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

[Stefanskins]

14 hours ago, KDawg said:

You’re crazy if you don’t see Fields potential. I’ve talked enough about it to the point I’m tired of rehashing it. I’ve come to the conclusion that if you don’t see his potential it’s 100% based on his school.

Yes...nooo Ohio State QBs!!!

[mhd24]

I don't think there is anyway Fields is even in play.  The Jets are either trading for Watson (via the #2 pick), or taking Fields/Wilson.  If Houston gets that pick, they are taking Fields/Wilson.  Those guys aren't getting passed by for Sam Darnold.  Joe Douglass and Saleh didn't draft Darnold.

 

The Falcons will strongly consider taking Fields/Wilson or will trade down to a team that wants Fields/Wilson (assuming Miami doesn't trade down and takes Sewell/Chase/Smith).  Carolina, Denver, and SF all have much higher picks that will be palatable to a team like Atlanta who doesn't want to trade down too far and lose a premium player.  We aren't going to have a shot at Fields and will have a really small chance at Lance.  Its just too high a leap IMO.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

Just now, mhd24 said:

I don't think there is anyway Fields is even in play.  The Jets are either trading for Watson (via the #2 pick), or taking Fields/Wilson.  If Houston gets that pick, they are taking Fields/Wilson.  Those guys aren't getting passed by for Sam Darnold.  Joe Douglass and Saleh didn't draft Darnold.

 

The Falcons will strongly consider taking Fields/Wilson or will trade down to a team that wants Fields/Wilson (assuming Miami doesn't trade down and takes Sewell/Chase/Smith).  Carolina, Denver, and SF all have much higher picks that will be palatable to a team like Atlanta who doesn't want to trade down too far and lose a premium player.  We aren't going to have a shot at Fields and will have a really small chance at Lance.  Its just too high a leap IMO.

 

Pretty simple really. Offer more than any other team. If it's Atlanta, offer them 1/2 and 1/2 next year. And those teams you mention may not be in the QB sweepstakes when the dust settles on the off-season. I think you're right with #2 being a QB, but right now that seems like it COULD be Wilson. Of course, if It's Fields, this conversation goes sideways.

 

But if 1-2 is Lawrence-Wilson ... Smith to Miami, Sewell to Atlanta, Chase to Cincy, Waddle to Philly ... suddenly you have a situation where teams opt to go with the BPA at their positions rather than trade out or force QB ... and at #7 you have Detroit who, if serious about Goff, could trade out. Would SF offer #12, 2nd and a 2022 1st to move up 5 spots? Doubtful. If Detroit covets future picks and doesn't see a huge difference between pick 12 and 19, it could lead to a trade partner.

[LetThePointsSoar]

I'd love for us to do a blockbuster deal for Watson or Fields, but I fear it might not get done. 

 

Outside of Watson, Fields or Lawrence, there's not a QB out there that I'd rather see under center before giving Heinicke a real shot at starter. 

 

If anything, this is where I'd love to bring in Fitzpatrick to back up Heinicke to at least set a realistic floor for the QB play. 

[mhd24]

2 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

 

Pretty simple really. Offer more than any other team. If it's Atlanta, offer them 1/2 and 1/2 next year. And those teams you mention may not be in the QB sweepstakes when the dust settles on the off-season. I think you're right with #2 being a QB, but right now that seems like it COULD be Wilson. Of course, if It's Fields, this conversation goes sideways.

 

But if 1-2 is Lawrence-Wilson ... Smith to Miami, Sewell to Atlanta, Chase to Cincy, Waddle to Philly ... suddenly you have a situation where teams opt to go with the BPA at their positions rather than trade out or force QB ... and at #7 you have Detroit who, if serious about Goff, could trade out. Would SF offer #12, 2nd and a 2022 1st to move up 5 spots? Doubtful. If Detroit covets future picks and doesn't see a huge difference between pick 12 and 19, it could lead to a trade partner.

