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

[Skinsinparadise]

Good, I hope they keep him.  But the more hyperbole I hear from the Jets the more obvious it looks that they are trading him.  The Lions new brass called Stafford elite and then days later he hit the trade market.

 

 

 

14 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

Because a single QB doesn’t make a roster.

 

I agree but to me its irrelevant hyperbole to the discussion at hand.  I don't see it as binary as that. 

Edited January 28, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[KDawg]

8 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Good, I hope they keep him.  But the more hyperbole I hear from the Jets the more obvious it looks that they are trading him.  The Lions new brass called Stafford elite and then days later he hit the trade market.

 

 

 

 

I agree but to me its irrelevant hyperbole to the discussion at hand.  I don't see it as binary as that. 

To me what’s not a good conversation piece is assuming a single asset transforms a team that was 7-9 in a historical bad division with holes in the roster into a Super Bowl contender. In fact, I believe that’s dangerous.

 

EDIT: To add, I’m talking at anything above two 1s and change as draft capital in a trade. 
 

Also, I do think he puts us in contention for the East every year. Which does say a lot. But this roster needs more work to make this team a Super Bowl contender.

 

The Saints? Yes. The Rams? Yes. Miami? Yes. 
 

Us? Not yet. As I’ve explained we are a full offseason away from being in that place. Next offseason is a great time to tool up. But with him we’d need to get creative.

 

Maybe this FO could do it. That’s why, if we acquired him, I’d have some excitement for him because who the heck knows. Maybe they can pull off something insane and make it happen with some smart moves. 
 

I don’t think that’s very likely. But Watson is certainly a difference maker... so a few smart moves and you can get some incredible things done.

Edited January 28, 2021 by KDawg

[Skinsinparadise]

6 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

Have to imagine Stafford is seeking a rock solid situation that is the antithesis of what he’s been a part of with the Lions organization. Difficult for me to connect dots to him wanting to play for Washington. Not saying it’s right or wrong just when looking at it from his point of view. 

 

You could be right, I've not argued against your point on this whenever you've made it. 

[wit33]

15 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

You could be right, I've not argued against your point on this whenever you've made it. 

Oh ya, not coming at you in any way, just sharing and your posts have contributed to my overall point of view on the situation. My goal isn’t always to argue lol

[Skinsinparadise]

20 minutes ago, KDawg said:

To me what’s not a good conversation piece is assuming a single asset transforms a team that was 7-9 in a historical bad division with holes in the roster into a Super Bowl contender. In fact, I believe that’s dangerous.

 

I get your point.   We agree on a lot of things.  We are apart on this but not by as much as it may seem.    You seem to push the idea that your position has nuance to it, "you'd be aggressive if this or that". 

 

But I got plenty of nuance and context to my take on this too and if that nuance hasn't caught on yet in this discussion, it never will.   

 

So let's agree to disagree.  

3 minutes ago, wit33 said:

Oh ya, not coming at you in any way, just sharing and your posts have contributed to my overall point of view on the situation. My goal isn’t always to argue lol

 

I didn't per se think you were arguing, I was just doubling down that i think you might be right, will see. 

Edited January 28, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[HigSkin]

32 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

 

 

Hard to know with any of these reports if it's Detroit leaking them to drive up the price.  It's kind of frustrating but the minute I saw Lombardi's name the cynical side of me thought he's carrying somebody's water.  LOL

[kingdaddy]

1 hour ago, Long Time Fan said:

This can't be stressed enough.  Unless the Jags, Miami, and the Jets all decide that they want to pass on Watson I think there is almost no chance we can get him.  Houston will be losing a franchise QB and you have to think that their top priority will be to replace him.  If Houston passes on an offer that includes a top 3 pick this year then they are willingly putting themselves in the same position as us, Indy, Carolina etc - scrambling to find a quarterback to anchor their team.  Theoretically we could make an offer that makes passing on one of the top 3 quarterbacks in the draft worth it but my guess is that it will have to be something insane like 4 or 5 first rounders.  I don't think it is a coincidence that Watson has (allegedly) stated that he would be open to a trade to Miami or the Jets.  Unless we secretly hired Vinny Cerrato to handle the negotiations for us, I don't see any chance of us landing Watson.  

