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

[Acworth skins fan]

1 hour ago, UK SKINS FAN 74 said:

I would bet we have nowhere near 65mil in cap space. 

Over the cap has us at 44 million with 39 players under contract, if I read it correctly 

[Redskins 2021]

I dont think Carr available but if he was would he cost more then Stafford last year?

[Warhead36]

4 minutes ago, Redskins 2021 said:

I dont think Carr available but if he was would he cost more then Stafford last year?

Its possible. He's coming off a playoff run and there is lower supply(with a weak QB draft class) and higher demand(a lot of teams including some contenders will need QBs).

 

I could legit see him going for two #1s. I know Stafford went for two #1s and Goff but they were future 1s and Goff is kind of a net negative with his contract.

[Voice_of_Reason]

1 hour ago, DiscoBob said:

 

Look at the cost for SF to go from 12 -> 3 

 

2021 1st

2022 1st, 3rd

2023 1st

 

Yes, they jumped two extra spots, but that is a way better indication of what it takes to trade up when there is a QB available...

God, I hate to wade into these waters again debating how to characterize "give up" vs. "cost" vs. all the other things in trades.  It was exhausting trying to clarify this during the RGIII trade.  And basic math has eluded Steve Czaban for decades, and he was one of the main culprits of purposely mis-stating math.  

 

But the COST the 49ers gave up was the 2022 1 and 3, and the 2023 #1 because they GOT BACK a 2021 1st. 

 

They LOST 3 total picks (ie: Cost), while swapping positions of 1 pick.

 

If you don't look at both sides of the equation, everything always looks skewed.    

 

If you're going to tell me the cost of going from 2022 #11 to #4 is

- 2023's 1st

- 2023's 3rd

- 2024's 1st

 

I'd say that's a bit rich. 

 

I'd also say you probably could do it for something like

- 2022's 3rd, NOTE: Draft picks in the CURRENT draft are worth more than draft picks in future drafts.  

- 2023's 1st

 -(Pick a player on the DL not named Jon Allen.)

 

I can't be sure, but I bet something like that can be worked out.  

 

If there was a QB they loved, I'd do that deal in a heartbeat, and then spend money on a MLB, preferably draft a guard in the second or 4th rounds.  

[goskins10]

28 minutes ago, Acworth skins fan said:

Over the cap has us at 44 million with 39 players under contract, if I read it correctly 

 

It's possible the other numbers is including the expected CAP increases. The overthecap # would not include the additional CAP until it's official. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

21 minutes ago, Redskins 2021 said:

I dont think Carr available but if he was would he cost more then Stafford last year?

You really can't compare the Stafford deal because the Lions took Goff and his unbelievably bad contract as part of the deal, and the Rams gave the Lions MORE picks to take Goff and the money.  

[Redskins 2021]

1 hour ago, Warhead36 said:

Its possible. He's coming off a playoff run and there is lower supply(with a weak QB draft class) and higher demand(a lot of teams including some contenders will need QBs).

 

I could legit see him going for two #1s. I know Stafford went for two #1s and Goff but they were future 1s and Goff is kind of a net negative with his contract.

Ok if we move up let's say we decided to move sweat. How does he compare to the 2 top defensive ends in this draft. I don't know this but will he be considered to be valuable because he is on a cheaper contract compared to top 2 pick. He been in the league but may still be considered a top prospect.

Edited January 14, 2022 by Redskins 2021

[Jds0912]

5 hours ago, mistertim said:

Not sure I quite get the Mills talk. Everyone and their mother knows that Watson has said he won't play another down for the Texans. So they drafted a guy and he played pretty well for a rookie...and now they're suddenly going to turn around and try to trade the only decent QB on their roster? Makes zero sense.

I guess two scenarios I was thinking about would be if Houston hires a coach Watson likes or if they decide they want Pickett/Corral. They’d be turning a 2021 3rd round pick into the 2022 11th pick overall. Not a bad flip. I’m not saying that’s what they would ask for Mills bc idk what his value is right now. I would think it’s at least an early 2nd rounder. We have to make that trade if so. 

2 hours ago, shemp nixon said:

Does anyone think there is a QB in this draft worthy of this?

I think Pickett is worth it. 

[88Comrade2000]

2 hours ago, Inigo Montoya said:

based on what, in what world is RR underperforming? FedEx field took out two QBs, Stafford didnt want to come here. What's his biggest issue? Jamin Davis? I'll hold off judgement until he's properly aligned knowing RR and Co had to try and play him out of position due to the need at MLB. 

