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

[Koolblue13]

1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

A lot of emotion on this thread from me included.  It's a good sign though in the past it was mostly debate about how to pull a crap team out of the gutter.   This version is more fun.

 

As for the FAs, I really don't have a strong opinion about anyone.  And I hate advocating for one of them because even when I explain the context of it -- I'll still be pushed to debate the merits of that dude.    But for me I am not dying on the hill for any of the FAs.  If I had to pick one or two it would be Fitzpatrick or Tyrod Taylor.  But if its Winston or Dalton or whomever, I personally wouldn't lose sleep over it.   So I don't really have a hard bet on any of the FAs.  I'd probably just ride what what they had in house over a FA.

 

From what I've read stats wise about Carr, I could ride with him.  But I won't die on the hill for him either.    I could dig trading up in the draft but it feels unrealistic but I guess you never know.  I am a pessmistic about punting to 2022.  I don't at the moment love with QB crop for that draft, FA looks meh and its tough for me to see a Stafford type hitting the market. But I guess you never know. 

 

 

Putting Winston and Dalton together there was a jab and I know it. lol. It's cool though.

 

I know you like Fitz. I do too, for the same reasons that I like Winston. 

 

Carr for a 3rd is best case IMO. Otherwise, I'd draft Book or Newsom in the 3rd, keep Alex and roll with the crew we have this year.

[Riggo#44]

31 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

Matt Miller has Carolina trading to 3 and taking Wilson. Lance at 4 to ATL. He doesn’t have Jets taking a QB. He then has WFT trading 19, 72 and a 2022 1st to Detroit for 7 to take Fields. 
 

 

[-9-]

56 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

I'm not getting rid of the only Temple player on this team ...

 

[KDawg]

27 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I thought @KDawg was a pro Haskins and anti Fields guy? 

Nailed it.

 

32 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

KDawg do that draft?

Maybe I did.

 

 

Edited February 2, 2021 by KDawg

[Skinsinparadise]

12 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

I just don't trust Fields ever developing. He looks like a guy who tops out as a Jackson level passer. Able to make some plays but never a guy who you win big with because of his throwing, 

 

Lance needs to sit for probably his whole first year. Work with him on his throwing the way Buffalo did with Fields. If you do that, I think the guy has the potential to be special. Like better than Allen. 

 

I like both of them. I talked in detail about both on the draft thread.  I don't have the energy to redo that here but IMO Fields is much further along right now as a passer than Lance.   Lance does have tools so I agree with that, rocket arm, great mobility.  

[Rufus T Firefly]

5 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I like both of them. I talked in detail about both on the draft thread.  I don't have the energy to redo that here but IMO Fields is much further along right now as a passer than Lance.   Lance does have tools so I agree with that, rocket arm, great mobility.  

In a way, that's the problem. I think Fields has close to reach his ceiling as a passer, Lance has room to grow. 

[Skinsinparadise]

15 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Putting Winston and Dalton together there was a jab and I know it. lol. It's cool though.

 

I know you like Fitz. I do too, for the same reasons that I like Winston. 

 

Carr for a 3rd is best case IMO. Otherwise, I'd draft Book or Newsom in the 3rd, keep Alex and roll with the crew we have this year.

 

I think you'd need at least a 2nd to get Carr, maybe a first.  

 

lol, putting Winston and Dalton together isn't a shot on my end.  Just saying I wouldn't hate either one or love them. 

 

For FA's, i'd go Fitz #1, Taylor #2.  but I don't feel like debating anyone on it.  Its not that i love either one but the pickings are slim.

 

I'd be jazzed if they can trade up for a QB especially if its Fields or Wilson but that strikes me as a hard task.  I was just listening to Graziano who is often on the mark and he thinks good chance Atlanta is in the Qb business in this draft.   If so i think you got to deal with Miami to go up to #3.  But if Miami trades for Watson then that's out the window.  To me its possible the top 4 Qbs go top 5 in this draft.  It doesn't matter to me what happened in prior drafts to determine this one.  Every draft isn't the same.  Supply and demand could match up that way.  

Edited February 2, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Skinsinparadise]

9 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

In a way, that's the problem. I think Fields has close to reach his ceiling as a passer, Lance has room to grow. 

 

Fields IMO has good accuracy all around the field.  He needs to work on a few things including getting rid of the ball faster.  But he has one key thing that I thought Haskins was missing (and I said so about Haskins before the draft) which his accuracy isn't confined to just a sweet spot or two.  Fields can throw it deep, short, intermediate.  Out routes, in routes.   Lance not so much, at least not yet.   Both players have sick mobility which they can use as a crutch in the NFL. 

 

 

 

 Haskins

Edited February 2, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[KDawg]

You’re crazy if you don’t see Fields potential. I’ve talked enough about it to the point I’m tired of rehashing it. I’ve come to the conclusion that if you don’t see his potential it’s 100% based on his school.