If I'm Houston, and all deals are comparable, I'm trading Watson outside of the conference. I don't want to see him and I damn sure don't want to play him twice a year in my division. So, if that is the case, don't be so fast to rule us out. Longshots for sure but not out. We have a chance, especially if Watson finds us an attractive landing spot. Time for Chase to pick up the phone and start his recruiting pitch. Terry Mac too. 

 

[mistertim]

1 hour ago, skins2victory said:

People keep talking about how they would give 3 1st's, 2nd's,  plus for Watson because he is "Elite". Watson is a good QB, no doubt, but I don't think he deserves the title of "Elite". At least not yet anyway, maybe he will get there. The way Heinicke played against a very very solid Tampa Bay defense that could potentially be a Superbowl Champion soon, I'd much rather roll with him, and keep our draft capital. I get Watson is good, but first round picks are worth more than what is being thrown around in these conversations, and there needs to be a point where you say "No way, that's way too much to give up", in my opinion.  

 

lol @ even trying to compare a UDFA guy who's played on 5 teams in 6 years and had 5 quarters of decent football to a proven stud top 5 QB with multiple years of starting to back him up. I wasn't kidding when I said this was starting to sound like the "Cult of Colt" thread again with this Heinicke stuff.

[Skinsinparadise]

2 minutes ago, HigSkin said:

 

Hard to know with any of these reports if it's Detroit leaking them to drive up the price.  It's kind of frustrating but the minute I saw Lombardi's name the cynical side of me thought he's carrying somebody's water.  LOL

 

It could be.  the oddest thing so far is there really isn't a single leak (aside from a weak one on the 49ers) about a specific team in pursuit.

 

I can say with confidence based on leaks that we are in the QB business this off season.   But I can't say with any confidence that are in on Stafford.  it would make sense that they would be.  But there hasn't been any that i can tell leak that they are in on Stafford.  So if they are chasing him, they've done a masterful job closing leaks.  

Edited January 28, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Voice_of_Reason]

So, let's go through this real quick:

 

Teams that absolutely need a QB: (I'm assuming Watson and Stafford are traded, because Watson has asked for a trade and the Lions have put Stafford on the block)  [Draft pick in parenthesis]

 

"List 1"

Colts (21)

Jags (1, 25)

Texans  (No first round picks)

Lions (7)

Bears (20)

Saints (assumption Brees retires) (28)

Patriots (15)

Washington (19)

 

Teams where the reporting indicates would like an upgrade:  [Draft pick in parenthesis]

"List 2"

Jets (which would make Darnold available) (2, 23)

49ers (which would make Garapolo available) (12)

Rams (which would make Goff available) (no first round pick)

Raiders (which would make Carr available) (17)

Panthers (which would make Bridgewater available) (8)

 

Teams we don't know what the hell they are going to do:

"List 3"

Eagles (they have a couple, but there is reporting they might draft another guy) (6)

Falcons (what to do with Ryan?) (4)

Dallas (Can franchise Dak, or not?) (10)

Steelers (Is Ben coming back or retiring?) (24)

Dolphins (seem to be disenchanted already with Tua?) (3, 18)

 

 

There are 3 highly rated QBs in the draft:

1. Lawrence

2. Zach Wilson

3. Justin Fields

4. Trey Lance

 

The following QBs are set to be unrestricted Free Agents: (I selected ones which I think might in some way compete for a starting job)

Dak Prescott (though not really because of the tag)

Jacoby Brissett

Mitch Trubisky

Ryan Fitzpatrick

Tyrod Taylor

Andy Dalton

Jameis Winston

 

The only guy on that list that is a definitely starter is Dak.  The rest are at best competing for a starting job.  AT BEST.