None of the Washington Circus is his fault, the dude fought cancer and the team loves him. 

2 losing seasons in a row. Yeah, the first one gave him a fluke division title.

 

He doesn’t survive a 3rd losing season; unless a rookie starts the whole year. Even then, Dan may decide he wants a new coach to develop the qb.

[mistertim]

2 minutes ago, Jds0912 said:

I guess two scenarios I was thinking about would be if Houston hires a coach Watson likes or if they decide they want Pickett/Corral. They’d be turning a 2021 3rd round pick into the 2022 11th pick overall. Not a bad flip. I’m not saying that’s what they would ask for Mills bc idk what his value is right now. I would think it’s at least an early 2nd rounder. We have to make that trade if so. 

 

I have a really hard time seeing a 3rd round rookie who played decently in his first season suddenly being worth #11 overall. That being said, IMO it would be sort of odd for Houston to have a somewhat successful rookie and then turn around and jettison him for a new rookie who hasn't even taken a snap. I think they'd have to really like one of the guys in order to do that. If there were a true consensus #1 blue chip QB prospect in this class I could see it, but as it is I'm not so sure.

 

As far as Houston and Watson, I think the issues there run way deeper than just the coaching staff. It seems like the damage between Watson and the organization in general is irreperable at this point.

[Voice_of_Reason]

I've been listening to a bunch of podcasts/radio shows, and reading, and I think I think I can now definitively call Ron a 

 

 

He keeps saying there are 4 paths:

- TH, who "competes his ass off" according to a quote from Ron to (I think JP).  

- FA

- Trade

- Draft

 

There are not 4 paths.  There are 2:

 

- Sign a FA AND draft a guy

- Trade for a starter.  

 

That's it.  That's the list.  

 

There is not a Franchise QB available in the Free Agent market.  You have guys like Mitch, Fitz, Marriota, Dalton, Winston, etc.  None of those guys are guys you can sign and say you solved the problem.  

 

TH is not an option.  Through other things Ron has said, he has made it clear they won't be going into next year with TH as the starter.  I don't even think they want him to be the stop-gap starter until a draft pick is ready. 

 

So, if they go with the first option, they would sign Mitch (for the purposes of this post, "Mitch" is either Mitch or somebody like Mitch)  which costs you no draft capital, AND they would draft a guy.  Probably having to trade up in the draft to get the guy they want. 

 

Let me shouted from the rooftops: If they sign Mitch that does NOT mean they are not going to draft a guy.  Mitch replaces TH as the potential day 1 starter if drafted guy is not ready.  

 

I see no scenario where they sign Mitch and then pat themselves on the back and say they're done.  It's not going to happen.  In fact, if they do sign Mitch then you can almost take to the bank they are drafting a guy, and probably trading up to do it.  

 

That's option 1: Mitch + Draft a guy high in the first round.  

 

NOTE: I also do not thing signing Mitch means they think they can draft a second tier QB in the 3rd or 4th round.  If they sign Mitch, they are STILL going to go after the QB they like best in the draft, whoever that is. 

 

Option 2 is a trade for a legitimate starter.  It seems the options are (and you can debate whether some of these guys are legitimate or not)

 

- Rodgers (not going to happen)

- Russ (not going to happen)

- Watson (really, really unlikely to happen)

- Garopollo (will most likely be available. So this would be a real possibility unless....)

- Trey Lance??? IF Jimmy G. leads the 49ers on a deep run, do they want to keep him and trade Lance?  We'll see. I doubt it. 

- Goff.  He has played in a SB.  But I don't think he's that good.

- Wentz. I don't want any part of Wentz except that he's definitively more talented than TH.  

- Cousins.  (Not going to happen.)

- Mayfield (I think they're going to keep him.)

- Carr (I can't think of any reason they trade him.  Extremely reasonable contract, and who are they going to replace him with?

 

 

So. I'm calling my shot: I think they try for Rodgers, Russ, Watson, Garopollo, Carr.  I don't think they try for Goff, Wentz, Mayfield or Cousins.  I think they will try hard and fail quickly.  We will know this before FA.  

 

Then they will sign Mitch (and I think it's actually Mitch), and I think they trade up to 4 and draft a guy. Which one, I don't know.  But based on draft order, with the Giants picking twice, and a few other QB needy teams, I think if they want their choice, they have to go to 4.  Which is what they will do. 

