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

[method man]

Just now, KillBill26 said:

I understand TT and MM are pretty underwhelming choices.  But the reason I'm now hoping for that is bc I don't have faith that the return on the other options will be worth the cost.  And worst case scenario is we give up significant resources where we can't plug other holes, and then if the qb doesn't pan out, we took major steps backwards.   

 

I guess what I'm saying is, I was all about being aggressive towards stafford, but now if the other options command the expected price tag, I'd rather not be aggressive this offseason.  Let's have a full draft and add a key piece or two in free agency, and look to the 2022 draft.  I just don't like the second tier qbs in this draft, and the other FA/trade options are too costly (dak notwithstanding, but JJ isn't letting him walk).

 

Risking one first and another late Day 2/early Day 3 pick on a QB isn't the end of the world. If it doesn't work out, it's not going to kill you. It's when you start talking multiple firsts where the risk increases greatly.

[Voice_of_Reason]

9 minutes ago, dyst said:

We may end up having a QB fall to us in the draft or require little in a trade to move up if pieces in free agency fall into place.

The problem is what they have is at best average, definitely unproven, and absolutely injury prone.  

 

And what there is on the free agency market (minus Dak, who's TECHNICALLY a free agent) is Jacoby Brissett, Trubisky, Fitzpatrick, Tyrod Taylor, A. J. McCarron, Andy Dalton, Colt McCoy, RGIII, Matt Barkley, Nate Sudfeld, Cam Newton, Joe Flacco, Ryan Griffin (who I've honestly never heard of), Mike Glennon, Geno Smith, Blaine Gabbert, Jameis Winston, Brian Hoyer, Blake Botles and Brett Hundley.  I could go on, but the rest of the list are guys competing for practice squad jobs.  

 

People can say what they want about Brissett, but I don't think he's the answer.  Neither did the Colts, which is why they signed Rivers last year, and are looking again this year.  Fitz is who he is. Taylor might be a stop gap.  Winston has upside but turns the ball over at a ridiculous rate.  To say this is an uninspiring list is an insult to uninspiring lists.

 

Which is why EVERYBODY was in on Stafford.  And if he's available, EVERYBODY will be in on Watson.  Because you have those 2 guys, you might have Darnold if the Jets either trade for Watson or pick a QB #2.  You have 3 or 4 QBs in the draft, and that's it.  Everything else is "meh."

 

I think Doug Williams at age 60 might be a better option than some of the schmo's on that list.  

[Darth Tater]

23 minutes ago, method man said:

My top 4 is as follows:

 

1. Dak if he is not franchised

2. Trade a #1 for Carr

3. Trade a #1 and #4 for Jordan Love

4. Trade 2 1sts and a 2nd or 3rd to move up to take Zach Wilson

 

Why isn't he worth a first?

He is not worth a first if the Raiders are willing to trade him.  Would you be willing to give up our 3rd this year along with that 1 assuming Carr is who you think he is? If you would, I'd understand why you'd give up a 19.

[goskins10]

1 minute ago, method man said:

 

Risking one first and another late Day 2/early Day 3 pick on a QB isn't the end of the world. If it doesn't work out, it's not going to kill you. It's when you start talking multiple firsts where the risk increases greatly.

 

The problem is the hit rate for a franchise QB goes significantly down when you get past the 1st rd. Someone posted some statistics that show it actually drops off a cliff. So yea it's not a big a waste but the odds of hitting a 2nd or 3rd guy are actually little better than hitting after the 4rd. 

 

it's not easy though because jumping into the top 5 or higher could cost way too much. But you have to have a QB. So if you think he is your guy, you have to spend the resources and then figure the rest out with what you have left. But no QB = very little chance of title.

[method man]

4 minutes ago, CapsSkins said:

 

Didn't know that about the big game thing. I saw him duel Mahomes this past year and hang in there till the very end. But your post makes him sound Kirk-like? That would be a concern (plus the fumbles), but idk man. I really liked watching him this year. 

 

People are not giving him credit for improving and taking his game to another level the past two seasons. I don't think the Kirk comparison really fits - he is more beloved by his teammates than Kirk and doesn't turn the ball over like Kirk does

[KillBill26]

7 minutes ago, method man said:

 

Risking one first and another late Day 2/early Day 3 pick on a QB isn't the end of the world. If it doesn't work out, it's not going to kill you. It's when you start talking multiple firsts where the risk increases greatly.

Who do you think is out there that would be worth that price tag?

