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

[zCommander]

39 minutes ago, Skin'emAlive said:

Detroit will not trade Stafford in the conference  unless the haul is significant. He’s going to Indy, and honestly, that’s the best spot for him ( with SF being a 1b).

 

 

Not sure why people think this is set in stone or something. We traded for McNabb and that was in the division. The Lions will trade, if they are going to trade Stafford to begin with, to a team that gives them a better value regardless of what conference that team is in. 

[Lovi]

1 minute ago, zskins said:

 

Not sure why people think this is set in stone or something. We traded for McNabb and that was in the division. The Lions will trade, if they are going to trade Stafford to begin with, to a team that gives them a better value regardless of what conference that team is in. 

 

I think that's because Philly knew McNabb was done.

[mistertim]

1 minute ago, skinny21 said:

You know what would be crazy?  A trade of Dak for Stafford.

The poetic version?  Dak for Watson - The Texas Two step. 

 

 (Not straight up in either case of course, and almost impossible to do given contact extensions/compensation)

 

Dak is a UFA this season

[skinny21]

1 minute ago, mistertim said:

 

Dak is a UFA this season

Unless he’s franchised (and then extended before or contingent upon a trade). 

[mistertim]

1 minute ago, Lovi said:

 

I think that's because Philly knew McNabb was done.

 

Oh they absolutely knew it. Everyone knew it except for Dan Snyder.

 

The Eagles when we called to ask about trading for McNabb:

 

[-9-]

47 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Every time one of You People ...

 

 

[Skin'emAlive]

3 minutes ago, zskins said:

 

Not sure why people think this is set in stone or something. We traded for McNabb and that was in the division. The Lions will trade, if they are going to trade Stafford to begin with, to a team that gives them a better value regardless of what conference that team is in. 

Im not willing to give up multiple 1sts for stafford. He’s a great player, and he could work here, but he is not the style of qb that is ideal for turner’s offense. He’s not worth 2 firsts. Honestly, He would fair much better in SF or IND. Mcnabb was a terrible trade. 

 

Watson is a perfect fit for what we want at the helm. But will ultimately be too costly. Dak is also a pretty great fit and wouldn’t require any assets. 

[FootballZombie]

2 minutes ago, skinny21 said:

You know what would be crazy?  A trade of Dak for Stafford.

The poetic version?  Dak for Watson - The Texas Two step. 

 

 (Not straight up in either case of course, and almost impossible to do given contact extensions/compensation)

Houston bringing in a 20M QB is unlikely. they are already 17M over a 180M cap. They are going to take an additional 5 M hit for Watson, so you'd be looking at being almost 40 M over the cap after such a transaction. They need cheap QB options. Sub 10 Mil. Stafford is not it.

 

 

Same problem w/ Dak, but it wont work for Dallas either.

 

Any sign and trade for Dak would require Dal to eat Dak's new deal G money as dead cap and then take on the new contract of the incoming player.

Even horrifically low-balling it, Dak will get 60M in G money. Dallas can't take that kind of cap hit.

 

even if Dak signs the franchise tag, its fully G, so Dallas would again be taking a 37M dead cap hit to trade him. 

 

Dallas will have to make some wiggle room just to fit Dak on the roster. Doubt they can look to afford Dak's ghost and an additional big money QB. Only way Dallas can bring in a pricey QB not named Dak is if they straight up let Dak walk.

 

 

[goskins10]

39 minutes ago, skinny21 said:

Unless he’s franchised (and then extended before or contingent upon a trade). 

 

Don't see them signing him to an extension. Kirk showed the blueprint on how to extract maximum $ from a team then leave. The injury maybe gives them a small chance. But if I were Dak, I would make them franchise me unless they offer at least $92M fully gauranteed, or very close. That's what he gets riding the tag train.  He gets that in the open market too - or at least close. 

 

2021 - $37.7M

2022 - $54.3M

 

 

35 minutes ago, Skin'emAlive said:

Im not willing to give up multiple 1sts for stafford. He’s a great player, and he could work here, but he is not the style of qb that is ideal for turner’s offense. He’s not worth 2 firsts. Honestly, He would fair much better in SF or IND. Mcnabb was a terrible trade. 