 

 

Except Carolina at 8 could trade up to Philly at 6 and ensure Fields (Philly is not trading down to us).  Philly takes either Waddle, Pitts (who is really a big WR), Parsons, Slater, or a CB at 8.

 

We won't have a shot at Wilson or Fields.  We're too far down at 19. 

[Thinking Skins]

16 hours ago, kingdaddy said:

 

If it's Dalton, then RR is bringing in a vet that he can go to if need be while still letting Allen and Heinicke or maybe even Montez have a shot at the job. I am convinced that RR is gonna bring in a league vet just as insurance if he can't find the answer he really wants in free agency, the draft or thru trade. Who knows, maybe we do draft a rookie and Dalton holds the place until the kid is ready, ala Fitzpatrick in Miami this year. Or maybe Dalton is signed as insurance in case we can't get Watson? After the year RR had with QB's, he is gonna need a vet to possibly lean on should things go south again. That's the only reason I see us signing a Dalton. RR needs competency at the QB position just to continue to evaluate the rest of the roster, assuming he can't do better through other ways. 

BTW, if we do go for Dalton early in the offseason, that should be seen as good news for the Heinicke supporters in my opinion. At least until draft day then who knows?

The only thing about this is that those were the exact words that Ron used as to why he was going to play Allen over Haskins. So why not just go with Allen in this scenario? I know there are injury concerns but I feel like we're coming into 2021 with a blackjack hand, say we're sitting on 16. Its not a definite winning position but its something we can play with. Coming into the 2020 season, it was more like we had an A and a 3, which is really nothing and we were going to be looking for a hit, which in this case was the need for more players. Now that we have a better hand we aren't really looking for a whole new set of players, just a few pieces here and there. And what's more is that we showed that we can win with the pieces we have.

 

So a 16 in Blackjack isn't always going to win you a hand, but if we just stayed there, there's a chance your opponent will have a 14 and ask for a hit and get a Jack and bust. Or they can just have worse cards than us. Thing is Heinicke and Allen showed they could play and put up decent numbers. Gibson, Thomas, McClaurin, and Sims all showed they could play with these guys. So I don't think we are in a dire situation like we need a hit from the dealer. It'd be nice if we landed that perfect peice, but I'd hate to see us abandon the path we already started to pave. 

[heyholetsgogrant]

30 minutes ago, Rdskns2000 said:

If Houston caves, Watson will have a big say; unless he waves the no trade clause.

 

Stafford wanted to go to LA. I think the Rams upped their initial offer to make it happen.

 

Watson is going dictate where he ends up and I don’t see us as being a destination.

 

 

 

 

Exactly, he has a no trade clause, so he holds all the cards.  We could offer more, but in the end it may not matter. 

[757SeanTaylor21]

1 hour ago, KDawg said:

 

Yes you can.

 

2 firsts

1 second

1 third

 

vs.

 

3 firsts

2 seconds

player

 

Rookie contract vs. Bloated contract.

 

Plenty of justification. You just don't agree. And that's cool. But it's justifiable.

 

Is it a bloated contract...or is it a justified contract for an all pro qb and would INSTANTLY be the best qb we've had here in eons if not ever. What if u trade all that trade capital and he busts..? Its a proven fact what watson is. Its a complete unknown what the rookie might be. So if you gamble....u betting a whole to say...we might hit big we might not. But what if you sprinkle in a little more in for certainty knowing you gonna hit big. You wouldn't take that deal?

[Darrell Green Fan]

1 hour ago, KDawg said:

Because that’s the current rumor. Equivalency of 3 firsts, 3 seconds and some change. 
 

If the price is lower it changes.

 

I hope the FO is communicating with Houston.

 

I’m with @JamesMadisonSkins on this. You put the feelers out on Watson and still try to get Dak if he hits FA or trade up in the draft to get Fields if he starts to fall. If neither materialize you keep your eyes on Watson. Actually, trading for Watson post 2021 Draft makes more sense to me. So if we strike out now after the draft is around the time I start to push more in. 
 