21 minutes ago, Redskins 2021 said:

Ok if we move up let's say we decided to move sweat. How does he compare to the 2 top defensive ends in this draft. I don't know this but will he be considered to be valuable because he is on a cheaper contract compared to top 2 pick. He been in the league but may still be considered a top prospect.

Sweat is a known commodity, a good pass-rusher and a former first round pick with a 4th and 5th year option left on his deal. 

 

I think you can absolutely value that as a first round pick as part of a trade.  Edge rushers are hard to get, and if you have a good one under contract, that's really good.  

[Jds0912]

2 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

I have a really hard time seeing a 3rd round rookie who played decently in his first season suddenly being worth #11 overall. That being said, IMO it would be sort of odd for Houston to have a somewhat successful rookie and then turn around and jettison him for a new rookie who hasn't even taken a snap. I think they'd have to really like one of the guys in order to do that. If there were a true consensus #1 blue chip QB prospect in this class I could see it, but as it is I'm not so sure.

 

As far as Houston and Watson, I think the issues there run way deeper than just the coaching staff. It seems like the damage between Watson and the organization in general is irreperable at this point.

So you’re saying Mills isn’t worth the 11th pick but they would pass on the top qb’s in this class bc they have Mills? 

[Acworth skins fan]

1 hour ago, goskins10 said:

 

It's possible the other numbers is including the expected CAP increases. The overthecap # would not include the additional CAP until it's official. 

Had to read your explanation a couple times, then finally figured out what you were saying. Thank you. 
it was the word, numbers, which made me think there were numbers at over the cap that I didn’t see. 

[mistertim]

35 minutes ago, Jds0912 said:

So you’re saying Mills isn’t worth the 11th pick but they would pass on the top qb’s in this class bc they have Mills? 

 

What I'm saying is I don't see Mills having a trade market value that high. He's a 3rd rounder who's only played one season, so it's super unlikely they'd be able to get a 1st round pick for him IMO. I think it would make more sense for them to keep him and see how he develops.

 

As far as this draft, I think they have so many holes that for them to jettison Mills and draft another QB in the 1st he'd have to be a guy they really liked and felt was a clear and obvious upgrade to Mills. I think in most drafts where you have a clear cut #1 QB it would be more likely, but in a draft where there's not much consensus and most of the prospects aren't considered blue chip prospects it becomes more muddy. 

[skinny21]

So, I wanna see if I’m clear here.  It’s pretty much: 

1) Trade 2 1sts or more for a high end vet - Rodgers, Watson, Wilson or Carr (very unlikely to pan out of course)

Or

2) Trade (something like) a day 2 pick for Garrapolo, Goff or Ryan (probably costs a 1st though?) - and look to the draft

Or

3) Sign a lesser vet in FA - Trubisky, Mariota - and look to the draft

 

Too many qb needy teams ahead of us (and others could move up), so a plan to stand pat and hope a guy they like falls to 11 is foolhardy, even if they believe one will fall.  Can’t plan on trading with NYG or another qb needy team, so moving to #4 (or better) is the only option draft-wise.  I mean that from the context of guaranteeing they get their guy.

 

If the FO manages option 1, we’re not drafting a qb in the 1st.

If it’s 2, we can maybe afford not to trade up, even though it’s a risk.  These are at least somewhat respectable qbs, in case we don’t manage to land a rookie.  They’ll have to try again next year of course, and it better pan out (and likely spend a lot to trade up).  As I said, it’s a risk though because if you don’t have a good year (marked improvement), RR’s seat is surely going to be red hot.

If it’s 3, we almost have to trade up, because coming out of the draft without your guy is a failure (and it’s too risky to hope one falls).  We might see improvement, but the angst will be high and hard to overcome.  The staff would essentially be banking on winning at least 10+ games.  Not saying they can’t get lucky - whether a qb drops to 11 or we make a playoff run - but they can’t risk ‘hoping for the best’.

 

So essentially, they need to decide if it’s worth moving up to #4.  If they don’t think it is, they have to look at 1 and 2, and if it is worth it to them, they still need the contingency of 3 (or 2).  The “good” thing about option 2 is that they might feel more comfortable waiting on a qb at 11 (and punting or drafting a guy later if one doesn’t fall).  In other words, they might be able to swing spending a 2nd on a trade, and then a 1st on a rookie, which would be a pretty good deal.

