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

[Est.1974]

The Lions are short on both cap space and draft picks. It’s debatable they can tag Gollady, who’s injury is a concern but has that high end potential...

 

They should be looking to draft a QB. I’d float the #19 pick their way. Start off with maybe a 3rd and 4th offer to break the ice.

[Skinsinparadise]

5 hours ago, KDawg said:

 

It seems like a desperation move that the old Redskins would have made and then set us back 5 years. 

 

The comedy about our desperation moves at Qb over the years is that it has been about primarily chasing aging QBs who never played close to Watson's level even when they were in their prime let alone at 34.    Then in the draft we've overdrafted Kyle Trask level type prospects (Haskins, Ramsey, Campbell) in the first that many thought should go in the 2nd.   RG3 has been really their only shoot for the moon move at QB but the difference to this is he was totally unproven.  Watson is proven.

 

Having a top 5 Qb would be beyond novel for this team.   We are used to mediocrity at Qb and chasing mediocrity.  But I agree it would be a super aggressive move.  I think there is almost zero chance it happens so I wouldn't worry one whit about this though.  If we end up with Watson it would be the most stunning off season of all time I'd think for this franchise.   I'd be somewhat surprised if we landed Stafford but i'd be beyond stunned if its Watson.  And stunned would be an understatement for me.  As you like to say (and I agree) the Texans are unlikely to trade him.  But if they did, we don't have nearly the same trade ammunition as other teams. 

Edited January 21, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Silvernon]

5 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

RG3 was 100% unproven.  Watson is 100% proven.  Apples to oranges.  

 

Most NFL observer types do see him as a top 5 Qb.  But yeah if I wasn't that high on him than I'd pass, too.  But to me he's not only top 5 but he's slam dunk easily top 5. 

 

Having said that I think no shot we get him so we are all debating semantics and theory versus reality.  But its still fun.  That's what they are ironically debating this morning on 980.  Fun talk but its likely fantasy.  

 

I've been pushing Stafford a lot.  But its not up to Mayhew as for whether Stafford hits the market that's up to the Lions.  He may hit the market but I'd guess now he doesn't.

 

Let's run with this as two perennial top 5 QBs just retired. Your top 5:

Aaron Rodgers

Patrick Mahomes

Tom Brady

Russell Wilson

#5 DeShaun Watson

 

Challenged by:

Josh Allen

Joe Burrow

Justin Herbert

Trevor Lawrence

 

How long does he remain a top 5 QB? Is it worth it?

 

Hopkins was simply incredible for the Texans and demonstrating how much that helps a young QB for the Cards.

 

I am very interested to see what happens over the next two years and how the competition shakes out. 

[kingdaddy]

10 hours ago, Dont Taze Me Bro said:

 

We do not need to give up multiple first round picks for another ****ing QB.  Haven't y'all learned our lesson when we did that with the Rams?

He's signed through 2025, he has zero leverage.   They can also franchise tag him after that.  Why do y'all want to give up multiple first round picks for another ****ing QB?  

I don't think any of us WANT to give up three 1sts for Watson but to get a player like him that's definitely a possibility of what it may take. If we do trade for him I hope you're right, that it does only require two 1sts and a player like Payne...I would bet there will be a hell of a bidding war for Watson if Houston does make him available, unless Watson really can control where he goes. 

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

13 minutes ago, Silvernon said:

 

Let's run with this as two perennial top 5 QBs just retired. Your top 5:

Aaron Rodgers

Patrick Mahomes

Tom Brady

Russell Wilson

#5 DeShaun Watson

 

Challenged by:

Josh Allen

Joe Burrow

Justin Herbert

Trevor Lawrence

 

How long does he remain a top 5 QB? Is it worth it?

 

Hopkins was simply incredible for the Texans and demonstrating how much that helps a young QB for the Cards.

 

I am very interested to see what happens over the next two years and how the competition shakes out. 

 

Maybe it happens.  But if so what does it matter if lets say Lawrence surpasses Watson in some NFL ranking list next season?

 

It's like saying you can sign a hitter who has a career 333 batting average but what if some new minor leaguer for another team gets called up and bats 335, how would you feel about your new 333 hitter?  My answer is I'd feel great.   I don't care about some other team having their own hitter hit a hair higher.  

 

But lol there is so much I am willing to debate Watson.  I think we are wasting time debating a fantasy, 

Edited January 21, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Skinsinparadise]

What would a trade mean for the Texans' salary cap?

Any trade of Watson will carry a charge of $5.6 million in dead money for the Texans. Because of the way his contract is structured (he is technically in the final year of his rookie deal, before his four-year contract extension kicks in), his cap charge for 2021 is only $15.94 million. In comparison, that number jumps to $40.4 million in 2022.

 

The reason it will be so costly for the Texans is because they paid a significant portion of the deal with Watson's $27 million signing bonus, which gets prorated. Teams do this to help them take advantage of the cap in future years.

If the Texans trade Watson, the yearly proration accelerates against the Texans as a dead money charge. The dead money on the contract is $21.6 million, which is the $5.4 million signing bonus prorated from 2021 to 2024.

