The Official QB Thread- JD5 taken #2. Randall 2.0 or Bayou Bob? Mariotta and Hartman forever. Fromm cut

[Skinsinparadise]

3 hours ago, MartinC said:

 

All of them can outright bust. (I know you know this @Skinsinparadise.)

 

I’d be slightly concerned if we were taking the guy we think has the highest floor at #2 overall. My view is when you are picking a QB this high (or anywhere for that matter) I’d swing for the guy with the highest ceiling unless there were factors that made you really really question if he can get to that ceiling.

 

Agree.  But I obviously got no idea what they are thinking as to the why part of the reasoning.

 

Keim basically has been saying every coach he's talked to (and he seems to suggest its not a limited number) thinks Daniels is the better player over Maye and by a clear peg.  And I believe he might have talked to a FO guy or two but I don't recall for that for sure.  I do remember he said he talked to current coaches who aren't taking a QB including some offensive minds he respects. 

 

Standig has said a variation of the same thing but isn't as hardcore making the point, I don't recall him saying everyone or not.   Keim suggested in one of his segments that its been everyone. Both have referenced its not neck and neck between Daniels and Maye among the ones the have spoken to and that Daniels is considered a peg better versus this being super close.  Both have referenced that some of the concerns that some mock drafters have made about Maye have been echoed by some they have spoken to around the league.

 

Having said that, I don't get the impression that they are finding that guys in the league are down on Maye -- the point seems to be that they think Daniels is better and it is by a margin that isn't neck and neck.  But I don't get the vibe of much negative on Maye.  It comes off more than they are higher on Daniels than some on this thread are.

 

As for people here extraoplating why the coaches, etc feel that way.  Those reasons could be it.  But we don't know of course.  Keim hasn't really delved deep into the reasons aside from saying its everyone he's spoken to including offensive minds he respects.

 

For me personally, yeah I agree swing for the fences for the highest upside QB albiet I do see Daniels as a high upside QB, too.  Daniels actually ironically feels to me more boom-bust than Maye.  But I am gathering am higher on Daniels upside than some of the other people here who prefer Maye. I actually see Maye's floor higher than Daniels -- but see their upsides as similar with an edge to Maye.    I would take Maye personally.  But I admit if I had no concerns about Daniels' durability it woud be a tough choice for me.  Like Maye, Daniels has stuff to work on but I think he can likely do it but not sure if he can stay healthy.

Edited April 5 by Skinsinparadise

[Bantu]

37 minutes ago, moondog said:

I think the biggest thing that bugs me is still mariota. The biggest upside to him is that absolutely no one, fan or player, will be looking for him to come in if a rookie struggles. The biggest downside is that if he has to play due to injury or because a rookie isn’t quite ready, everyone knows he sucks and there will be more pressure to get the rookie in even if he’s not quite ready. 
 

I know Brissett wanted to leave even if he was the best option, it doesn’t seem like that was on the table because he didn’t want to be here. But I would have much preferred Minshew or Flacco as veteran mentors but also guys that I would feel totally comfortable playing with and still having offensive production with. I just have zero faith in Mariota as a player or the personality type to lead the team or a young quarterback. I think he is sincere but also lacks any juice personality wise or on the field. 

They were trying to add Sam Darnold at the time, as well. Really wish they invested a little money and tried to fight for Brissett. I assume he'll be fulfilling a similar role in NE that he would have had here. Everything great about Brissett screams perfect QB to have alongside a young rookie. 

[SkinsFTW]

4 minutes ago, cakmoney61 said:

 As a fan, I want to "believe" that we are choosing between great and greater.  But that's not the vibe I'm getting.  

 

Because there is probably a 5-10% chance that any of these QBs turn out to be equal to Mahomes, Allen, Burrow.

[SpacePenguin]

32 minutes ago, moondog said:

I think the biggest thing that bugs me is still mariota. The biggest upside to him is that absolutely no one, fan or player, will be looking for him to come in if a rookie struggles. The biggest downside is that if he has to play due to injury or because a rookie isn’t quite ready, everyone knows he sucks and there will be more pressure to get the rookie in even if he’s not quite ready. 
 

I know Brissett wanted to leave even if he was the best option, it doesn’t seem like that was on the table because he didn’t want to be here. But I would have much preferred Minshew or Flacco as veteran mentors but also guys that I would feel totally comfortable playing with and still having offensive production with. I just have zero faith in Mariota as a player or the personality type to lead the team or a young quarterback. I think he is sincere but also lacks any juice personality wise or on the field. 