 

Watson is a perfect fit for what we want at the helm. But will ultimately be too costly. Dak is also a pretty great fit and wouldn’t require any assets. 

 

So if you gave this years and next years 1st for Stafford, the cost is a 1st for next year as he IS your 1st rd pick this year. If we make th POs again, which if you make the trade that should be the bottom of the expectations - you lose no better than #19 again. I do not see that as a problem. Now you start adding more picks or and player and I am out. But if 2 1sts gets it done for Watson or Stafford I am in. 

 

I believe the talk of 3 1sts and 2 2nds for Watson is not realistic. No one is worth that. If they can get it, then I certainly hope it's not from us. 

Edited January 28, 2021 by goskins10

[Skin'emAlive]

I just think 2 firsts for a guy who has been in the league for that long, and who has been injury prone is too high a risk. 
 

Id much rather save that ammo for the draft in the event Kyle Pitts becomes available.
 

Best case off-season scenario for me is to get Dak at 36-38 or so, go bpa with the 1st, draft Newman in the second, and pick up Juju on the cheap to run our slot. 

[Conn]

1. If you pay Dak 36-38 you aren’t drafting a QB in the 2nd.

 

2. JuJu will under no circumstances be “cheap” even if he’s been overrated as a young playmaker in the past. 

[markmills67]

25 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

Don't see them signing him to an extension. Kirk showed the blueprint on how to extract maximum $ from a team then leave. The injury maybe gives them a small chance. But if I were Dak, I would make them franchise me unless they offer at least $83.6M over 3 yrs, fully gauranteed, or very close. That's what he gets riding the tag train.  He gets that in the open market too - or at least close. 

 

2021 - $23M

2022 - $27.6M

2023 - $33M

 

That's $83.6M. 

 

So if you gave this years and next years 1st for Stafford, the cost is a 1st for next year as he IS your 1st rd pick this year. If we make th POs again, which if you make the trade that should be the bottom of the expectations - you lose no better than #19 again. I do not see that as a problem. Now you start adding more picks or and player and I am out. But if 2 1sts gets it done for Watson or Stafford I am in. 

 

I believe the talk of 3 1sts and 2 2nds for Watson is not realistic. No one is worth that. If they can get it, then I certainly hope it's not from us. 

If Dak gets franchise tagged the next 2 years(2021/2022), he is guaranteed 90m minimum, 37.5 this year and 52m in 2022 

[goskins10]

2 minutes ago, markmills67 said:

If Dak gets franchise tagged the next 2 years(2021/2022), he is guaranteed 90m minimum, 37.5 this year and 52m in 2022 

 

Fair enough. I just looked at the overthecap projected numbers for QBs. I should have remembered to look up his exact salary. Good catch. Thanks.

 

Makes my point even more. Have to start at $90M guaranteed I would think. 

[zCommander]

10 minutes ago, Skin'emAlive said:

I just think 2 firsts for a guy who has been in the league for that long, and who has been injury prone is too high a risk. 
 

Id much rather save that ammo for the draft in the event Kyle Pitts becomes available.
 

Best case off-season scenario for me is to get Dak at 36-38 or so, go bpa with the 1st, draft Newman in the second, and pick up Juju on the cheap to run our slot. 

 

How about I give you a 1st and a 3rd for Stafford and maybe throw in a player. Would that work?

[mistertim]

14 minutes ago, Skin'emAlive said:

I just think 2 firsts for a guy who has been in the league for that long, and who has been injury prone is too high a risk. 
 

Id much rather save that ammo for the draft in the event Kyle Pitts becomes available.
 

Best case off-season scenario for me is to get Dak at 36-38 or so, go bpa with the 1st, draft Newman in the second, and pick up Juju on the cheap to run our slot. 