[kingdaddy]

3 minutes ago, KDawg said:

You’re crazy if you don’t see Fields potential. I’ve talked enough about it to the point I’m tired of rehashing it. I’ve come to the conclusion that if you don’t see his potential it’s 100% based on his school.

I trust you....BUT, like you said , do we really trade up to take an OSU QB? I'd never really seen Fields play until the Clemson game and he was excellent...and tough. 

[KDawg]

Just now, kingdaddy said:

I trust you....BUT, like you said , do we really trade up to take an OSU QB? I'd never really seen Fields play until the Clemson game and he was excellent...and tough. 

Look, he can bust. Anyone can. He’s no different. But he has tremendous potential.

[Rufus T Firefly]

Yeah, posting a bunch of numbers on Fields doesn't mean much to me. I just don't see anticipation and instincts as a passer. Again, I'm not saying he'll be bad. Just don't see him developing into greatness.

[dyst]

Fields would be an awesome get. Young guy and can grow with the team.

[kingdaddy]

22 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Look, he can bust. Anyone can. He’s no different. But he has tremendous potential.

If you can answer this, how comparable is Fields to Russell Wilson when he came out of college?

[dyst]

It’s an unknown but Fields body type (not necessarily size) and style remind me of Dak and/or Russell 

[RWJ]

47 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Fields IMO has good accuracy all around the field.  He needs to work on a few things including getting rid of the ball faster.  But he has one key thing that I thought Haskins was missing (and I said so about Haskins before the draft) which his accuracy isn't confined to just a sweet spot or two.  Fields can throw it deep, short, intermediate.  Out routes, in routes.   Lance not so much, at least not yet.   Both players have sick mobility which they can use as a crutch in the NFL. 

 Haskins

SIP and others.   I haven't followed Fields that much other than watching him in the Sugar Bowl this year.  I hope he has the ability to read Ds like Haskins could never do.  I want a QB first that can read a D and if he has the intangibles that Fields has than that's a bonus.

[redskinsrmylyfe]

18 minutes ago, RWJ said:

SIP and others.   I haven't followed Fields that much other than watching him in the Sugar Bowl this year.  I hope he has the ability to read Ds like Haskins could never do.  I want a QB first that can read a D and if he has the intangibles that Fields has than that's a bonus.

From what I watched a Fields he doesn't read the field well.

[RWJ]

Just now, redskinsrmylyfe said:

From what I watched a Fields he doesn't read the field well.

Not good from your perspective for me for as you know I want one who can read a D.  Most important to me.  Thank for the input. 

[The Consigliere]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

There are some differences with the business world and some similarities.  I have a financial planning certificate.  I run by own business.  Back in college i was a teacher's assistant in stats.  Part of my job is to explain surveys/stats to clients and how to look at the landscape without being overly impinged by emotion so its part of my business to stay anaylitical.  So this isn't a foreign conversation for me. 

 

Where the NFL is different from some businesses and even other sports is there is a big time overriding variable that affects the bottom line.   i an a big Premier League fan and its interesting to read the UK's take on the NFL.  And among their points is the NFL is a weird sport in that its so dependant on one guy.    If you don't have that one guy there is a good chance your team isn't that good. They feel their sport is much more balanced and less hinged on having one key player. 

 

As prudent for example as Warren Buffett is as an investor, he still these days has almost 50% of his portfolio in Apple.  He is placing big bets on one front.  NFL is similar on the QB front.   With some businesses balance is everything.  In life balance and prudence is cool and smart.  Arguably its not the case with the NFL.  

 

To me the idea of hey just wait until your roster is stacked and then the Qb will be there for the taking comes off naive and pie in the sky versus prudent.  But that's my perspective and point of view.   Doesn't mean I am right.   So that's my way of saying I think both sides of this debate i find emotional but in a different form that's all.   And the emotional is all in good spirits on both sides of the debate. 

 

Both groups IMO are optimisitc and pessimistic but just in different forms.   For example for those that look at late first rounders and late second rounders as likely resulting in a group of studs IMO haven't looked at the stark differences between the NFL and our own draft record from drafting in the late first versus the early first.   McVay is no dummy.  Supposedly behind the scenes this very point about the value of late first rounders has guided some of their moves.  Are the Rams foolish or smart?  It depends on your perspective.   

 

The argument that you can't both get a QB and upgrade the rest of the roster at the same time -- that argument to me is as wildly emotional as the argument that we need to throw whatever we can to get a QB.  It's just emotion in a different form.

 

So that's my long way of saying you got to take each situation as it comes.  I'd lean towards being aggressive towards getting a QB and not let emotional impinge on that move.  The RG3 trade or the McNabb trade and drafting Patrick Ramsey or whatever to me is irrelevant.  The Browns struck out plenty at QB just like we have but that didn't stop them from drafting Baker Mayfield.    Teams have bombed trading up for QBs but they didn't stop the Texans and Chiefs from doing it on their end.   Don't let fear and emotion stop you.   You can justify anything or argue against anything -- its not hard to find arguments that fit a perspective.

