe a 4th or 5th.  Everyone in the league knows what Carr is, he's serviceable and that's about it.

Edited February 1, 2021 by JSSkinz

[CommDownMan]

44 minutes ago, TheShredSkinz said:

 

And here we are in quiet the pickle....again .

 Tiny Heinike falls in our universe and we're taking him for granite.

 

Granted.

 

Unless you are calling him a rock solid option

[Thinking Skins]

33 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

What guys like Standig speculated is that Rivera doesn't want a wildcard at QB but a veteran he could trust.   Otherwise, I don't know, I'd guess if their scouts were in love with a QB prospect they'd shoot for them in the draft. 

 

Dag, I just had a reply to this and lost it because of the voting (pressed tab and enter and voting lost it)

 

But I can agree with this to the extent that he wants somebody he can trust instead of going through the ups and downs of developing a young QB. In particular Ron and company have ake and evaluation of these guys since Carolina and before that Minnesota, plus their scouting of them in college. Its definitely true that they could see the pluses and minuses of the guys and say its got potential but not worth the risk right now. Especially if they did scouting reports on a Darnold, Tribusky or Maroita or whoever else and said that this guy would be perfect for their system, or wondered why their team was using them in a certain way. My dislike of this isn't comparable to Bibbs and Marshall. Its more close to when Guice went down and we brought in AP instead of rolling with Bibbs and the other guys we had in preseason. AP offered us a chance to solidify the RB position and turn it into a strength instead of a 50/50 spot. So while I wouldn't be happy with getting these guys, its not like this is the ultimate straw for me. 

 

Even the benching of Haskins wasn't that bad for me. It was him calling out Haskins with te 52 other guys comment. But even that is kinda moot now because as much as I hate the leaks and calling him out, it seems like Haskins had some knucklehead in him and wasn't responding to coaching. But this is just me connecting dots since he was cut. 

[Skinsinparadise]

10 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

Honestly if we go QB at 19 I think its Snyder picking somebody and my spider sense says it'd be Newman. 

 

 

[RWJ]

1 minute ago, JSSkinz said:

So I would do our #1 because its the 19th pick, I can deal with that or a scenario of multiple lower round picks but there's no way I add a 2nd or 3rd along with that 1st, maybe a 4th or 5th.  Everyone in the league knows what Carr is, he's serviceable and that's about it.

I'm with you and 24.  I'd hope that we'd can get him on the cheap too but we will have to first see if the WFT is interested and two how the Ram's trade affects this.

[kingdaddy]

11 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

Honestly if we go QB at 19 I think its Snyder picking somebody and my spider sense says it'd be Newman. 

Did you mean "Snyder sense"? LOL

[RWJ]

Just now, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

With you and everyone on the board saying my guessing was too much.  I agree.  I'm just pointing to the ridiculous trade that happened with Lions/Rams regardless of why/what.  It was what it was.  IF I am making the trade for Carr, I would go our #19 and our early 3rd.  That'd be fair.