 

Forget Brissett, they had a QB under contract that already would be a better backup than Mariota. Howell should not have been traded. The mentor QB stuff is way overblown, that's what a QB coach is for. Likewise, the idea that how likely a QB controversy is to take place in the media should inform a team's decision at QB is also irrelevant.

 

It'd be nice if teams correctly decided to keep the best 2 or 3 QBs you can find, because injuries happen all the time and QB controversies will always exist if the starter struggles.

 

Drafting Kirk Cousins was the smartest thing the Shanny crew ever did here, and if they'd subscribed to these misguided viewpoints, then the 2013-2016 seasons would've been way less entertaining.

 

Ah, well. I'm just a longtime fan. Professionals are running the front office, at least. Time will tell.

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, cakmoney61 said:

I appreciate you talking so positively about the draft class, but i have heard (and read) much more negative rhetoric than positive.  Am I wrong.

 

QBs are highly considered for the most part.  It's considered a good draft for the spot by almost every mock draft type -- ditto leaks from scouts, etc.

 

I think it feels negative because the Maye-Daniels debate is polarizing with fans.  So we got to hear over and over again about these QBs perceived flaws.

 

I posted last week some scout takes on both QBs.  And 2 out of three were gushing about how special they are.

[seantaylor=god]

25 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

No, they aren't. That's just a perception based on what you're reading here and other places at this point in the draft process and as a team that will be picking a QB at #2. There's always going to be more scrutiny about negatives in that situation. All of these top guys have massive positives, but the negatives will always be focused on in this specific circumstance. 

 

This is a top notch QB class. Any of the top 3 would almost certainly be the #1 overall pick in most drafts.

100% Yes.
 

Also, people sometimes focus on the negatives and put off the decision as if there is some sort of real alternative.

 

Facts:

1. You need at least  above average QB play to win in today’s NFL. Run game/defense can only take you so far. Most SB winning teams had elite play from their QB. QB pay continues to rise to absurd levels because it’s easily the most important position by 2-3 times.

2. Rarely do above average/elite QBs make it to free agency/available in a trade, and if they do, the compensation required in contract, draft picks, or both is insane.

3. The NFL draft/UDFA is the only source for rookie QBs.

4. No guarantee a QB in the next year of the draft will be highly qualified or be available at your pick.

 

So, even knowing the first round QB you evaluate as a future above average/elite QB historically fails 50% of the time, there is no true alternative.

 

Evaluate as best you can ( particularly work ethic, character, and leadership) and hope for the best. If it fails, try again.

 

 

[Warhead36]

It makes sense for coaches of other teams who aren't scouting the guys at the top to on the surface prefer Daniels. He has bigger name recognition and his style of play is harder to game plan against.

 

Actual scouts/evaluators/FO people are likely to prefer Maye.

[Conn]

1 hour ago, Est.1974 said:

I don’t want to give a QB a 25mil signing bonus within a fully guaranteed deal of 40mil to then sit for a year. 
 

That has to be considered a massive risk.

 

You pick a player at #2 that will start week 1.
 

 

You pick the QB at #2 who you think will develop into the best player for you by the time you have to pay him, no matter how you get him there. Pretty simple to me. You won’t be able to accurately assess how exactly you can get him there (or not) until he’s in your building every day anyways, so it’s not a set in stone thing.
 

NOBODY thought Herbert was ready to play coming into the league. Then a dumbass doctor pierced Tyrod Taylor’s lung before kickoff week 1 and Herbert’s been one of the best young QB’s in the league ever since. You just never know. So you can’t weight it as a significant part of your decision-making as if you do know, that’s just pure arrogance. Unless a guy is RAW raw of course. Which doesn’t apply to anyone this year. There are no Trey Lance types. 

[cakmoney61]

18 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

You're on a football message board with one group of people debating with another that their guy is the guy. Of course you're going to see more negatives in that situation. 

Of course.  The talking heads generally talk about what makes one better than the other.  But fan message boards tend to talk about what makes the other guy worse.  Honestly, they have me shook.🙂

[JamesMadisonSkins]

If we ARE in on Maye, and the Pats are in on Daniels (which we should easily be able to glean from the conversations our FOs would have around a trade up), then it makes sense to swap picks as long as NE thinks we're willing to trade down further. Yes the needle needs to be thread strategically but this FO seems like it has the ability to play those cards right. Something to monitor if those are in fact the QBs each team ends up preferring.