 

I’ve been supportive of this staff and I’m fine being patient, but the more I think about it - the rebranding, fan apathy, the need to have a qb of the future, and not having that qb after 2 years (not trading up last year or managing to land Stafford)… RR has put a ton of pressure on himself.  Not all of his own making, but still.  It’s a shame Fitzpatrick and Heinicke didn’t work out, because at least we’d have an “option 2” already in-house…

 

 

 

[London Kev]

I think that Rodgers and Wilson are such longshots that they're not even worth considering. They are both financially set and whichever team they go to is going to continue to pay them big bucks.

 

Their only real consideration is where can they go to have the most success, i.e. win Super Bowls. Maybe they would also desire to have some amount of control regarding offensive schemes, etc. but I think that would be secondary.

 

When they look at the NFC East; dallas has hit their stride and are seen as real contenders, and philly has improved more than expected. Both the giants and us can only be considered as bottom-dwellers from an outside perspective.

 

Why would any elite, successful QB want to finish their career in Washington right now?

[Jds0912]

17 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

What I'm saying is I don't see Mills having a trade market value that high. He's a 3rd rounder who's only played one season, so it's super unlikely they'd be able to get a 1st round pick for him IMO. I think it would make more sense for them to keep him and see how he develops.

 

As far as this draft, I think they have so many holes that for them to jettison Mills and draft another QB in the 1st he'd have to be a guy they really liked and felt was a clear and obvious upgrade to Mills. I think in most drafts where you have a clear cut #1 QB it would be more likely, but in a draft where there's not much consensus and most of the prospects aren't considered blue chip prospects it becomes more muddy. 

I see what you’re saying. I’m just thinking of scenarios where we can get a possible good young qb and not have to trade multiple high picks to do so bc I don’t see Pickett or Corral falling to us at #11. But if we have to I think we should trade up for one of them. It would be a mistake to go with what we already have or get a proven mediocre qb that might be a small upgrade from Hieneke. 

[Redskins 2021]

33 minutes ago, Jds0912 said:

I see what you’re saying. I’m just thinking of scenarios where we can get a possible good young qb and not have to trade multiple high picks to do so bc I don’t see Pickett or Corral falling to us at #11. But if we have to I think we should trade up for one of them. It would be a mistake to go with what we already have or get a proven mediocre qb that might be a small upgrade from Hieneke. 

The problem for Rivera is after winning the division alot more was expected. I expected a 10 win season last season and much improved QB play. He is in between a rock and hard place here.

Can a rookie Qb win 10. 

 

Edited January 14, 2022 by Redskins 2021

[Jds0912]

8 minutes ago, Redskins 2021 said:

The problem for Rivera is after winning the division alot more was expected. I expected a 10 win season last season and much improved QB play. He is in between a rock and hard place here.

Can a rookie Qb win 10. 

 

10+ should be the expectation for Ron in year 3 if he’s the coach/team builder we’ve been waiting for and I believe he is. I think we win 10 games this past season if we stay somewhat healthy. That many injuries is hard to overcome. I know every team has injuries  but it seems like we always get hit harder than most. I expect our overall roster to be better next year through drafting and free agency. The question is are any of these prospects better day 1 than Heineke? I believe Pickett, Corral, and Willis (in a Lamar Jackson style offense) are instant upgrades. Add in the fact that we’re going to have an easier schedule next year due to us finishing 3rd in our division and I think we get to 10 wins. Unless we have a ridiculous amount of injuries again. 

[DiscoBob]

3 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

God, I hate to wade into these waters again debating how to characterize "give up" vs. "cost" vs. all the other things in trades.  It was exhausting trying to clarify this during the RGIII trade.  And basic math has eluded Steve Czaban for decades, and he was one of the main culprits of purposely mis-stating math.  

 

But the COST the 49ers gave up was the 2022 1 and 3, and the 2023 #1 because they GOT BACK a 2021 1st. 

 

They LOST 3 total picks (ie: Cost), while swapping positions of 1 pick.

 

If you don't look at both sides of the equation, everything always looks skewed.    

 

If you're going to tell me the cost of going from 2022 #11 to #4 is

- 2023's 1st

- 2023's 3rd

- 2024's 1st

 

I'd say that's a bit rich. 

 

I'd also say you probably could do it for something like

- 2022's 3rd, NOTE: Draft picks in the CURRENT draft are worth more than draft picks in future drafts.  