 

This means the team that trades for Watson isn't responsible for the prorated portion of his signing bonus, just his base salary. So, his cap charges from 2021 to 2025 would be $10.54 million, $35 million, $37 million, $32 million and $32 million. The final two years of the contract are not guaranteed, but if Watson is playing this well at that point, a $32 million salary will be considered a bargain for an elite quarterback.

Because the $10.54 million in salary would be paid by the team trading for Watson, trading the quarterback would add only $5.6 million in dead money. Of course, in addition to that dead money charge, the Texans also would have to pay another quarterback, and that won't come cheap.

 

The dead money is likely only worth taking on for the Texans if they find a team willing to trade them a player (or players via draft picks and players on rookie contracts) that equal the productivity they believe they'll get from Watson.

Otherwise, if you're trying to compete, that's a lot of money to have on the books for someone not playing for the Texans in 2021.

Watson also could offer to return the guaranteed money to the team, which would make it easier for the Texans to facilitate a trade.

 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/30749365/deshaun-watson-no-trade-clause-puts-houston-texans-no-win-situation

[Est.1974]

Watsons 37mil number in 2023 is 20mil salary and 17mil roster bonus. 
 

Only reason the 17mil doesn’t pro rata into 2024 and 2025 is because they are voidable years. So you can basically say that deal would be getting re-done in 2023.

 

In fact, If I was trading the farm for him, he’d be getting a new 6 year deal as part of the process and the cap hits will be slightly lower in the early years 1-3 anyway.

[KDawg]

24 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN 74 said:

Watsons 37mil number in 2023 is 20mil salary and 17mil roster bonus. 
 

Only reason the 17mil doesn’t pro rata into 2024 and 2025 is because they are voidable years. So you can basically say that deal would be getting re-done in 2023.

 

In fact, If I was trading the farm for him, he’d be getting a new 6 year deal as part of the process and the cap hits will be slightly lower in the early years 1-3 anyway.

The cap hit is what I have the least issue with in trading for him. But it’s still significant.

[Blanka]

 

[Capt'n Obvious]

9 minutes ago, Blanka said:

 

 

 

There are only like 5 QB's in the entire league that are an adequate replacement for Watson. Texans are such a dumpster fire. Watson gains you the ability to acquire picks to rebuild. You aren't getting a QB at his level back in any trade. They'll have to accept either a young prospect QB (Tua/Darnold) or get the picks to draft and develop their own. Bill O' Brien deservedly gets a ton of crap for what he did, but that group down there now also seems to be pretty stupid.

Edited January 21, 2021 by Capt'n Obvious

[KDawg]

Just now, Capt'n Obvious said:

There are only like 5 QB's in the entire league that are an adequate replacement for Watson. Texans are such a dumpster fire. Watson gains you the ability to acquire picks to rebuild. You aren't getting a QB at his level back in any trade. They'll have to accept either a young prospect QB (Tua/Darnold) or get the picks to draft and develop their own. Bill O' Brien deservedly gets a ton of crap for what he did, but that group down their now also seems to be pretty stupid.

They aren’t going to trade him if they get Bieniemy. And that’s their plan. Do they get him? We’ll see. But I’d be shocked if that’s not their current goal.

[Capt'n Obvious]

5 minutes ago, KDawg said:

They aren’t going to trade him if they get Bieniemy. And that’s their plan. Do they get him? We’ll see. But I’d be shocked if that’s not their current goal.

 

I don't think they should trade him at all. Their goal absolutely should be to keep him, and I really don't think he gets moved. I was more reacting to the quote that they don't think Tua is an adequate replacement for Watson. As if you can trade away a young franchise QB and simply get back anything even remotely close to his level. If you move Deshaun you are starting over and will need to develop a QB. 

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, Capt'n Obvious said:

 

I don't think they should trade him at all. Their goal absolutely should be to keep him, and I really don't think he gets moved. I was more reacting to the quote that they don't think Tua is an adequate replacement for Watson. As if you can trade away a young franchise QB and simply get back anything even remotely close to his level. If you move Deshaun you are starting over and will need to develop a QB. 

Should or shouldn’t may not be relevant to the discussion. 
 

But I wouldn’t trade him either if I were them. And if I were us I wouldn’t give up what we’d need to to get him.

[Capt'n Obvious]

2 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Should or shouldn’t may not be relevant to the discussion. 
 

But I wouldn’t trade him either if I were them. And if I were us I wouldn’t give up what we’d need to to get him.

 

I would agree with that. I would be interested in at least seeing what the Lions would want in return for Stafford if I'm the WFT front office. I think at a minimum its #19 overall. 

[Est.1974]

1 hour ago, KDawg said:

The cap hit is what I have the least issue with in trading for him. But it’s still significant.

I agree. The potential draft picks required is a very dangerous/risky strategy.

[zCommander]

I still think we roll with what we have. Build the roster. Get a QB using one of the 3rd round pick. We are not one elite QB and a WR away from being a contender yet. Too many holes to fill.

[Burgundy Yoda]

Swooping in and being a 3rd team in the trade while grabbing Tua would be a great idea. His rookie season was decent enough and he still has upside, it would probably warrant our 1st but he's a better prospect than any QB we would get at #19. 