 

Stafford isn't injury prone. He had a shoulder injury in his second season, then went 8 seasons without missing a game, had a back injury in 2019, and then played all 16 games again this past season. He's actually an extremely durable QB, considering how much punishment he's taken behind some horrible OLs in Detroit. 

 

I feel like you're just making stuff up here.

 

First it was that Stafford is somehow not the right QB for what we're trying to do on offense. Um, how exactly are you privy to this information? 

Then it was that Stafford is "injury prone" when he's decidedly not. 

[Skin'emAlive]

7 minutes ago, zskins said:

 

How about I give you a 1st and a 3rd for Stafford and maybe throw in a player. Would that work?

A 1st and a 3rd is fair imo

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

 

 

[kingdaddy]

2 hours ago, Long Time Fan said:

I don't think we've seen the best of Montez yet.  I think he will continue to develop and be a force in the league for years to come.  Watson is a special talent at the most important position in football so I would have to consider it (depending on what else we're giving up) but it would be very difficult for me to give up Montez Sweat in a trade.  Young is flat out untouchable.  

Well, if you're right about Montez it makes me wonder why we are pursuing a QB from outside the organization knowing that we already have 2 potential bridges in place to get to Montez? 

[Skin'emAlive]

1 minute ago, mistertim said:

 

Stafford isn't injury prone. He had a shoulder injury in his second season, then went 8 seasons without missing a game, had a back injury in 2019, and then played all 16 games again this past season. He's actually an extremely durable QB, considering how much punishment he's taken behind some horrible OLs in Detroit. 

 

I feel like you're just making stuff up here.

 

First it was that Stafford is somehow not the right QB for what we're trying to do on offense. Um, how exactly are you privy to this information? 

Then it was that Stafford is "injury prone" when he's decidedly not. 

You said it yourself. Stafford was beat up a lot due to the nonexistent OL in Detroit. It did affect his play. He played through the injuries. 
 

Also I didn’t say Stafford is bad. He’s a great qb. But I don’t like the idea of trading 2 firsts for him. 

[LetThePointsSoar]

I'm a little surprised that all the chatter on here is primarily about Stafford. 

 

Am I the only one that is all on on Watson?!? I can't be, right?! 

 

There is no price too high. Doesn't matter the haul we give away. He's worth it. Make it happen, and let's build a team the next decade and a half that competes every single year. 

 

If we happen to miss, then Allen, Heinicke and a rookie is the ONLY other solution. 

 

Who's with me? 

[Long Time Fan]

2 minutes ago, kingdaddy said:

Well, if you're right about Montez it makes me wonder why we are pursuing a QB from outside the organization knowing that we already have 2 potential bridges in place to get to Montez? 

I was referring to Montez Sweat and the idea of trading him as part of a QB package - which I am not in favor of.  

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

 

 

 

 

[DWinzit]

Watching NFL total access, they said Newman didn't have a great day including a couple picks by Safety Richie Grant

Hoping he knocks the rust off and does well Saturday

[kingdaddy]

10 minutes ago, Long Time Fan said:

I was referring to Montez Sweat and the idea of trading him as part of a QB package - which I am not in favor of.  

Ha, ha....OK, my bad. 

11 minutes ago, LetThePointsSoar said:

I'm a little surprised that all the chatter on here is primarily about Stafford. 

 

Am I the only one that is all on on Watson?!? I can't be, right?! 

 

There is no price too high. Doesn't matter the haul we give away. He's worth it. Make it happen, and let's build a team the next decade and a half that competes every single year. 

 

If we happen to miss, then Allen, Heinicke and a rookie is the ONLY other solution. 

 

Who's with me? 

I'm with you. 

[Conn]

16 minutes ago, kingdaddy said:

Well, if you're right about Montez it makes me wonder why we are pursuing a QB from outside the organization knowing that we already have 2 potential bridges in place to get to Montez? 

...He’s talking about Montez Sweat lol. This is wild, if I thought he was talking about the other Montez my only response could be laughter! 
 

Edit: I see that he told you already, nvm lol 

Edited January 29, 2021 by ConnSKINS26