- 2023's 1st

 -(Pick a player on the DL not named Jon Allen.)

 

I can't be sure, but I bet something like that can be worked out.  

 

If there was a QB they loved, I'd do that deal in a heartbeat, and then spend money on a MLB, preferably draft a guard in the second or 4th rounds.  

 

Your points are valid, and I've made those arguments myself... the root of my post was a response to a poster who claimed we could move up to #4 for:

 

#11, and a 3rd

Daron Payne

 

My only point was that the SF trade from last year for #3 was:

 

#12

2022 #1, #3

2023 #1

 

People look at the draft value chart and (1) assume it holds for the top of the first round (it doesn't), and (2) fail to realize that there is no universally agreed to method for valuing future draft picks

 

 

 

[JamesMadisonSkins]

There has to be sufficient demand for those sort of mega deals. 12 to 3 in an absolutely loaded QB class is a bit different than 11 to 4 in a class with (currently) no consensus QB1. Not saying we can do it for a ham sandwich, but I don’t see a ton of demand for the 4 picks like there may have been for the 1-2-3 last year. 

[Skinsinparadise]

PFF top 100 FAs.  As for QBs that have Winston, Bridgewater, Mariota making the cut in that top 100.

 

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-2022-free-agent-rankings-free-agency

 

61. QB MARCUS MARIOTA, LAS VEGAS RAIDERS

For years, the primary goal of quarterbacks in Mariota’s position was to find a team desperate enough for a starting signal-caller to sign them to an inflated deal in free agency. While that’s still a goal, there are more potential avenues for players with Mariota’s skill set. Two-quarterback systems continue to crop up around the NFL, so Mariota could attempt to leverage New Orleans Saints weapon Taysom Hill’s recent four-year, $40 million extension with massive upside. Mariota is an infinitely superior passer, and while he’s endured a handful of injuries the past few years, he’s still just 28 years old.

Strengths:
– Athleticism and running in space
– Play-action passing

Weaknesses:
– Mistakes
– Consistent accuracy
– Durability

Scheme Fit/Role:
HIGH-END BACKUP/LAST-CHANCE STARTER: Mariota never really got going in Tennessee, devolving rather than evolving as a starter before being replaced by Ryan Tannehill. As a backup with the Raiders, he has flashed the potential to be a starter again after time on the bench. But in a league with plenty of options, there won't be many chances for him to start again. His best role may be that of a high-end backup who can offer a change-of-pace package of rushing plays in certain situations from the bench.

Recent Injury History:
Mariota suffered a quad injury on a 31-yard run off the bench for the Raiders this season. He carries an extensive injury history, which is its own issue, independent of any concerns over his play.

Contract Projection: One year, $8 million fully guaranteed

Bottom Line:
Mariota is a former No. 2 overall draft pick, and the NFL struggles to give up on that kind of prior evaluation for a player. He flashed talent in limited snaps with the Raiders, and it might just be enough to convince a team without a quarterback in 2022 to roll the dice on him one last time. At the very least, he should be a coveted backup option.

---

[Redskins 2021]

13 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

There has to be sufficient demand for those sort of mega deals. 12 to 3 in an absolutely loaded QB class is a bit different than 11 to 4 in a class with (currently) no consensus QB1. Not saying we can do it for a ham sandwich, but I don’t see a ton of demand for the 4 picks like there may have been for the 1-2-3 last year. 

I agree. This year top two players are defensive ends. Sweat is probably as good as them Sweat and 11 should move us up if we go that route. Sweat is also cheaper then other players in this draft. Some of teams drafting ahead of us do not want to invest that kind of money in non QB.

 

Edited January 15, 2022 by Redskins 2021

[Skinsinparadise]

5 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

I've been listening to a bunch of podcasts/radio shows, and reading, and I think I think I can now definitively call Ron a 

 

 

He keeps saying there are 4 paths:

- TH, who "competes his ass off" according to a quote from Ron to (I think JP).  

- FA

- Trade

- Draft

 

There are not 4 paths.  There are 2:

 

- Sign a FA AND draft a guy

- Trade for a starter.  

 

 

He's not really lying, its not hard to read through the coach speak.  In your own post, you talk about how they are going to likely use FA.    He's basically screaming what he plans to do in his interviews:  shoot hard for a top veteran and if they fail then trade up for their favorite QB in the draft.