 

Watson is going to cost us everything. We aren't as close as people think to contending either, there's still quite a few holes this team has and we don't have near the amount of blue chip talent that other contenders have. 

[kingdaddy]

1 hour ago, Capt'n Obvious said:

 

I don't think they should trade him at all. Their goal absolutely should be to keep him, and I really don't think he gets moved. I was more reacting to the quote that they don't think Tua is an adequate replacement for Watson. As if you can trade away a young franchise QB and simply get back anything even remotely close to his level. If you move Deshaun you are starting over and will need to develop a QB. 

This is obviously a tough situation the Texans put themselves in, having a disgruntled face of the franchise. I just pray that the Eagles don't get in on this because they have 2 QB's and high draft picks they could offer that might tempt the Texans more than anything we could offer. Wentz and two #'1s for Watson probably gets Houston thinking. Heck, Hurts may get them thinking if they like him. I don't want to see Watson in our division unless his helmet has a number on both sides of it.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

 

Edited January 21, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[MisterPinstripe]

1 hour ago, zskins said:

I still think we roll with what we have. Build the roster. Get a QB using one of the 3rd round pick. We are not one elite QB and a WR away from being a contender yet. Too many holes to fill.

Disagree, a truly elite QB covers many holes. 

[Skinsinparadise]

Listened to a national insider today and a Lions beat guy on 980.  

 

I missed him saying this directly, caught the 2nd half of the interview but heard Galdi's  recap of it which was the Lions insider doesn't think they trade Stafford.

 

The national insider doesn't think the Texans end up trading Watson but its possible and the issue with WFT is their pick is far back -- 19.  (he was stating the obvious but for what it was worth he's parroting what makes sense to us).

 

He said he's hearing Altanta is unlikely to trade Ryan.

 

He's hearing the WFT wants to be aggressive this off season for a Qb.  Yet when cornered on then for whom -- he agreed the pickings are slim so he speculated maybe Darnold. 

Edited January 21, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[zCommander]

29 minutes ago, MisterPinstripe said:

Disagree, a truly elite QB covers many holes. 

 

You will still need people to throw to. The QB doesn't play on the D and we still need help in that area and on the offense line as well. 

[sjinhan]

4 minutes ago, zskins said:

 

You will still need people to throw to. The QB doesn't play on the D and we still need help in that area and on the offense line as well. 

 

If you have a top level QB that gets the ball out fast, keeps drives alive and score some points... it is going to have positive impact on every aspect of the football team.

 

For Stafford and Watson.. we have to give up whatever we need to get up to get a QB of that caliber...  If it is anyone else then I agree with you that we shouldnt do the deal and spend our resources to fill the holes on the roster.

[FootballZombie]

1 hour ago, kingdaddy said:

I just pray that the Eagles don't get in on this because they have 2 QB's and high draft picks they could offer that might tempt the Texans more than anything we could offer.

 

Don't worry too much about that scenario

 

Zero percent chance Philly can get in on this w/ Wentz

 

The Eagles are already way over the Cap, trading Wentz would result in a 33 M dead cap hit on phil. W/ the additional 10 M from watson's deal, Philly would be 60M over the cap.

Even after the trade, Wentz would cost 15 M for the Texans and they already have to trade JJ Watts 17 M to get back in the black. Bringing in a 15M QB puts them back at square one, from a cap standpoint. Neither side can really afford to make this move.

 

Hurts would be a better fit for Hou, as his Cap hit would be tiny, but Phi would be trading Hurts 1.5M deal for Watson 10M would again put them 60M over the cap.

 

Phi will likely have to sell high on a few of their players, but they have to bring in smaller contracts or draft picks in return. By no means are they in a position to buy.

 

 

Hou can not afford to bring in a QB that cost much more than 10 M. If they do, they will have to slash up their roster far worse than just shipping off JJ Watt.

If a player/QB costs more than 10 M, I would seriously doubt that player is even on Hou's radar to get in a return deal. That would rule out players like Collins and J. Allen on our team.

 

Hou would want guys who are on rookie deals, or economically friendly deals, Like Io, Settle, Payne ect.

 

33 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

He said he's hearing Altanta is unlikely to trade Ryan.

 

ATL would eat a 45 M dead cap hit to trade that dude. You'd be basically punting on the season and giving away 1/4 of your cap to trade him before June 1

If he gets moved, it will be after June 1, well after FA and the draft, so most spots will be filled, giving them much less leverage and return.

[zCommander]

1 minute ago, sjinhan said:

 

If you have a top level QB that gets the ball out fast, keeps drives alive and score some points... it is going to have positive impact on every aspect of the football team.

 

For Stafford and Watson.. we have to give up whatever we need to get up to get a QB of that caliber...  If it is anyone else then I agree with you that we shouldnt do the deal and spend our resources to fill the holes on the roster.

 

Again we would still need WRs who can catch the damn football coming at them faster. We would need to upgrade in that area either via the draft of the free agency. If you can get a QB better than what you have on the roster and one that is not going to cost you your whole draft picks then yes do it. But have to give him weapons to throw to as well.