Edited April 5 by JamesMadisonSkins

[Conn]

1 hour ago, cakmoney61 said:

I appreciate you talking so positively about the draft class, but i have heard (and read) much more negative rhetoric than positive.  Am I wrong.

You aren’t “wrong”, you’ve just lost perspective. Not a rare thing. It means you need to zoom out, mentally speaking, and reassert yourself in reality before diving back into the mostly made-up minutia of the 24/7 NFL draft cycle.

[Warhead36]

6 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

If we ARE in on Maye, and the Pats are in on Daniels (which we should easily be able to glean from the conversations our FOs would have around a trade up), then it makes sense to swap picks as long as NE thinks we're willing to trade down further. Yes the needle needs to be thread strategically but this FO seems like it has the ability to play those cards right. Something to monitor if those are in fact the QBs each team ends up preferring.

Why would the Pats make that trade if they know they can get Daniels sitting at 3? They know there is 0 chance we would trade with anyone else.

 

Why would we make that trade and risk losing out on the guy we like? They won't just out of the kindness of their hearts tell us who they're gonna pick. Because if they did, and we were willing to make the deal, then they know they could just stand pat and take the guy anyway.

 

A pick swap just doesn't make sense once you apply any sort of logic to it.

[Est.1974]

35 minutes ago, SkinsFTW said:

 

The last draft that I remember where the 3 top QBs didn't start right away was when Eli, Rivers, and Roth, all didn't start for a while and they all might get into the HOF.

 

Carson Palmer sat an entire year, Rodgers sat 3, Mahomes sat 15/16 of a season, Cousins sat 15/16 of year 1 and clearly turned out better than the #2 overall pick.

 

I can't even remember guys who sat and sucked. I knew that Love was going to be garbage if they started him but he sits for years then comes in and by the playoffs looks like an MVP. Much better than the actual MVP did in the playoffs in fact.

So you want Mariota starting for a season. Find that hard to believe. Didn’t take you as an F- guy.

[SkinsFTW]

Just now, Est.1974 said:

So you want Mariota starting for a season. Find that hard to believe. Didn’t take you as an F- guy.

 

Nope but 5-8 games isn't going to take a SB away from this team, IMO.

[Est.1974]

13 minutes ago, Conn said:

pick the QB at #2 who you think will develop into the best player for you by the time you have to pay him, no matter how you get him there. Pretty simple to me. You won’t be able to accurately assess how exactly you can get him there (or not) until he’s in your building every day anyways, so it’s not a set in stone thing.

We’re not picking a player to sit out a full season. No chance.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

8 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

Why would the Pats make that trade if they know they can get Daniels sitting at 3? They know there is 0 chance we would trade with anyone else.

 

Why would we make that trade and risk losing out on the guy we like? They won't just out of the kindness of their hearts tell us who they're gonna pick. Because if they did, and we were willing to make the deal, then they know they could just stand pat and take the guy anyway.

 

A pick swap just doesn't make sense once you apply any sort of logic to it.

 

Yeah, it would be a needle thread strategy. These conversations happen all the time pre-draft. The Pats have likely engaged us to understand what it would cost to pick-swap. It's just standard protocol to have these discussions before the draft. 

 

So we get closer to the draft, we let the Pats know that #2 is a hot commodity. You're willing to trade down, but there are a couple of QBs you like and are gauging who will be available in the range of various trade-downs. You understand who the Pats are targeting at QB. Then you make a calculated decision - do you take your QB at #2. Trade with the Pats and still likely get your guy at #3 (because you're not doing the trade if you are not) or trade down further with another team looking to come up. And obv. in that third scenario you're taking yourself out of the running for most of the top guys. And yes, the Pats will know this, but if they sense that someone else would be coming up for "their" guy, they might make the swap.

 

And that swap is unlikely to be the true value of the pick swap. They'll know that we're likely still to get "our" guy at #3. So would we rather have our guy and a 3rd round pick, or would we prefer to add several #1s and trade back out of range of our guy? It's a trade the Pats are willing to do, because it ensures that they get their guy, versus not having control and leaving the door open for us to go and trade to someone that would come get the Pats guy.

 

Of course, none of this matters if the decision is a coin-flip for NE and they will gladly take either Maye or Daniels at #3. And none of this matters if the Pats want Daniels and we also want Daniels.