 

So we know that 4 of the teams are going to get the 4 top draft picks. And we know one of those is Jacksonville who will pick Lawrence.  I'm also just going to assume Jerrah pays Dak in the end.  And I wouldn't be even a little surprised to see them re-sign Dalton.  

 

First, let's talk about Stafford.  The only teams where it makes sense for them to trade for him are teams which are ready to make a run.  You're not going to trade for Stafford and try to build around him. It will take too long.  If you've got a top 10 pick, you use that on a young QB.  The way I see it, of "list 1",  the Colts, Bears, Saints and Washington fit that bill.  Maybe the Patriots, but they have more holes than we do, honestly.  So, if the competition is the Colts, Bills and Saints, we are in pretty good position because none of those teams have high draft picks.  

 

Now, if some of the teams from "list 2" get involved, you'd be talking about the 49ers, Rams, Raiders.  They could theoretically trade their starter back to Detroit with a mid-round pick if Detroit was interested in Garapolo, Goff or Carr.  Which I doubt.  

 

Now let's contemplate Watson.  The way I see it, there are only 2 really legitimate landing places for him:  New York Jets or Miami Dolphins. Both the Jets and the Dolphins have 2 first round picks this year, and they both are picking 2nd and 3rd respectively in the draft.  They also each have a QB which Houston might be interested in.   The Dolphins make the most sense.  They trade both of their #1 picks and Tua to Houston.  That basically accounts for 3 #1's.  They are already 10-6.  They get really good QB play immediately, and become a huge challenger in the NFC East.  Houston gets Tua, who was a top 5 pick last year, and 2 first round picks this year to fill in much needed gaps.  

 

I don't think there's any way Washington can put a package together good enough to get Watson.  

 

However, I think they're in the best position to get Stafford.  

 

Other noodlings: 

- Jets will not select a QB at #2.  They'll stick with Darnold and give Salah the ability to evaluate him.

- Houston (in my scenario) picking 3 will go best player available not a QB. 

- Second QB (Wilson) goes off the board at 4 to the Falcons.  Falcons trade Ryan to the 49ers, reuniting him with Kyle.  In turn, 49ers trade Garapolo to the Patriots.  

- Lions pick Fields at 7

- In what a lot of people will believe is a reach, Panthers will pick Lance at 8.  

- Bears are screwed again at QB.  

- Saints go with Winston and Hill to replace Brees

- Rams and Raiders will sit pat. Jay is going to join Jon's staff eventually in Vegas because literally nobody else is going to hire him.  

- Ben will return and throw for 4500 yards 5 yards at a time.  Haskins will be cut before the season starts. 

- The less said about the Eagles the better. 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

Pauline has gotten some things right in the past

 

 

 

[mistertim]

1 minute ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

There are 3 highly rated QBs in the draft:

1. Lawrence

2. Zach Wilson

3. Justin Fields

4. Trey Lance

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[Riggo#44]

3 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

There are 3 highly rated QBs in the draft:

1. Lawrence

2. Zach Wilson

3. Justin Fields

4. Trey Lance

[madden lot]

6 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Oh man... i can't stop laughing 🤣

[Skinsinparadise]

49ers podcast guy, probably not plugged in but i'll say as far as small tea leaves, 49ers seem to have more of that than the others today.  I saw another thing similar to this posted by someone else but no one major.   Could be all BS.  Will see.

 

 

 

[86 Snyder]

Watson to the Dolphins makes a ton of sense for both sides.  Really doubt we are actually in the mix on him no matter how much Id love it to happen.  And Stafford to SF makes a ton of sense as well.

 

We're gonna get left holding the bag, arent we?

 

 

Edited January 28, 2021 by 86 Snyder

[ExoDus84]

I get a strange feeling that we're going to be left holding the bag.

[Est.1974]

2 minutes ago, ExoDus84 said:

I get a strange feeling that we're going to be left holding the bag.

 

3 minutes ago, 86 Snyder said:

We're gonna get left holding the bag, arent we?