 

As for mentioning FA from time to time.  If the idea is to draft a rookie AND sign a FA then yeah FA is a tool he will use.  He's not going to basically publicly tell whomever the FA they intended to sign that they already think he's not the guy and he's just signing them for insurance.  He has to play that up to whomever they chase in FA that he could be that guy.

 

And as for Heinicke.  He's being cruel enough    as is basically saying in so many words, he's the reason why the team has a ceiling and that needs to be fixed.  Occasionally he throws a bone and mentions in house but he clearly doesn't play that up when doing so, its just thrown in there with the other three things at the same time.  I don't recall a single segment where Rivera hammed up in house solutions outside of him doing so during the season.  To me its just a throw away mention to not come off over the top knocking a player on the roster.  I am sure Rivera also really likes Heinicke so I don't think he just wants to nonstop hammer the point that he's not the guy, so on occasion he gives a very weak nod to it being a possibility without elaborating one whit about it.

 

In just about every interview he screams that the solution isn't in house.  

Edited January 15, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[tomwvr]

5 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

I've been listening to a bunch of podcasts/radio shows, and reading, and I think I think I can now definitively call Ron a 

 

 

He keeps saying there are 4 paths:

- TH, who "competes his ass off" according to a quote from Ron to (I think JP).  

- FA

- Trade

- Draft

 

There are not 4 paths.  There are 2:

 

- Sign a FA AND draft a guy

- Trade for a starter.  

 

That's it.  That's the list.  

 

There is not a Franchise QB available in the Free Agent market.  You have guys like Mitch, Fitz, Marriota, Dalton, Winston, etc.  None of those guys are guys you can sign and say you solved the problem.  

 

TH is not an option.  Through other things Ron has said, he has made it clear they won't be going into next year with TH as the starter.  I don't even think they want him to be the stop-gap starter until a draft pick is ready. 

 

So, if they go with the first option, they would sign Mitch (for the purposes of this post, "Mitch" is either Mitch or somebody like Mitch)  which costs you no draft capital, AND they would draft a guy.  Probably having to trade up in the draft to get the guy they want. 

 

Let me shouted from the rooftops: If they sign Mitch that does NOT mean they are not going to draft a guy.  Mitch replaces TH as the potential day 1 starter if drafted guy is not ready.  

 

I see no scenario where they sign Mitch and then pat themselves on the back and say they're done.  It's not going to happen.  In fact, if they do sign Mitch then you can almost take to the bank they are drafting a guy, and probably trading up to do it.  

 

That's option 1: Mitch + Draft a guy high in the first round.  

 

NOTE: I also do not thing signing Mitch means they think they can draft a second tier QB in the 3rd or 4th round.  If they sign Mitch, they are STILL going to go after the QB they like best in the draft, whoever that is. 

 

Option 2 is a trade for a legitimate starter.  It seems the options are (and you can debate whether some of these guys are legitimate or not)

 

- Rodgers (not going to happen)

- Russ (not going to happen)

- Watson (really, really unlikely to happen)

- Garopollo (will most likely be available. So this would be a real possibility unless....)

- Trey Lance??? IF Jimmy G. leads the 49ers on a deep run, do they want to keep him and trade Lance?  We'll see. I doubt it. 

- Goff.  He has played in a SB.  But I don't think he's that good.

- Wentz. I don't want any part of Wentz except that he's definitively more talented than TH.  

- Cousins.  (Not going to happen.)

- Mayfield (I think they're going to keep him.)

- Carr (I can't think of any reason they trade him.  Extremely reasonable contract, and who are they going to replace him with?

 

 

So. I'm calling my shot: I think they try for Rodgers, Russ, Watson, Garopollo, Carr.  I don't think they try for Goff, Wentz, Mayfield or Cousins.  I think they will try hard and fail quickly.  We will know this before FA.  

 

Then they will sign Mitch (and I think it's actually Mitch), and I think they trade up to 4 and draft a guy. Which one, I don't know.  But based on draft order, with the Giants picking twice, and a few other QB needy teams, I think if they want their choice, they have to go to 4.  Which is what they will do. 

Sweat is a known commodity, a good pass-rusher and a former first round pick with a 4th and 5th year option left on his deal. 

 

I think you can absolutely value that as a first round pick as part of a trade.  Edge rushers are hard to get, and if you have a good one under contract, that's really good.  

We could draft a rookie and see TH as the starter for 3-4 games …