 

I agree with your take, I'd have done a 1st and a 3rd for stafford.  But I wouldn't do it for the remaining options.  I wouldn't for ryan, by the time he gets acclimated and we can use picks to surround him with playmakers, he is in the twilight years.  Derek carr is not worth a 1st.  Darnold definitely not.  I'd even balk at lesser asking prices for them, I just think the odds of those moves working out for us are too slim.

Edited January 31, 2021 by KillBill26

[CapsSkins]

Just now, method man said:

 

People are not giving him credit for improving and taking his game to another level the past two seasons. I don't think the Kirk comparison really fits - he is more beloved by his teammates than Kirk and doesn't turn the ball over like Kirk does

 

I'm with you man. I call up Gruden w/ an exploding offer for pick 19 and make him say yes.

[HigSkin]

 

[mistertim]

7 minutes ago, CapsSkins said:

 

Didn't know that about the big game thing. I saw him duel Mahomes this past year and hang in there till the very end. But your post makes him sound Kirk-like? That would be a concern (plus the fumbles), but idk man. I really liked watching him this year. 

 

In watching both of them, Kirk is actually one of the best comparisons to Carr I think. Certainly not a bad QB, but is a bit of fool's gold. Throws up nice stat lines overall but tends to wither in big situations. Neither is a guy who's going to come in and elevate an offense. We could certainly do worse than Carr, so I wouldn't necessarily be against getting him. I'm just not sure I'd trade a 1st for a guy like that.

[kingdaddy]

53 minutes ago, bowhunter said:

I think one thing that we sometimes overlook is that RR wants the entire team to buy in. It's why he mentioned the importance of wins vs tanking. The building of a culture and most certainly the need for optimism in HIS teams eyes. We also know the C.Young and other teammates jumped on the Heine -a-...KEY bandwagon. The optimism was infectious at that time. But should Shiney Hiney falter or appear human during the season, there is no pedigree for his teammates to latch on to. I would hope that RR saw the very same thing we all saw from Heinecke during that moment, and I don't feel he is forgetting it either. We won't fully know until training camp is underway, but I feel that RR wouldn't mind an upgrade at QB, if simply as something to unite his team. So if it's not an obvious upgrade, we'll stay put. So I think that dismisses the Darnolds and Trubiskys out there.

To your point about RR wanting an upgrade at QB, I don't at all disagree, but I also feel like he wants stability and maybe some consistency at that position even if its not a pro bowler. Going thru 4 different QB's had to be grueling to prepare for week after week based on their combined strengths and limitations. I'll bet having Alex in there, just because of his league and game experience, made it much easier to prepare the entire team. This is why I think Ron will at least CONSIDER Cam Newton IF he can't find another vet to name the starter. Cam is durable, knows the league and will allow the rest of the roster to continue to grow....not to mention he would be likely be cheap. He would provide RR with an insurance policy and also allow Allen and Heiny to compete for the starting job against a guy they both would have a chance at beating out. I also think, should Cam come here, he could be useful in short yardage packages for sure. Think about it, Heinicke wins the job as starter, Cam is backup and Allen continues his rehab on PUP to start the season. Montez or a rookie is the #3. 

Again, this whole theory is based on not finding anyone better for opening day....Cam is brought in as cheap insurance with certain packages that he sees the field. If Heiny breaks down, Cam comes in. You could do worse for a backup then Cam Newton and best of all he would cost us no draft choices while we found out about the others which hopefully would include a rookie like Mac Jones or someone along those lines.

[Voice_of_Reason]

6 minutes ago, CapsSkins said:

 

Didn't know that about the big game thing. I saw him duel Mahomes this past year and hang in there till the very end. But your post makes him sound Kirk-like? That would be a concern (plus the fumbles), but idk man. I really liked watching him this year. 

Actualy, I think he and Kirk are basically the same guy.  That's a really good comparison.  

 

3 years ago he was absolutely on the rise as one of the best young QBs in the game.  But he never took the next step, and the Raiders have just been sorta stuck in neutral.  Granted, they have had an abysmal defense.  But say what you want about Jon Gruden, the guy knows QBs.  And if he's not really in love with Carr, that's also a red flag. Jon made his career on getting the most out of guys.  First with RIch Gannon when he was with the Raiders, then he got Brad Johnson to the SB.  So when he's somewhat ambivalent, you should take notice.  It's very possible Jon is getting the best there can be out of Carr, and Scotty Turner won't be able to get that level of production, which would mean we're still not in a great spot.  

 

If you put the pieces around Carr, he can be ok.  He can have a few gem games here and there, or he can have some really, really bad games. 

 

I like him, I would trade for him.  Would I trade a first? I dunno.  You might have to, though.  