And that includes a defensive linemen in the offer.

 

I would think that if Houston decides they have no choice but to trade Watson they would do it before the draft.  Obtaining picks a year away for one of the most valuable players in the league will be a hard sell to the fans. 

20 minutes ago, LetThePointsSoar said:

I'd love for us to do a blockbuster deal for Watson or Fields, but I fear it might not get done. 

 

Outside of Watson, Fields or Lawrence, there's not a QB out there that I'd rather see under center before giving Heinicke a real shot at starter. 

 

If anything, this is where I'd love to bring in Fitzpatrick to back up Heinicke to at least set a realistic floor for the QB play. 

 

I think Allen provides that floor without the expense of a Fitz.  And having Fitz on the roster and lighting it up as a backup, as he is prone to do at times, will only cause a QB controversy. 

Edited February 2, 2021 by Darrell Green Fan

[dckey]

How about 2021 1st, 2022 2nd, 2023 1st, 2024 2nd, Matt IO and Landon Collins for Watson??????????

[Conn]

50 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

I'm fairly certain he has already said that. Especially given who his agent is: David Mulugheta--Dwayne Haskins agent.

The agent that parted ways with Haskins after we cut him? 

[Darrell Green Fan]

11 minutes ago, dckey said:

How about 2021 1st, 2022 2nd, 2023 1st, 2024 2nd, Matt IO and Landon Collins for Watson??????????

 

Wondering if Collins has any value at all at this point.  Even without the injury.  

[The Consigliere]

2 hours ago, KDawg said:

So, for you "Watson no matter what" folks... I have a question.

 

Forgetting the fact I vehemently disagree with giving up what appears to be the price for a moment...

 

Is your plan to do nothing while we hope Houston actually trades him?

 

Because that's just about the worst idea if you don't want Heinicke/Allen as our guy this year.

 

Are you trying to get me to buy into this plan?

 

I think I've led the train on this thought around here. If you are trading assets for a QB, trade them for a rookie. Yes, you give up draft capital. But you have the cheat code... a five year rookie contract.

 

Second best move is signing a vet in FA. Yes, they cost a lot of cap, but you keep draft assets.

 

The worst move is trading cap and draft picks for a vet.

 

 

 

I would probably do the deal you outlined to get into the top 5... As long as Fields is there. I wouldn't trade that much for Wilson. But I'd trade close to that for him. 

 

I don't disagree w/anything you said, though I'm a fan of the Watson idea. If it were me, I'd be all in on a trade up for:

1. Lawerence

2. Fields

3. Lance or Wilson

4. Lance or Wilson

 

It's only after that that I'd consider the lesser options of paying through the nose for Watson, or trying to get Darnold on the cheap etc. 

 

If it can be done, I'd be offering Chase Young or any other DL asset, the 19 pick and '22 1st to move up for Lawrence/Fields, I'd do that in a second, especially if we could switch Young out for Iron Man, or Allen or Payne. 

 

No doubt about it, I'm 100% sold on Lawrence

I'm about 85% sold on Fields

I'm 55/45 on Wilson and 45/55 on Lance.

 

For Wilson and Lance I'm paying a lot less than for Lawrence or Fields (and I'm very happy if Fields is guaranteed to fall out of the top 5). 

[CapsSkins]

If we want a top QB prospect from the draft then realistically we probably have to trade with Miami at 3 - assuming they haven't sent that pick to Houston for Watson. At 3, you're guaranteed one of Lawrence/Fields/Wilson, obviously most likely Fields/Wilson.

 

What would it take to go from 19 to 3? I looked at the Jimmy Johnson draft chart and this should be around equal value:

 

2021 1st, 2nd, 3rd

2022 1st

 

Would you guys do that? If Ron loves one of those three guys, then I would tbh. 

[Riggo#44]

3 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

The agent that parted ways with Haskins after we cut him? 

