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

[Malapropismic Depository]

Just now, TheShredder said:

I'm not getting off the Curtis Samuel train though.  I want them to book that one.

 

That's fine.

Also notice I actually had to correct my post about Weinke's age when drafted - he was actually even a few years older than I thought he was, when drafted !

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

39 minutes ago, Jericho said:

 

But that still really doesn't answer how Washington is supposed to acquire Bridgewater. I do see Carolina is looking to improve at QB. But at this point, the question is how? And with who? Is CArolina's pla to try and draft someone? If they like some rookie and if that rookie is available, then sure. But then what happens to Bridgewater? 

 

Bizarrely Alex Smith was the only QB rated worse than Bridgewater last year, though surely would be cheaper. Except Bridgewater is essentially a sunk cost for Carolina at this point. If Mariota has no trade market, I can't see any for Bridgewater either.

 

You already know the answers. You're asking rhetorical questions.

 

Bridgewater's time in Carolina now has a max period.  They might keep him for a bridge year to help acclimate a rookie, or they might cut him when free agency starts.  If they actually get positive value in return from a trade, then they'd ship Bridgewater out.  But no team is going to do that.

[Malapropismic Depository]

@TheShredder I was actually the absolute, very first WFT fan to want to acquire Samuel this offseason.

Because way back during the season, on the day we were playing against Carolina, I was practically thinking "I want THAT guy on our team !"

Samuel actually earned the name "The Shredder" that day, the way he shredded us.

5 Catches, which averaged over 21 yards a catch.

Edited March 8, 2021 by Malapropismic Depository

[Jericho]

3 minutes ago, Alcoholic Zebra said:

 

You already know the answers. You're asking rhetorical questions.

 

Bridgewater's time in Carolina now has a max period.  They might keep him for a bridge year to help acclimate a rookie, or they might cut him when free agency starts.  If they actually get positive value in return from a trade, then they'd ship Bridgewater out.  But no team is going to do that.

 

I don't know the answers. That's the whole point. I get that Bridgewater is not likely going to stay in Carolina for years. Maybe not even next year. But that doesn't necessarily mean he's gone in 2021 either. The Raiders did this with Carr for years (though Carr had a much longer contract and a higher peak value) and ultimately stuck with him. Point being I've heard nothing about Carolina trying to trade Bridgewater. And if Carolina was just going to cut Bridgewater before the new league year, they'd likely have done it already. It seems Carolina is holding on to him if and until they find something better. But at this point, barring a Watson or a Wilson trade (both of which seem like extreme longshots), that only leaves the draft as a viable place of finding "something better". Problem there being that Carolina is sitting at #8. They don't control their own destiny. They could trade up or they could not. They might not even draft a QB at all. But the biggest point being that if Carolina doesn't do anything for 1.5 months, what's Washington going to do in the interim? Sit on its hands and hope Carolina does something that leads to Bridgewater in 1.5 months? Is that Washington's plan?

 

My general point is people like Keim throw out the name Bridgewater, but then don't connect the dots as to how that's going to happen. And that's my point of asking. What's the hypothetical series of events that leads to Washington acquiring Bridgewater? I'm asking someone to lay it out for me. And no one really has. The inference seems to be: (1) Washington does nothing in free agency or the draft; (2) Carolina eventually drafts a QB, possibly at #8 or possibly through a trade up; and (3) then Washington somehow acquires Bridgewater (it's not mentioned if via trade or free agency) in late April or later. And while that series of events is possible, it seems incredibly unlikely. Which is why I ask. How exact is Washington realistically acquiring Bridgewater? Is that the entirely of how it's supposed to go down? Just seems like lazy journalism, kind of like those that constantly link Washington to Cam Newton just because Ron Rivera. 

[Rufus T Firefly]

30 minutes ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

@TheShredder I was actually the absolute, very first WFT fan to want to acquire Samuel this offseason.

Because way back during the season, on the day we were playing against Carolina, I was practically thinking "I want THAT guy on our team !"

Samuel actually earned the name "The Shredder" that day, the way he shredded us.

5 Catches, which averaged over 21 yards a catch.

So, like 6 months after I started thinking "well, we didn't draft or sign a starting WR, so next year I'd love to sign Curtis Samuel"?

 

That doesn't make you first, by the by.

[Malapropismic Depository]

So there's your answer, Watson-Followers...

 

 

[DWinzit]

11 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Hope that doesn't include us

 

There aren't many players that have enjoyed a more profitable non productive career that Chase Daniels. 12 years, 5 starts, 8 TDs, 7 Int's

[Fat Stupid Loser]

1 hour ago, DWinzit said:

There aren't many players that have enjoyed a more profitable non productive career that Chase Daniels. 12 years, 5 starts, 8 TDs, 7 Int's

Back up NFL QB.  Best job in the world.