 

In the end it's about controlling the draft. If the Pats really want Daniels, and we really want Maye, but we are also open to moving back for a huge haul, why wouldn't the Pats throw us their 3rd round pick to guarantee they get their guy, versus leaving it up to chance that we do not trade out with a team that will come up to take the Pats guy?

Edited April 5 by JamesMadisonSkins

[Est.1974]

Just now, SkinsFTW said:

 

Nope but 5-8 games isn't going to take a SB away from this team, IMO.

The comment I was replying to was full season.

[Warhead36]

If we do decide that Maye should sit, I doubt he'd end up sitting the entire season. He's not that raw and he's good enough that I would guess by like mid-October his stuff will be mostly cleaned up and at that point he'll need live reps and we'll wanna start that clock right away. And Mariota isn't any good and we'll probably be like 2-5 or something anyway.

 

The crazy dream scenario is Mariota actually plays well but we aren't in contention and we can flip him for a mid round pick to a QB desperate team at the deadline and then start Maye.

[mistertim]

Just now, Est.1974 said:

So you want Mariota starting for a season. Find that hard to believe. Didn’t take you as an F- guy.

 

Who cares? We're not going to the Super Bowl this season. If this FO believes that we could pick one guy and start him right away but that he's not necessarily going to be special or a great QB for a long time, or we could pick the other guy and he might need to sit at first but he'll be an elite QB for the next 10-15 years, then we pick the second guy 10 times out of 10.

 

I have no clue why some people are so obsessed with winning right now or starting the QB right now. It doesn't matter. We're not currently a contender and we'd have another 4 years before we'd have to pay him anyway.

 

You go with the long term play.

[SkinsFTW]

1 minute ago, Est.1974 said:

The comment I was replying to was full season.

 

The world wouldn't end if he sat the year either. I doubt that they would do that though after signing the guys they did though but sitting a QB for a year does seem to be a successful strategy.

[Est.1974]

3 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Who cares? We're not going to the Super Bowl this season. If this FO believes that we could pick one guy and start him right away but that he's not necessarily going to be special or a great QB for a long time, or we could pick the other guy and he might need to sit at first but he'll be an elite QB for the next 10-15 years, then we pick the second guy 10 times out of 10.

 

I have no clue why some people are so obsessed with winning right now or starting the QB right now. It doesn't matter. We're not currently a contender and we'd have another 4 years before we'd have to pay him anyway.

 

You go with the long term play.

You’re basically starting to talk around Mayes issues by justifying sitting him in 2024. 
 

What next?

1 minute ago, SkinsFTW said:

 

The world wouldn't end if he sat the year either. I doubt that they would do that though after signing the guys they did though but sitting a QB for a year does seem to be a successful strategy.

Agree. Free agency doesn’t suggest punting on 2024. Exhibit A - Bobby Wagner.

Edited April 5 by Est.1974

[mistertim]

Just now, Est.1974 said:

You’re basically starting to talk around Mayes issues by justifying sitting him in 2024. 
 

What next?

 

I'm saying if the FO feels he should sit for a little while but that he can be an elite QB for 10+ years after he fixes whatever they want him to fix and don't believe the same of Daniels then they should 100% pick Maye every day.

 

I don't necessarily think he needs to sit, but I'm not an NFL coach.

[Warhead36]

Remember Harris's mantra in his PC: take no shortcuts.

 

If sitting Maye drastically increases our long term chances of success, its probably the best route to take long term. And I personally have no issues with taking a long term approach. We've been hamstrung too much by short sighted regimes under the previous ownership.

 

With that said, a big part of my reason to be excited for 2024 is watching a #2 overall pick super talented QB play. It'd be a real bummer to have the kid sit. But I'd get it.

[Going Commando]

We're not going to sit the QB we draft at #2, and Drake Maye is way better prepared to deal with the dysfunctional offense and crappy protection we're going to have next year than Jayden "I need four seconds in a clean pocket to make a decision" Daniels.

[Warhead36]

2 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

I'm saying if the FO feels he should sit for a little while but that he can be an elite QB for 10+ years after he fixes whatever they want him to fix and don't believe the same of Daniels then they should 100% pick Maye every day.

 

I don't necessarily think he needs to sit, but I'm not an NFL coach.

Oh you absolutely can not sit Daniels. He needs to play day one. He's going to be a 24 year old rookie whos game is reliant on mobility and athleticism which tends to fade around age 27. We basically have to go all in by like his 2nd year in the league to maximize that window.