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

[Lovi]

3 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

I don’t know. Worst part of that deal to me was including fuller. And we got him back. Lol

[Skinsinparadise]

6 minutes 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 am close to the same place on Carr.  I think he's probably better than Alex Smith.  I'd put him in the 13-16 range of QBs.  i'd say he's good but a distance from being great.   

 

But beggars can't be chosers and I'd take him over the FA corps.  I love the top 4 QBs in this draft but I think getting them is a pipe dream, ditto Watson.

Edited February 1, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[86 Snyder]

Carr is basically the worst a quarterback can be and still keep a starting job.  Theres a reason why hes constantly under the gun and starts every season with a ton of smoke around whether hes the solution.  Eventually he'll have a rough season and wont be the guy anymore, or he'll be victim of circumstance when his team earns a high enough pick to replace him.  Hes Andy Dalton.

 

Hes an improvement for the Skins but we're not a contender with him.   Im fine bringing him in as long as its not more than a 2nd.

 

Would be a pretty underwhelming acquisition.

 

 

Edited February 1, 2021 by 86 Snyder

[Skinsinparadise]

4 minutes ago, Lovi said:

I don’t know. Worst part of that deal to me was including fuller. And we got him back. Lol

 

The worst part to me is that contract extension.  Bruce I gather was trying to show up Kirk because he wouldn't give him a third year of guarantees so he turns around with Alex by not just giving him three years but 5 years of guarantees in the contract.   We will be paying off that contract if i recall through 2022.   It's that type of petty nonsense that Bruce would do whether its the QB situation or Trent, etc where winning a spitting match was more important than winning.  Or maybe Dan put him up to it for all I know.  Hopefully that type of crap is over with. 

Edited February 1, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[fearlessNelms]

All coaches obviously have big egos, but the egos on Kyle Shanahan and Sean McVay have got to be the two biggest in the NFL. Shanahan got to the SB with Garropolo last year and can't wait to unload him. It looks as though he might be stuck with him, but it appears clear that he'd like to move on from him.

 

Same with McVay. Goff got you to the SB two years ago and already McVay kicked him to the curb. Maybe the hate from their respective coaches is deserved, but it seems clear that both coaches are blaming these guys for their SB losses. 

 

Not saying that Garropolo or Goff are good QB's and that I would want either one of them on our team. But they were the QB's of the last two NFC SB representatives. Goff lost to the Patriots with the best coach in NFL history in Belichick and best QB in history in Brady and Garropolo lost to the Chiefs with one of the best coaches ever in Reid and quite possibly the future best QB of all time in Mahomes.

 

I wonder if the two ego maniacs, Shanahan and McVay, ever thought that maybe they haven't reinvented offensive football and were out coached in their SB losses.

 

Now that McVay has Stafford to run his greatest offense that has ever stepped foot onto a football field, a lot of people are putting the Rams in the SB next year. We'll see, but if the Rams don't win a SB with Stafford, his tenure with the Rams and the trade will be considered a failure. 

 

I'm glad Rivera didn't give up half the farm to acquire Stafford and I believe we'll win another SB before the Rams do.

 

   

 

  

[Skinsinparadise]

6 minutes ago, RWJ 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.

 

I think its too much.  I agree with Russell about not coming off desperate for a QB.  But aggressive and desperate are two different things.   I like shooting for a QB but there is a limit to what I'd pay.  For me the limit for Stafford was a first and 2nd but i didn't want to give up two firsts.    For Carr who i think is a peg lower talent wise than Stafford I think giving up a first is plenty generous enough. 

[Rufus T Firefly]

31 minutes ago, kingdaddy said:

Of course you don't count on them elevating their games in the Super Bowl, you count on your pass rush, play calling and solid roster to help your average QB out. Players, from what I've seen, just want a QB that they believe they can win with. Our defense is starting to take on an identity where they will feel like they will be the reason we win or lose....mostly win. Just give them a guy at QB who they feel can win. 

BTW, don't underestimate the impact a great head coach and coaching staff play in all of this. The year the Eagles won with Foles their offensive play calling was incredible. 

So, the only non-elite QBs to win Super Bowls are ones who elevate their games in the postseason, so now the plan is to win titles with a non-elite QB who doesn't do anything special in the playoffs?

 

Of course, you were just using the 49ers historically great team with a mediocre QB not winning the Super Bowl because their QB wasn't good enough as an example of how to win a Super Bowl without a great QB, so you know, .....

 

[Conn]

46 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.  

Thanks for the scoop, Schefter

[Burgold]

1 hour ago, mistertim said:

 

 

 

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.