[Thinking Skins]

1 hour ago, DWinzit said:

There aren't many players that have enjoyed a more profitable non productive career that Chase Daniels. 12 years, 5 starts, 8 TDs, 7 Int's

This board was going crazy for him. Not as big as Colt Brennan but people loved him. I guess he has lasted longer than Campbell though. 

[Sonny9TD]

On 2/23/2021 at 11:12 AM, clskinsfan said:

We have no clue if Lance is a difference maker or not. The guy has barely played. Trading up for a project QB would be a monumental mistake IMO. 

I respect that. But he will be. He's the one to get. Will need a season probably but so what. We will be getting a veteran anyway. Unless there is a freak linebacker or a shutdown corner go get this QB. Just my opinion though

Edited March 8, 2021 by Sonny9TD

[kingdaddy]

11 hours ago, samy316 said:

Because getting the QB position settled through FA gives us a better chance to sign FA WR’s and TE’s.  If we go into the FA signing period with the current QB’s we have, no offensive FA’s will come here unless we overpay.  If we want a Corey Davis, or a JuJu Smith-Schuster, we better have a plan at QB better than our current options, or we will have to significantly outbid other teams to have a chance at signing high caliber FA’s.

Playing devils advocate, you don't think the free agents saw what Heinicke did vs. Tampa Bay? Also, if the money is more here than anywhere else, and the culture is good, we will attract players for sure. I don't buy into the no QB, no free agent talk. Again, playing devils advocate, money talks. I also believe these players around the league talk and we have some great young players from big time schools here, that will help. Finally, big name free agents are gonna have limited options of where they go this year and the teams with the most money, other than Indy, don't have great QB situations either but they will have more $$$$ then teams that do have big name QB's.

[Thinking Skins]

16 hours ago, Jericho said:

One other thing I'd add. The idea of drafting and developing a QB is exceptionally rare. Many, including myself, have pointed out how rare it is for non-first rounder QBs to actually work out. But the few that do, often play much sooner rather than later. Prescott, Carr, and Russell Wilson all started from Day 1 in their rookie year. Tom Brady had displaced Drew Bledsoe by Year 2 and Bledsoe was pretty good (and Brady was only a sixth round pick). Yeah, I know Aaron Rodgers sat for a few years behind Brett Favre. But that was Brett Favre! It's one thing to sit behind a future HOFer, it's another to sit behind Kyle Allen. Mahomes did sit of a year, though Kansas City was coming off a strong season and Alex Smith was a Top 10 QB the year Mahomes was there. And KC still dumped Alex Smith in the offseason. The general idea is good QBs force there way into the line-up fast. And there's really no obstacles here in Washington. So the idea of drafting a guy and then having him sit for a few years and then busting out is unlikely. Interestingly, Kirk Cousins is probably the only great example of this in recent history (and maybe Garoppolo if you want to stretch it). So it could happen. But it's very, very unlikely. Anyone that hasn't shown something by Year 2 is probably not going to show it at all.

This is a nice observation but I'd add some names to your list. While this borders into the conversations that @Skinsinparadiseoften have in terms of what level of a good QB we want, some names I can add to the conversation: 

 

 - Aaron Brooks (career AV of 72, didn't start full time until end of second year.

 - Chad Pennington (career AV of 62, didn't start until third year)

 - David Garrard (career AV of 69, started 3 games over his first 3 years).

 - Tony Romo (career AV of 116), didn't start his first 2 years in the league. 

 - Matt Schaub (career AV of 81, started 2 games over his first 3 years)

 - Matt Cassel (career AV of 49, started no games over his first 4 years). 

 - Kyle Orton started as a rookie but was benched as a second year guy (only 3 games) then put back in as a starter in year 3. 

 - Derek Anderson played 3 games as a rookie and started his second year and looked good there, but mellowed out. 

 - Chad Henne didn't play as a rookie and was mediocre after that. 

 - Kaep didn't play as a rookie. 

 - Tyrod Taylor didn't start a game his first 4 years in the league. 

 - Jacoby Brissett started 2 games as a rookie

 

Now none of these names are ones that I'd argue as HOF players of franchise guys, but it does show that its not a foreign concept. And these are the 'successful' ones. Its not to say that others (like say Brandon Allen or Paxton Lynch) weren't drafted with this thought and the guys just bombed when given the opportunity. 

 

Its not a long record of guys recently going from bench to all pro, but its not unheard of as a way to find a starter. But if you compare it to other ways (FA QB, top QB in the draft, backup on other team (who may have been a starter elsewhere), UDFA/low round pick who comes in and dominates, etc) they are all either unlikely options or require you to get extremely lucky. And I think its a reasonable option to develop a guy who can play in this league. 

[TradeTheBeal!]

#Darnold2DC

 

 

[HigSkin]

1 hour ago, TryTheBeal! said:

#Darnold2DC

 

 

 

 

Wonder why the Jets aren't focused on bringing in the "right cast" for him to show how good he is?  

[TradeTheBeal!]

