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

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, kingdaddy said:

Would you go 1st, 2022 2nd and 2021 3rd? 

I wouldn’t. No.

[skinny21]

4 hours ago, kingdaddy said:

Interesting....if we draft Newman or Jones do we just stand pat with Allen and Heinicke then? You would think we would. I doubt this plays out that way but who knows?

Or, do we add a Fitzmagic and subtract Allen or Heinicke once the rookie is brought on board. This plan makes a lot of sense. 

If the draft pans out roughly as expected in terms of early qbs taken, the only one I could see us trading up for is Lance.  I don’t see him fitting what Rivera wants, but maybe retaining Smith (doubtful) or signing Cam and having them compete with Heinicke (Allen too, unless he starts on PUP) alleviates some of the pressure?  I doubt it.  Similar situation if they went with Newton, Ridder or Jones in the draft.  I doubt we trade for Fitzpatrick, though perhaps Miami releases him at some point.

 

I think Stafford will be option A... maybe option A, B, and C.  I doubt Watson is much on their radar due to trade cost, but I could be way wrong - his upside (age, contract, talent - including mobility) is huge.  I don’t see us trading a player to them though as they aren’t going to want a short term gain when they’ll be searching for their next qb, and 3 1st, if speculation is correct, is a daunting road.  With that said, maybe one of our talented guys that have 3 years left on their contracts (including rookie options) - Sweat/Payne - are enticing enough to knock the deal to closer to 2 1sts.

 

The wildcards for me are trading up big time, or chasing Matt Ryan.  Both seem highly unlikely though.

 

My personal preference is either Stafford, draft a (developmental) guy without trading up, or trade back for future pics.  I hate the idea of Watson’s cost, but I’d consider it - would hurt our pipeline of talent.  The youth on our team, shedding contracts down the road - Smith/Collins mainly - and some good fortune with drafting could alleviate that pain.

 

I forgot Dak and Carr.  The former (if not franchised - I’m not trading with DAL) is tempting.  Give RR the vet he’s looking for and maybe his cost comes down slightly due to injury.  Don’t love the option.  Carr I’m not really interested in.  Lot of resources for essentially a talented placeholder.

Edited January 27, 2021 by skinny21

[Conn]

1 minute ago, kingdaddy said:

Would you go 1st, 2022 2nd and 2021 3rd? 

Maybe. Wouldn’t love it but if we were where he had been convinced he wanted to be I’d swallow it in the end. 

[RWJ]

3 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

I’m coming off very enthusiastic for Stafford but just to clarify, I hover right around KDawg’s 1st+ 3rd price as my line. I could go a little higher if we were a finalist in his eyes, where he wanted to be, and needed to make that push.

 

I’d pay more to be in the Watson/Rodgers sweepstakes but that’s very unlikely on both counts. 

Correction—whoever offers the most, that Stafford will play for, will get him. 

Who do you think the Lions would trade him to.  WFT offers our #19 this year and our 1st next year.  The 9ers offer their 1st this year and their 2nd this year or next?  

[Conn]

2 minutes ago, RWJ said:

Who do you think the Lions would trade him to.  WFT offers our #19 this year and our 1st next year.  The 9ers offer their 1st this year and their 2nd this year or next?  

Us if it’s all equal to Stafford himself. That would be more than I’d want to pay, ideally. 

[88Comrade2000]

Stafford wants to go to the Colts. If true, my guess Detroit tries to a deal with Indy.

[skinny21]

14 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Pertaining to the first paragraph: We had phenomenal QB play against Tampa and our D didn’t get the job done. 
 

There’s also the question of: Do we beat Dallas, twice, if Dak is playing and their line is even somewhat competitive (they played Terrence Steele... let that sink in).

 

And one could easily make the argument that the same risk exists except amplified if you use those selections on a QB who gets injured... and the cap involved.

 

I’m not against grabbing a QB but I don’t agree with the “**** it I’m going deep” all in stuff that’s been going on.

Not to go off topic (but I am), I think your first sentence highlights a sneaky need for us - cornerback.  ILB could have helped make TB more one dimensional (and is the clearer need, which I know we agree on), but Brady was picking on our secondary in a big way.

[HigSkin]

49er's are probably offering 2 firsts, at least David Carr thinks so but they also might be considering what they could get back for Jimmy G.  I think it's crazy but some analyst think Jimmy G is worth a 1st - not...