I didn't take it that way at all. I'm just wary of the trade-fool's gold QB. We've been down that road with Brad Johnson, Jeff George, Mark Brunell, Donovan McNabb, Alex Smith and a series of other hand me downs. Some worked out okay. None were good enough. I think Stafford would probably elevate us to that Mark Brunnell, Alex Smith, or Brad Johnson level (mind you, a different Gruden took Johnson to the Super Bowl which makes me wonder if the Gruden we got was a hand-me-down, too).

 

I think it's unlikely that we are going to reach the mountain by trading for a QB that for ten years hasn't been good enough.

 

More importantly, sorry you're having a rough day. I think we all deserve some grace these days. Life is rough.

Edited February 1, 2021 by Burgold

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[CommanderDOOM]

17 minutes ago, jsharrin55 said:

 

Granted.

 

Unless you are calling him a rock solid option

Mind blowing....how he doesn't have more support.

[Commander -JB-]

3 hours ago, CapsSkins said:

 

The irony of saying this in response to a stat line. It's literally data. Lol

 

ES: We need a QB who can beat Mahomes!

 

Derek Carr: <only guy to beat Mahomes this season thus far, almost did it twice>

 

ES: He's not worth more than a 3rd!

 

Lmao y'all wild 

 

47-63 career record.  You have to be ****ting me.

[CommDownMan]

1 minute ago, TheShredSkinz said:

Mind blowing....how he doesn't have more support.

 

The phrase is "take for granted" not granite.

 

I wasn't saying anything about Heinicke...

[kingdaddy]

5 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

So, the only non-elite QBs to win Super Bowls are ones who elevate their games in the postseason, so now the plan is to win titles with a non-elite QB who doesn't do anything special in the playoffs?

 

Of course, you were just using the 49ers historically great team with a mediocre QB not winning the Super Bowl because their QB wasn't good enough as an example of how to win a Super Bowl without a great QB, so you know, .....

 

No, of how you can build a team and get to and even win the SB with a mediocre QB. You can pick apart and disagree with everything I say, I see where you're going. No worries...

[Burgold]

Just now, jsharrin55 said:

 

The phrase is "take for granted" not granite.

 

I wasn't saying anything about Heinicke...

That's one I used to get wrong, too. I don't mind "Taken for granite" as an equivalent cliche because granite is a pretty cheap substance. So, your taking it for something plentiful and cheap vs. something valuable.

 

 

[CapsSkins]

3 minutes ago, -JB- said:

47-63 career record.  You have to be ****ting me.

 

Is there anything more crude than citing a team win-loss record as gospel for a QB's value? Look at the below and tell me he sucks

 

 

[86 Snyder]

4 minutes ago, CapsSkins said:

 

Is there anything more crude than citing a team win-loss record as gospel for a QB's value? Look at the below and tell me he sucks

 

 

 

You are literally propping him up because his team beat Mahomes team.

 

 

Edited February 1, 2021 by 86 Snyder

[heyholetsgogrant]

10 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

Analysis is spot on, reading some posts in this thread you’d think Jared Goff was 30-50 as a starter.

[CapsSkins]

Just now, 86 Snyder said:

 

You are literally propping him because his team beat Mahomes team.

 

I'm highlighting his individual performance in a shootout w/ the best QB in the league, but the crux of my argument is his stats. I see you ignored the giant stat chart from Wikipedia I pasted into the post you quoted.  

[Skinsinparadise]

Funny and apt tweet 

 

 

 

[86 Snyder]

4 minutes ago, CapsSkins said:

 

I'm highlighting his individual performance in a shootout w/ the best QB in the league, but the crux of my argument is his stats. I see you ignored the giant stat chart from Wikipedia I pasted into the post you quoted.  

 

This you?

 

49 minutes ago, CapsSkins said:

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.

 

[Rufus T Firefly]

1 minute ago, kingdaddy said:

 You can pick apart and disagree with everything I say,

[CapsSkins]

1 minute ago, 86 Snyder said:

 

This you?

 

 

 

I said yes, I highlighted a key win but the crux of my argument is his individual stats. Slow down a second and read what I'm saying lmao. 

[mhd24]

What if the Jets offered #2+2022 2nd (which is a very high 2nd)+2022 Seattle 1st+Q. Williams for Watson?

 

That's an insane haul for Deshaun.  Q. Williams was dominant last year.  He'd be the centerpiece of a rebuilt Houston defense.  

[Skinsinparadise]

5 minutes ago, CapsSkins said:

 

I'm highlighting his individual performance in a shootout w/ the best QB in the league, but the crux of my argument is his stats. I see you ignored the giant stat chart from Wikipedia I pasted into the post you quoted.  

 

I don't have a dog in this Carr debate yet but I am open on it.  I just looked up the PFF ratings which I trust more than QB ratings, here it is, you can thank me later...