5 minutes ago, HigSkin said:

 

 

Wonder why the Jets aren't focused on bringing in the "right cast" for him to show how good he is?  

Cause they’re the Jets?

[DWinzit]

12 minutes ago, HigSkin said:

 

 

Wonder why the Jets aren't focused on bringing in the "right cast" for him to show how good he is?  

I keep two 2 pictures in my head after I read your post

1. A guy in traction in a hospital bed with a full body cast

2. The cast from Homeboys from Outer Space....The goofiest, dumbest show ever

[Number 44]

1 hour ago, TryTheBeal! said:

#Darnold2DC

 

 

Two possibilities, as I see it:

1.  She's lying.

2.  The GMs and head coaches are lying to her.

[profusion]

Any number of underperforming NFL QBs could be "really good" if surrounded by the "right cast"--meaning a stout line and a murderer's row of WRs and TEs.

 

The trick is finding someone who can excel without some of that in place. I'm doubting that Darnold is that guy.

[Skinsinparadise]

I'd bet on Darnold failing as a reclamation project for reasons I've said.   But if Darnold or whomever comes cheap I wouldn't give a rats behind who they'd try as a reclamation project.   No one has cracked the QB code.  It's certainly not the average FO guy who cracked the code, draft geek or any fan.  So anything is possible with just about anyone.  To me then its about playing the odds.  

 

But if Darnold comes for a 2nd rounder and 4th as most have said -- you aren't getting the dude cheap, you are betting big in advance that the reclamation will work.  That to me is risky.   And the opportunity cost is high IMO.  So I am skipping on Brevin Jordan potentially or Rondale Moore, etc for a roll of the dice QB?  

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/2021/03/08/mmqb-salary-cap-squeeze-free-agency-veteran-trade-candidates

 

While, again, the preference is to see the quarterbacks throw live before they make a call on Darnold, the Jets are cognizant that holding onto Darnold past the start of free agency, with quarterback vacancies filling across the league, could hurt his value. So it’s not impossible that they’d move faster.

As for teams to watch, three in particular are interesting to me: Chicago, San Francisco and Washington. Two of the three, Chicago and Washington, were playoff teams in 2020, aren’t in striking distance to draft one of the top guys and may not think developing a rookie, given where they’re at, is the best play. San Francisco would be even more fascinating. Darnold’s a strong fit for Kyle Shanahan’s offense, and trading for him would make the Niners six years younger, and $20 million cheaper at the position in 2020. The Niners like Jimmy Garoppolo, as we’ve said here, and won’t move off him without a clear upgrade. Could Darnold be that?

 

 

Edited March 8, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Blanka]

20 minutes ago, Number 44 said:

Two possibilities, as I see it:

1.  She's lying.

2.  The GMs and head coaches are lying to her.

3. or they actually legit like the guy. I know that’s blasphemous here but lying sheesh lol

[Number 44]

2 minutes ago, Blanka said:

3. or they actually legit like the guy. I know that’s blasphemous here but lying sheesh lol

[Skinsinparadise]

Chris Sims

 

 

6 minutes ago, Blanka said:

3. or they actually legit like the guy. I know that’s blasphemous here but lying sheesh lol

 

I am not a Darnold guy but I go not doubt some teams like Darnold.  It was the same 2 years ago with Rosen.  You bet on the dude's potential and you think you can fix them.  Rosen had tools.  Darnold has tools, too.  I didn't think at the time Rosen was a good bet for similar reasons I don't think Darnold is a good bet.  

 

But i am sure some teams are willing to roll the dice.  Personally I wouldn't care if it werent for like the deal for Rosen it looks like it will require a 2nd and change.  That to me is a steep price.  But teams are desperate clearly at the QB spot so I'd bet the Jets will get the compensation they are asking for or close enough.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

I'd bet some $$ we are/were one of the teams eyeing Mond as a backup plan to trading up and or trading for a QB. Not at #19, but possibly later in the draft .. Round 2 or 3. But maybe the hype/realization that others see what Simms sees could force him to go earlier.

 

Either way, I do wonder if Lance falls. I don't know if Mond goes ahead of us at #19 and I honestly feel like the pressure for him to deliver if he was a R1 pick is a lot higher than if we drafted him in R2 or 3 to compete. But if Lance is there at #19, the pressure is on him too.

 

Jones or Lance at #19 would be fine by me. Sounds like the floor for Jones is #15 to the Pats though. Can't see us taking the 6th QB in Mond at #19, but you probably risk losing out on him if someone at the back-end ... Saints or Steelers for example ... pull the trigger on him as a replacement for an aging vet.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[NickyJ]

Darnold I can stomach as a backup who might eventually get a chance to be Tannehill. Darnold, Heinicke, and Kyle Allen all as viable options to be the day 1 starter? Miss me with that harder than we missed on Haskins. 3 QBs all at roughly the same level of proven skill is a hard one for me to look forward to. It's what QB carousels are made of.

Edited March 8, 2021 by NickyJ