[CapsSkins]

2 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

In watching both of them, Kirk is actually one of the best comparisons to Carr I think. Certainly not a bad QB, but is a bit of fool's gold. Throws up nice stat lines overall but tends to wither in big situations. Neither is a guy who's going to come in and elevate an offense. We could certainly do worse than Carr, so I wouldn't necessarily be against getting him. I'm just not sure I'd trade a 1st for a guy like that.

 

1 minute ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Actualy, I think he and Kirk are basically the same guy.  That's a really good comparison.  

 

3 years ago he was absolutely on the rise as one of the best young QBs in the game.  But he never took the next step, and the Raiders have just been sorta stuck in neutral.  Granted, they have had an abysmal defense.  But say what you want about Jon Gruden, the guy knows QBs.  And if he's not really in love with Carr, that's also a red flag. Jon made his career on getting the most out of guys.  First with RIch Gannon when he was with the Raiders, then he got Brad Johnson to the SB.  So when he's somewhat ambivalent, you should take notice.  It's very possible Jon is getting the best there can be out of Carr, and Scotty Turner won't be able to get that level of production, which would mean we're still not in a great spot.  

 

If you put the pieces around Carr, he can be ok.  He can have a few gem games here and there, or he can have some really, really bad games. 

 

I like him, I would trade for him.  Would I trade a first? I dunno.  You might have to, though.  

 

A Kirk-level QB at a $20M cap hit for another two years for #19, which is well out of reach of the top QB prospects this year, would be a no-brainer to me. Just my $0.02

[Mooka]

Just now, method man said:

 

People are not giving him credit for improving and taking his game to another level the past two seasons. I don't think the Kirk comparison really fits - he is more beloved by his teammates than Kirk and doesn't turn the ball over like Kirk does

 

How much of that improvement is due to Josh Jacobs and Daren Waller though? 

 

Don't watch many Raiders games so I have no idea. 

[method man]

2 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Actualy, I think he and Kirk are basically the same guy.  That's a really good comparison.  

 

3 years ago he was absolutely on the rise as one of the best young QBs in the game.  But he never took the next step, and the Raiders have just been sorta stuck in neutral.  Granted, they have had an abysmal defense.  But say what you want about Jon Gruden, the guy knows QBs.  And if he's not really in love with Carr, that's also a red flag. Jon made his career on getting the most out of guys.  First with RIch Gannon when he was with the Raiders, then he got Brad Johnson to the SB.  So when he's somewhat ambivalent, you should take notice.  It's very possible Jon is getting the best there can be out of Carr, and Scotty Turner won't be able to get that level of production, which would mean we're still not in a great spot.  

 

If you put the pieces around Carr, he can be ok.  He can have a few gem games here and there, or he can have some really, really bad games. 

 

I like him, I would trade for him.  Would I trade a first? I dunno.  You might have to, though.  

 

Look at the numbers. He has taken his game to another level the past two seasons. Again, I don't know how many times I have to say this but he has done it with a crappy supporting cast. Waller is a stud and Jacobs is a solid back (though not special). Outside of that, his #1 WR in 2019 was Tyrell Williams and it was Agholor in 2020. Renfrow is an average slot receiver and Ruggs sucked last year.

 

It's funny that so many of you are willing to do the "change of scenery" thing with people who have showed nothing like Darnold but are not considering it for someone who has actually played well in this league like Carr.

 

I'd love to see Carr in Turner's offense with a real #1 WR like McLaurin and, with the FA dollars we have, someone like a Marvin Jones with our backs and Logan Thomas

[Skinsinparadise]

24 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Zach Wilson is at least = Fields IMO. 

 

That being said, in order to GUARANTEE that we'd get one of those guys we'd have to trade into the top 3. From 19 to 3 would probably take two 1st round picks (additional 1sts, not including the one swapped), two 2nd round picks and maybe more. 

 

Agree. 

 

Spitballing for a second.  The Watson thing might be a wildcard.  I was listening to a Houston beat guy on the radio just now.  He was a cynic before on the Texans trading Watson but now he thinks it happens.  His thoughts:

 

A.  They will try right until early April to change Watson's mind but they will likely fail. 

B.  Then they put him on the market.  He think the Jets have the best capital to do it.

C.  He doesn't think this goes past the draft for two reasons -- opportunity cost lost to improve the team now and the perception that 2022 is a bad draft for QBs whereas this is a good one.

 

So lets say the Jets land Watson.  The Dolphins would at least want to hold onto their first rounder when they bid for Watson.  So I think either way it has to play out whether its the Jets or Miami assuming that's where Watson goes.  I'd guess the Jets is more likely than Miami to take a QB in the draft if they don't land Watson. 