 

Oh, I didn't see that. Still, I don't imagine Ron and him have a buddy-buddy relationship.

[CapsSkins]

1 minute ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

Oh, I didn't see that. Still, I don't imagine Ron and him have a buddy-buddy relationship.

 

I wouldn't read into it. Agents have to have good relationships with all the teams, even if they end up playing hardball for an individual client. Remember, there are only 32 teams in the league. No way they permanently hamper their ability to do business with any one of them.

[The Consigliere]

2 hours ago, KDawg said:

 

For the people who are saying offer the farm for Watson... How long do you give the Texans to accept any offer you send them? Beyond the draft holding out hope they balk and trade him? Until the draft where we may trade up? Do we offer Dak a contract if he hits FA and pull the Texans offer if he signs? Or do we not even try for Dak or a rookie because we're hoping to get Watson?

 

Personally, I'd try to trade up right now for a top 3 pick, just blow them away immediately w/an overpay. 

 

If that fails: then I go after a pick inside the top 4-5.

 

If that fails too.

 

Then I go after Watson.

 

If that fails, I get a stop gap, and then try a live draft trade up.

 

If that fails, try again next year. We've sucked for nearly 30 years, another year of suck is not going to be surprising. Just realize the '22 draft class is weak at QB, and as such, trading a way a first from that class that is likely to be high (I think the assumption that we're a playoff team w/o a massive improvement at QB is pure folly) to move up for a QB from a much better positional class makes sense. 

 

Needless to say, this is why I advocated either taking a QB last year, or trading back and down to acquire ammo to move up this year. 

 

If I didn't take Tua/Herbert last year, I would have worked every angle to insure I had 1 more 1st, and hopefully another day 2 pick beyond the SF pick to improve offers with. 

Barring getting our QB last year, I absolutely would have done everything possible to be going into this draft with:

1sts: 2

2nds: 2

3rds: 2

 

Then when you add a '22 1st or 2nd, it's damn hard for a team to say no to your offer whatever it may be.

 

The absolute worst case scenarios from my position last year was:

#1 just winning that Giants game and gifting them Chase Young

#2 Doing what we did, taking Chase Young at slot. 

 

While it gave us the defense to make a playoff run when Alex came back it did nothing to address a fundamental core problem that will knee cap the team during this window (which isn't really a window unless we get a Dak or Watson) where our front four on defense is so good we have a '07/'11 Giants capability if we just had at least a league average offense (which we don't). 

Love Chase Young, but the bottom line is that guys like Chase Young don't make your team a long term contender unless you have the elite QB on the other side of the ball. 

 

 

 

[KDawg]

33 minutes ago, 757SeanTaylor21 said:

 

Is it a bloated contract...or is it a justified contract for an all pro qb and would INSTANTLY be the best qb we've had here in eons if not ever. What if u trade all that trade capital and he busts..? Its a proven fact what watson is. Its a complete unknown what the rookie might be. So if you gamble....u betting a whole to say...we might hit big we might not. But what if you sprinkle in a little more in for certainty knowing you gonna hit big. You wouldn't take that deal?

It’s bloated. The key to winning in the NFL is drafting your own QB and using the rookie window to build around him.

 

There are cases where signing a vet from FA works, too.

 

Trades very rarely work out.

 

And yes, Watson getting traded is not an every day occurrence. And he IS special. But the cost is heavy in assets and cap.

[The Consigliere]

2 hours ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

@The Consigliere well you can. Ionidis is older and likely not brought back after 2022. Settle expires in 2022.

 

In 2022 and 2023 you currently have a projected $133m and $177m respectively. You Absolutely have the ability to have Payne/Allen extended on big deals while still on the rookie deals of Sweat and Payne. These contracts are staggered, and you have tons of cap space available. You can 100% keep the big 4 together as long as you want.