 

 

Holding two is even worse.

[KDawg]

4 minutes ago, 86 Snyder said:

Watson to the Dolphins makes a ton of sense for both sides.  Really doubt we are actually in the mix on him no matter how much Id love it to happen.  And Stafford to SF makes a ton of sense as well.

 

We're gonna get left holding the bag, arent we?

Watson to the Dolphins makes a ton of sense for both sides.  Really doubt we are actually in the mix on him no matter how much Id love it to happen.  And Stafford to SF makes a ton of sense as well.

 

We're gonna get left holding the bag, arent we?

Watson to the Dolphins makes a ton of sense for both sides.  Really doubt we are actually in the mix on him no matter how much Id love it to happen.  And Stafford to SF makes a ton of sense as well.

 

We're gonna get left holding the bag, arent we?

Watson to the Dolphins makes a ton of sense for both sides.  Really doubt we are actually in the mix on him no matter how much Id love it to happen.  And Stafford to SF makes a ton of sense as well.

 

We're gonna get left holding the bag, arent we?

I’d say you think we may get stuck holding the bag... 

[Riggo#44]

2 minutes ago, KDawg said:

I’d say you think we may get stuck holding the bag... 

 

No...wait, it's gotta be your bag

[Long Time Fan]

19 minutes ago, kingdaddy said:

If I'm Houston, and all deals are comparable, I'm trading Watson outside of the conference. I don't want to see him and I damn sure don't want to play him twice a year in my division. So, if that is the case, don't be so fast to rule us out. Longshots for sure but not out. We have a chance, especially if Watson finds us an attractive landing spot. Time for Chase to pick up the phone and start his recruiting pitch. Terry Mac too. 

 

Maybe.  But I think obtaining a QB that you can build your team around will be more important than trading Watson out of conference.  We can't offer a draft pick high enough to get a coveted QB in this years draft nor can we offer a good QB in a trade.  To me that makes us the longest of long shots for Watson.  To be clear I would love to have Watson under center next season and I hope I'm wrong about our ability to get him (at a price that doesn't mortgage our future).  I just don't see how you pass on trade offers that can get you your QB for the future in exchange for an offer that leaves you in QB purgatory - even if that means Watson stays in your conference.      

[KDawg]

I gotta tell you... I am kind of hoping Dallas screws up Dak. I’d love to have him and I’m curious if his cost is slightly lowered due to the injury. I don’t think it happens but not giving up picks and getting a youngish franchise style QB would be the win of the offseason for me. 

[kingdaddy]

5 minutes ago, Long Time Fan said:

Maybe.  But I think obtaining a QB that you can build your team around will be more important than trading Watson out of conference.  We can't offer a draft pick high enough to get a coveted QB in this years draft nor can we offer a good QB in a trade.  To me that makes us the longest of long shots for Watson.  To be clear I would love to have Watson under center next season and I hope I'm wrong about our ability to get him (at a price that doesn't mortgage our future).  I just don't see how you pass on trade offers that can get you your QB for the future in exchange for an offer that leaves you in QB purgatory - even if that means Watson stays in your conference.      

totally agree, I think it would cost us more to get Watson simply because we don't have a QB or high 1st round pick to offer. NYJ and Miami are in perfect spots as far as compensation. Only if Houston loved our d-line (Young or Sweat) could we be in the conversation...but stranger things have happened.

[Long Time Fan]

1 minute ago, KDawg said:

I gotta tell you... I am kind of hoping Dallas screws up Dak. I’d love to have him and I’m curious if his cost is slightly lowered due to the injury. I don’t think it happens but not giving up picks and getting a youngish franchise style QB would be the win of the offseason for me. 

Honestly this would be the best possible scenario to me.  Yes he would eat up a ton of cap space and we may need to get creative in a year or two to keep most of our D Line together but picking up Dak without giving up any draft picks and we leave Dallas scrambling (and possibly overpaying) for the Teddy Bridgewater's of the world would make my offseason.  Assuming Dak is healthy of course.