 

https://www.nfl.com/news/matthew-stafford-landing-spots-six-teams-that-should-trade-for-qb

 

 

[RWJ]

Those who want Stafford will LOVE THIS:

 

John Clayton Predicts Who Will Trade For Matthew Stafford (msn.com)

[Lovi]

2 minutes ago, RWJ said:

Those who want Stafford will LOVE THIS:

 

John Clayton Predicts Who Will Trade For Matthew Stafford (msn.com)

I like this.  But he's also saying for just a 1 and a 3.  I think the price is getting higher every day.  I don't think that gets it done now.

[RWJ]

Just now, Lovi said:

I like this.  But he's also saying for just a 1 and a 3.  I think the price is getting higher every day.  I don't think that gets it done now.

A lot of us here on ES think that would be a very fair price for Stafford.  I do anyway. 

[Lovi]

Just now, RWJ said:

A lot of us here on ES think that would be a very fair price for Stafford.  I do anyway. 

 

Fair yes, totally agree.  But I think they are going to get more than what's fair.

[kingdaddy]

5 minutes ago, skinny21 said:

Not to go off topic (but I am), I think your first sentence highlights a sneaky need for us - cornerback.  ILB could have helped make TB more one dimensional (and is the clearer need, which I know we agree on), but Brady was picking on our secondary in a big way.

You may be right but I'd argue that corner is not high on the list of needs when compared to LB, WR, QB.....our corners were pretty good this year and if we add some athletcism at LB where JDR can use them as blitzers, etc then I think our corners get even better. Hopefully Landon Collins will help too back there.

[RWJ]

1 minute ago, Lovi said:

 

Fair yes, totally agree.  But I think they are going to get more than what's fair.

Could be.  We wait and see.  

[Darrell Green Fan]

1 hour ago, kingdaddy said:

It would certainly be a competition which is good for the Heinicke supporters. And, if Carr doesn't cost a high pick, we can grab a young QB who hopefully does become the guy of the future for years. 

 

Option A is taking a QB who has demonstrated that he just isn't good enough, then we dip into the draft and take a QB outside of the top 10 where the hit rate on a true franchise QB is about 1% but you retain your high picks for other positons.

 

Option B is taking a proven top 10 QB who has not had an injury history and projects to have 5-7 more productive years and immediately makes them a contender in the NFC.

 

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

40 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Grant Cohn of Sports Illustrated is reporting that the San Francisco 49ers have the "inside edge" to acquire quarterback Matthew Stafford from the Detroit Lions, according to a "source extremely close to the situation."

Online sportsbook Bovada recently listed the 49ers with the best odds to land Stafford, and Ian Rapoport said on NFL Network that nearly a third of the teams in the league have already reached out to the Lions.

"As teams line up to trade for Matthew Stafford, a source extremely close to the situation said that while nothing is done or close to being finalized, the San Francisco 49ers seem to have the inside edge to land Stafford in a trade with the Detroit Lions," reports Cohn.

The beat writer states that the source did not divulge what kind of compensation the 49ers might need to surrender for Stafford, but notes that the general manager John Lynch and company would likely have to at least send Detroit the No. 12 overall pick. It's also unknown which destinations Stafford prefers.

Stafford will turn 33 years old on Super Bowl Sunday. David Lombardi of The Athletic points out that Stafford's post-trade salary-cap hit would be about $20 million in 2021 and about $23 million in 2022. Jimmy Garoppolo's cap hit is about $27 million for each of the next two seasons.

Stafford passed for 4,084 yards with 26 touchdowns and 10 interceptions in 2020. He has passed for over 4,000 yards in eight of his 12 NFL seasons and appeared in 16 games during nine of his past 10 seasons.
 

 

 

I think we should be paying attention to this.  They aren't always right but these early reports tend to play out often. With the 12th pick in the draft SF does have better ammunition, this may be the price we paid for getting beat in the playoffs.  Sigh.  

[RWJ]

2 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

I think we should be paying attention to this.  They aren't always right but these early reports tend to play out often. With the 12th pick in the draft SF does have better ammunition, this may be the price we paid for getting beat in the playoffs.  Sigh.  

It just depends on the best offer made.  Whoever give the Lions the best/most compensation for Stafford; he'll get traded to that team whomever it will be.  In the end we'll all know whether us or another team over spent.  