 

That's my point though:

You have four elite DL players. No team can pay for second contracts on four different guys like that. Sure we can cut Iron man when his dead cap hit is reasonable, but you won't be able to afford Allen/Payne/Chase either in 2025, you have to make choices here, trade from a strength to address a weakness. Figure out which guy you can afford to lose in terms of value based upon production, likely cost to resign, chemistry etc. establish values, and move one of them. 

 

If we have a four man elite DL, but a dumpster fire at QB, we still have nothing. 

 

If we have an elite QB, we can have a dumpster fire at DL and be a .500 team, if we're just competent on the lines with an elite QB, we're a playoff team. 

 

We're trying to build this bloody thing in reverse. 

[joeken24]

QBs out of college are rarely known. The WFT has never known since its inception. We as fans obviously haven't known, because many were all in on RGIII, DH, McNabb, Alex and Ramsey (just to name a few). I'm going to have a wait and see approach on this one. But I do think, Ron is looking for a vet to run his offense; not manage; none of this learning ****; no flashes and everything that goes with that bull****. But to run it. The only guy that's run this offense so far is Heineke. Even as I look back on games with Kyle in, I saw a little bit of Alex in his throws and decisions. Just sayin'

Some fans are like that homely looking chick that's always looking for a Fabio, when the guy that's her speed is right in front of her getting the job done. Get in, where you fit in grasshopper.

  

Edited February 2, 2021 by joeken24
add

[The Consigliere]

2 hours ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

 

Contracts are also backloaded. By the time you enter Allen's big paydays, you have Sweat being extended with lower hits. By the time Payne gets into his big paydays, you have Chase going on the cheaper years of his deals.

 

You aren't paying more than 2 guys massive $$ on their new deals until you get into the 2026-2027 time-frame and at that point you start making the "hard decisions" ... and at that point you likely have drafted potential replacements to let one of Allens and Paynes walk.

 

Lol, I forgot to even mention Sweat. This truly is hilarious, we have four elite DL's acquired with first round draft capital AND an elite DL acquired with day 3 draft capital on a legit starter contract now. It's an absolute no brainer to trade one of these guys, we just need to be smart in establish value and not sell cheaply (if it does cost that to acquire firsts). Oh and I'd love to pawn off the Landon Collins deal as one of the defensive pieces, I'd do that in a second, needles to say. 

[Darrell Green Fan]

7 minutes ago, KDawg said:

It’s bloated. The key to winning in the NFL is drafting your own QB and using the rookie window to build around him.

 

I know this is your position and it makes total sense. However if you look at the list of SB QBs over the last 2 decades you will see a lot of names of high paid QBs who were no longer on their rookie deal. As I was saying the other day teams like the Rams have shown that it's still possible to build a really good roster even with the QB taking up a big portion of your cap.  

[The Consigliere]

1 hour ago, Stefanskins said:

Yes...nooo Ohio State QBs!!!

This doesn't make sense.

 

Btw, he was a Georgia QB before he was an Ohio State QB. He's not even an Ohio State system guy to begin with, they just moved heaven and earth to get him when Georgia fumbled away landing the #1B prospect in the Lawrence recruiting class (was that '17 or '18, I never remember, I think it was '17). 

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

I know this is your position and it makes total sense. However if you look at the list of SB QBs over the last 2 decades you will see a lot of names of high paid QBs who were no longer on their rookie deal. As I was saying the other day teams like the Rams have shown that it's still possible to build a really good roster even with the QB taking up a big portion of your cap.  

 

If you draft a guy and he is a franchise guy, you pay him. 

 

My position feeds into my draft and FA QB philosophy.

 

You draft one and use the window. I am fine with paying a FA QB, though it's not ideal. But you don't use draft capital in FA. So it's a sound strategy. So, paying your own (AFTER THE WINDOW!!!! Not before... like the Rams did...) makes some sense for sure as he's not just a FA QB but he's your QB who you know has a handle on your system and locker room. They are valuable.

 

I posted why I disagreed with your Rams take. That still stands for me as well.