 

To trade up that high from 19, I'd guess at least two firsts, two seconds.  But i'd guess more likely three firsts and two seconds.  You'd figure they'd have to beat the Rg3 trade at least if they are moving up from 19 versus moving up from 6 like what happened in 2012.

 

I think Lance might be the more difficult get because once you get past the Eagles you got teams that could use a QB.  Heck Atlanta could easily take Lance, Ryan is old. 

Edited January 31, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[method man]

Just now, Mooka said:

 

How much of that improvement is due to Josh Jacobs and Daren Waller though? 

 

Don't watch many Raiders games so I have no idea. 

 

You are citing his only two plus weapons and I'd argue that Jacobs is closer to the average than being elite

[kingdaddy]

2 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Agree. 

 

Spitballing for a second.  The Watson thing might be a wildcard.  I was listening to a Houston beat guy on the radio just now.  He was a cynic before on the trading Watson but now he thinks it happens.  His thoughts:

 

A.  They will try right until early April to change Watson's mind but they will likely fail. 

B.  Then they put him on the market.  He think the Jets have the best capital to do it.

C.  He doesn't think this goes past the draft for two reasons -- opportunity cost lost to improve the team now and the perception that 2022 is a bad draft for QBs whereas this is a good one.

 

So lets say the Jets land Watson.  The Dolphins would at least want to hold onto their first rounder when they bid for Watson.  So I think either way it has to play out whether its the Jets or Miami assuming that's where Watson goes.  I'd guess the Jets is more likely than Miami to take a QB in the draft if they don't land Watson. 

 

To trade up that high from 19, I'd guess at least two firsts, two seconds.  But i'd guess more likely three firsts and two seconds.  You'd figure they'd have to beat the Rg3 trade at least if they are moving up from 19 versus moving up from 6 like what happened in 2012.

 

I think Lance might be the more difficult get because once you get past the Eagles you got teams that could use a QB.  Heck Atlanta could easily take Lance, Ryan is old. 

With all of the teams supposed to take QB's ahead of us in the draft, it stands to reason that some stud at another position is gonna be there for us at #19. That is exciting to me.

[Mooka]

Just now, method man said:

 

You are citing his only two plus weapons and I'd argue that Jacobs is closer to the average than being elite

 

I don't know man, there aren't that many top RBs in todays game. 

 

Jacobs has back to back 1000 yard seasons. That's a very short list: Henry, Cook, Chubb.  (can throw Kamara in there) 

[Skinsinparadise]

17 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

 

Which is why EVERYBODY was in on Stafford.  And if he's available, EVERYBODY will be in on Watson.  Because you have those 2 guys, you might have Darnold if the Jets either trade for Watson or pick a QB #2.  You have 3 or 4 QBs in the draft, and that's it.  Everything else is "meh."

 

 

That's more or less the way it looks to me.  

 

As for all the Derek Carr stuff.  He's better IMO than the FAs.  I like him by far better than Darnold.  I like many of the FAs better than Darnold.   I don't get excired about Carr but if I threw him in the pile with what else is likely available -- I like him from that context.  But we don't know if he hits the trade market. 

[Skinsinparadise]

6 minutes ago, kingdaddy said:

With all of the teams supposed to take QB's ahead of us in the draft, it stands to reason that some stud at another position is gonna be there for us at #19. That is exciting to me.

 

I got mixed feelings about it.  4 QBs for sure look to go before 19, maybe 5.  I've played it out scenarios in the draft thread.   We could end up with someone like Waddle.  That's fun.  But what's not fun is thinking right now that 2022 is considered "meh" at QB (granted it could change) and FA looks even weaker than this year.  So striking out at QB this off season could very way follow by striking out in 2022, too.

 

We got a cheap D line for the next 2 years before the big contracts start coming up.  My gut is if we don't find a QB in this off season or next -- then years later we will look at this era as a rerun of Gibbs 2.  Where we had a really good defense, it was fun.  We made the playoffs every other season but went nowhere in the playoffs.  If that's the best we can do, then I'd take it over our recent run.  The good news for me is all indications seem to be that Rivera has the QB spot on Code Red, so I suspect he will try to do something.  Will see.  

[method man]

15 minutes ago, Mooka said:

 

I don't know man, there aren't that many top RBs in todays game. 