 

I don't see Ron an an overly emotional type.  He strikes me as a dude that will put a value on something and pursue things accordingly.  So i am not worried about them botching this.  But I do have doubts they will have a good chance to upgrade. 

 

 

 

Yeah i agree.  Context is what's missing.  Terry McLaurin for example failed the lofty "demoninator score" which isn't a PFF metric but its an often used number based way to judge draft prospects at WR.  But if you get past religiously being married robotically to scores -- you'd see for example Terry had sick combine numbers and a sick YPA, and 700 yards wasn't bad considered Haskins threw short so much to Paris Campbell who hogged Ohio State's stats at WR.  Yeah he was a late bloomer which is a knock against players as to demoniator scores but then you read about his story and high intangibles -- and I was sold that a late bloomer could work in his case.  But if went with pure anayltics I'd be off Terry.   But loved him before the draft factoring context.

 

PFF would say Okudah is the better pick over Chase.  But among other things they don't factor the domino effect one dude could have on a full unit.   Also as Cooley likes to say an elite player brings a ripple effect that can pervade a locker room.  

 

So i love PFF, Football Outsiders, etc but i don't take all of their stuff as the be all and end all either.

 

 

 

My take is likely no but that choice is unlikely to present itself.  

It wasn’t dominator, he had no dominator, the problem was breakout age. He never broke out. Honestly, how do you evaluate a player that was never used. What were you going to buy his potential on? Character? Being a great gunner. The reason I was anti-McLaurin was simple: he never did anything. There are no examples in the modern NFL of guys w/his profile doing anything. None. It’s one thing if there were tons of markers missed but there weren’t. You seem to bash analytics here but the only selling points were intangibles and athleticism the latter of which you should probably also not care about as it’s far less relevant than breakout age.

 

What McLaurin underlined is that w/mega programs like Clemson, Ohio State, and Alabama, elite guys like Josh Jacobs and McLaurin can slip through the cracks and be beat out by inferior players. Rare, but it happens. Sony Michel once split snaps w/Chubb after all.

Edited February 2, 2021 by The Consigliere

[redskinsrmylyfe]

Fields is a lot like Jalen hurts in that he is A great athlete but not so great At diagnosing defenses and Getting Through progressions

[Conn]

Insane efficiency despite being the only thing the Texans had this year essentially.

 

 

[mhd24]

If the Jets want him, he'll be a Jet.  We couldn't beat this offer...

 

#2+2021 2nd+2022 1st+Quinnen Williams+Darnold (if Houston likes him)

[redskinsrmylyfe]

5 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

It wasn’t dominator, he had no dominator, the problem was breakout age. He never broke out. Honestly, how do you evaluate a player that was never used. What were you going to buy his potential on? Character? Being a great gunner. The reason I was anti-McLaurin was simple: he never did anything. There are no examples in the modern NFL of guys w/his profile doing anything. None. It’s one thing if there were tons of markers missed but there weren’t. You seem to bash analytics here but the only selling points were intangibles and athleticism the latter of which you should probably also not care about as it’s far less relevant than breakout age.

 

What McLaurin underlined is that w/mega programs like Clemson, Ohio State, and Alabama, elite guys like Josh Hacobs and McLaurin can slip through the cracks and be beat out by inferior programs. Rare, but it happens. Sony Michel once split snaps w/Chubb after all.

This is also why I don't trust the quarterback From either School Because The talent level goes deep Into the depth chart to the point Where They will never have a wr core that Overpowered again

Edited February 2, 2021 by redskinsrmylyfe

[AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy]

3 hours ago, Mr. Sinister said:

I can accept wanting to shoot your wad on DeShawn Watson and hoping for the best, but Andy Dalton??? No, hell no.

I’ve had worse.

41 minutes ago, mhd24 said:

If the Jets want him, he'll be a Jet.  We couldn't beat this offer...

 

#2+2021 2nd+2022 1st+Quinnen Williams+Darnold (if Houston likes him)

No trade clause. Watson ain’t gonna be a Jet. 

Edited February 2, 2021 by AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy

[Est.1974]

3 hours ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

Matt Miller has Carolina trading to 3 and taking Wilson. Lance at 4 to ATL. He doesn’t have Jets taking a QB. He then has WFT trading 19, 72 and a 2022 1st to Detroit for 7 to take Fields. 
 

 

might as well add another first rounder to that and get Watson instead.

 

i posted that type of scenario earlier, we almost have to assume getting to #7 with Detroit is the slot to get a top QB prospect. And the cost wouldn’t be far short of Watson by time you are finished.