[seantaylor=god]

If it ends up being 2 firsts or more and our  front office doesn’t do it, I can accept it. I’ll disagree with it, but I will see what their plan is. Mariotta? Tribusky? 
 

What I won’t accept is the Smith, Heineke, and Allen. That’s not a solution, mostly because every single one of them has significant injury concerns.

[Conn]

6 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

I think we should be paying attention to this.  They aren't always right but these early reports tend to play out often. With the 12th pick in the draft SF does have better ammunition, this may be the price we paid for getting beat in the playoffs.  Sigh.  

Maybe. Or maybe making the playoffs and putting up a scrappy showing on a national stage against the GOAT is why we’d even be considered by a good QB with other options. You never know. 

Edited January 27, 2021 by ConnSKINS26

[ExoDus84]

1 hour ago, KDawg said:

I thought Fields played well in his last 2 games. Indiana and NW were concerns.

 

I literally don't want Fields, even if he drops to us. After the last 2 years with an OSU QB bust, I'm not ready for another one. In fact, has there ever been an OSU QB that was any good in the NFL? I can't think of one.

[RWJ]

5 minutes ago, seantaylor=god said:

If it ends up being 2 firsts or more and our  front office doesn’t do it, I can accept it. I’ll disagree with it, but I will see what their plan is. Mariotta? Tribusky? 
 

What I won’t accept is the Smith, Heineke, and Allen. That’s not a solution, mostly because every single one of them has significant injury concerns.

I could too but if it were a 1st this year and a 2nd next year, I'd give it serious consideration if I were the Lions.  I'd go that far.  

[HigSkin]

So Saleh must have tipped them off.

 

 

[KDawg]

5 minutes ago, ExoDus84 said:

 

I literally don't want Fields, even if he drops to us. After the last 2 years with an OSU QB bust, I'm not ready for another one. In fact, has there ever been an OSU QB that was any good in the NFL? I can't think of one.

Has there ever been a good Alabama QB in the last 20 years? How many from Cal? Oregon? USC? Florida? FSU? Miami? Texas A&M?

 

And does this work in reverse? The schools above have produced one so whoever is at QB should be drafted pronto, right?

 

I could go on and on. Most schools don’t produce multiple great products.

 

Discounting a guy based on school is a bad plan.

Edited January 27, 2021 by KDawg

[Burgold]

I don't know if I'm an outlier, but I hope we don't acquire Stafford. My preferred scenario is to go with whoever wins a QB competition between Hieneke, Allen, and Smith (assuming Smith doesn't retire) and draft the best QB we can in the second or third round that we think after a year of coaching up can be our guy.

 

For whatever reason, I feel like Stafford coming here will be just another McNabb, Brad Johnson, Jeff George, Mark Brunnell, etc. situation. In other words, he might be a bum or he might be a very short term answer to fool's gold playoff aspirations, but he won't be a real answer to the QB question. More, I think Stafford will not last with us. He does have an injury history and we have a pretty thin line.

Edited January 27, 2021 by Burgold

[Thinking Skins]

6 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Has there ever been a good Alabama QB in the last 20 years? How many from Cal? Oregon? USC? Florida? FSU? Miami? Texas A&M?

 

And does this work in reverse? The schools above have produced one so whoever is at QB should be drafted pronto, right?

 

I could go on and on. Most schools don’t produce multiple great products.

 

Discounting a guy based on school is a bad plan.

Its different though because every year there are QBs at schools like Alabama and Ohio State that are saying that they're the top ever. Its kinda like USC QBs. How many times have they been put at the top of the draft and how many times have they panned out? OSU is looking similar. You can look at other schools, but they aren't generally put up there with the best ever. We constantly see these schools ranked with top prospects and they just don't pan out. 

 

Its not to say that it can't happen and the fact that I'm ok with us getting Darnold (not excited about it but ok) shows that I don't really believe in it. But I don't think Mac Jones of Fields are the sure fire locks that we saw in Luck or RG3 or Lawrence or Burrow or some of the other guys who have recently come out. So its part of the equation. Its a question of what makes Fields different than other OSU QBs? What makes Jones different than other Alabama QBs? Why are they going to succeed where so many others have failed? 

 

I think it'd be different if this were Greg McElroy who I wanted in the draft, but for a 3rd of 4th. But spending a first on a QB from a school with a history of busts like this doesn't feel right.