 

Jacobs has back to back 1000 yard seasons. That's a very short list: Henry, Cook, Chubb.  (can throw Kamara in there) 

 

I think his stats are inflated by usage - the Raiders are giving him the workload of a 1990s/2000s back. His rookie year was impressive but he averaged less than 4 yards a carry this year and does not add much in the receiving game. He is not a home run hitter either. His longest run this year was 28 yards

Edited January 31, 2021 by method man

[Skinsinparadise]

43 minutes ago, method man said:

 

People are not giving him credit for improving and taking his game to another level the past two seasons. I don't think the Kirk comparison really fits - he is more beloved by his teammates than Kirk and doesn't turn the ball over like Kirk does

 

Int % is close (number of throws/INTs), its almost the same number if you look at the last 3 years.  And Kirk's TD % is better than Carr's overall and by a good  margin if you look at the last 3 years.   I am not one of the Kirk haters here.  So I don't mind the Kirk comparison.  I am ok with Carr but I don't see how easy it would be to make the case he's a peg better than Kirk.  Stafford to me was a peg better than Kirk.  Carr IMO and Kirk are in the same conversation.

 

Edited January 31, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[kingdaddy]

11 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I got mixed feelings about it.  4 QBs for sure look to go before 19, maybe 5.  I've played it out scenarios in the draft thread.   We could end up with someone like Waddle.  That's fun.  But what's not fun is thinking right now that 2022 is considered "meh" at QB (granted it could change) and FA looks even weaker than this year.  So striking out at QB this off season could very way follow by striking out in 2022, too.

 

We got a cheap D line for the next 2 years before the big contracts start coming up.  My gut is if we don't find a QB in this off season or next -- then years later we will look at this era as a rerun of Gibbs 2.  Where we had a really good defense, it was fun.  We made the playoffs every other season but went nowhere in the playoffs.  If that's the best we can do, then I'd take it over our recent run.  The good news for me is all indications seem to be that Rivera has the QB spot on Code Red, so I suspect he will try to do something.  Will see.  

Look at it this way, I the Eagles can win a SB with Nick Foles then we just have to keep adding everywhere we can and hope the strength of the roster allows us to have a QB who doesn't screw things up. Hell, Alex Smith wrote the blueprint this year. Add to the defense, add in the draft, add thru free agency...thats all we can do til we find Mr. Right who may not be a world beater (aka Foles)

[mistertim]

Just now, kingdaddy said:

Look at it this way, I the Eagles can win a SB with Nick Foles then we just have to keep adding everywhere we can and hope the strength of the roster allows us to have a QB who doesn't screw things up. Hell, Alex Smith wrote the blueprint this year. Add to the defense, add in the draft, add thru free agency...thats all we can do til we find Mr. Right who may not be a world beater (aka Foles)

 

C'mon. Can we stop with this stuff? Yes the Eagles won a SB with Nick Foles, yes the Ravens won a SB with Flacco, yes the 49ers got to a SB with Jimmy G. It's by far the exception, not the rule. 

 

Those were one time things where a bunch of factors just happened to come together and a team with a mediocre QB went really far (though Foles was only in for the late part of the season). If it happens to a team like that, it pretty much happens once and then that's it. 

 

I do not want the WFT to be like that. I don't want flukes. I want a team that's a threat to go deep into the playoffs year in and year out. To do that you need a top QB. Period. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

31 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

That's more or less the way it looks to me.  

 

As for all the Derek Carr stuff.  He's better IMO than the FAs.  I like him by far better than Darnold.  I like many of the FAs better than Darnold.   I don't get excired about Carr but if I threw him in the pile with what else is likely available -- I like him from that context.  But we don't know if he hits the trade market. 

You can put him on the trade market by making a compelling offer. 

 

I agree.  Assuming we can't get Watson, Rodgers won't get traded, and we aren't in the running for Trevor, Carr might be the next best option if you can get him.  Darnold does nothing for me.  Though I also admit he's been in an absolute **** show of an organization and situation, so it's possible he's really good but just a victim of circumstance.  

25 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

then years later we will look at this era as a rerun of Gibbs 2. 

the difference being at least they know they need a QB and they're trying.  Gibbs thought he could win with Brunnell, then drafted JC.  Maybe JC was trying and failing, but I think this group REALY knows they have to get a QB and get one who can start now.

51 minutes ago, CapsSkins said:

 

 

A Kirk-level QB at a $20M cap hit for another two years for #19, which is well out of reach of the top QB prospects this year, would be a no-brainer to me. Just my $0.02

Keep in mind that the Raider's decision to trade Carr depends entirely if they think Mariota can play better than him and start all the games.  

 

Otherwise they are going to look at it the same exact way and not trade him.