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

[Voice_of_Reason]

Bram brought up something I don't think I've seen discussed here.  (Maybe it has, I haven't read every page, I do have a job...)

 

The Bear's are hiring a new GM and HC.  And the owner said the new pair would be able to do whatever they wanted at QB, they wouldn't HAVE to coach Fields.

 

So, there is a chance the Beas go after Russ or Watson.  I THINK (could be wrong) that Russ had put Chicago on the list of places he would go. That might have changed, or might change depending on who they hire as GM and Coach.  But let's say they hire somebody Russ likes, and he's good with it.   And for this scenario to work, let's say Seattle would prefer just straight draft compensation, and not have Fields as part of the trade.  (I could see why, keep reading.)

Then Fields is available.

 

Personally, I think you can get Fields for #11, straight up, if the Bears want to trade him.  They'd need the pick to send back to Seattle anyway. I could see some type of a 3-team deal, where we send #11 to the Bears for Fields, the Bears send their pick 2nd Round Pick (they don't have a first) + #11 and 2023 first + probably something else (another 2nd, maybe a player, not sure) to Seattle for Wilson.  Seattle ends up with 2 2nds this year, 2 1sts in the next 2 drafts and something else, Chicago gets Wilson, and we get Fields. ** I'm going on the assumption that Wilson basically is worth 3 1sts.  Which I think is what has generally been speculated.  This trade basically gets Seattle to 3 Firsts value. Chicago basically is flipping Fields for a first to include in the trade.  

 

Bram was saying he thought Fields would require more than 1 first.  I totally disagree.  He played "ok" and was a mid-1st round pick last year. And I don't care what Chicago had to do to move up to pick Fields.  That's on them.  I don't see how he would have increased in value.  He didn't play well enough to do that.

 

So.  For the scenario above, what do you think?  Who's interested in Fields for #11 (which would be our part of the deal)?

[Warhead36]

I'm not a big Fields guy, never have been, but I'd probably give up 11 straight up for Fields. I'm afraid he might already be damaged goods though. It doesn't take much but I'm already getting Sammy Darnold vibes from Fields.

[Stadium-Armory]

Sign Fitz for another year. Seems like the ultimate mentor QB.

 

Draft Howell, Willis or Corral (Pickett will be gone). I don't even care which one because nobody on earth seems to be able to accurately predict QB success (save a few exceptions).  Keep throwing darts.

 

 

Edited January 20, 2022 by Stadium-Armory

[Zim489]

42 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Bram brought up something I don't think I've seen discussed here.  (Maybe it has, I haven't read every page, I do have a job...)

 

The Bear's are hiring a new GM and HC.  And the owner said the new pair would be able to do whatever they wanted at QB, they wouldn't HAVE to coach Fields.

 

So, there is a chance the Beas go after Russ or Watson.  I THINK (could be wrong) that Russ had put Chicago on the list of places he would go. That might have changed, or might change depending on who they hire as GM and Coach.  But let's say they hire somebody Russ likes, and he's good with it.   And for this scenario to work, let's say Seattle would prefer just straight draft compensation, and not have Fields as part of the trade.  (I could see why, keep reading.)

Then Fields is available.

 

Personally, I think you can get Fields for #11, straight up, if the Bears want to trade him.  They'd need the pick to send back to Seattle anyway. I could see some type of a 3-team deal, where we send #11 to the Bears for Fields, the Bears send their pick 2nd Round Pick (they don't have a first) + #11 and 2023 first + probably something else (another 2nd, maybe a player, not sure) to Seattle for Wilson.  Seattle ends up with 2 2nds this year, 2 1sts in the next 2 drafts and something else, Chicago gets Wilson, and we get Fields. ** I'm going on the assumption that Wilson basically is worth 3 1sts.  Which I think is what has generally been speculated.  This trade basically gets Seattle to 3 Firsts value. Chicago basically is flipping Fields for a first to include in the trade.  

 

Bram was saying he thought Fields would require more than 1 first.  I totally disagree.  He played "ok" and was a mid-1st round pick last year. And I don't care what Chicago had to do to move up to pick Fields.  That's on them.  I don't see how he would have increased in value.  He didn't play well enough to do that.

 

So.  For the scenario above, what do you think?  Who's interested in Fields for #11 (which would be our part of the deal)?

I’m taking fields for 11. Like right now. 

[London Kev]

Never mind

Edited January 21, 2022 by London Kev

[Skinsinparadise]

Combing different podcasts.  Jay on Standig.  Cooley on Sheehan.

 

Cooley:

 

A.  He's a big Derek Carr guy would do what it takes to get him.

 

B.  He likes Jimmy G but not to the extent that he likes Carr.  He'd even give up a first rounder for him

 

C.  Took a shot at Trubisky, came off like he doesn't think highly of him

 

D.  Would shoot for the moon for a QB, echoed the desperate vibe some of us here have

 

E.  He likes this roster for the most part, thinks a Qb would have plenty of weapons if the weapons get healthy

 

 

Jay

 

A.  He's a big Derek Carr guy.  He'd give the Raiders the farm to get him.  He said Carr carried the team.

 

B.  He came off more reserved than Cooley about Jimmy G.  But he still thinks he'd improve the QB situation of many teams

 

C.  Obsessive about how you need that QB to win in this league

I talked about this in the draft thread, I missed the word "few"

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 21, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Est.1974]

Trubisky is likely heading our way along with a day two QB……or someone falls in the first and we trade back in to get him. That feels like the most realistic scenario to me.

 

Could be underwhelming, I really hope not.

[KDawg]

3 hours ago, UK SKINS FAN 74 said:

Trubisky is likely heading our way along with a day two QB……or someone falls in the first and we trade back in to get him. That feels like the most realistic scenario to me.

 

Could be underwhelming, I really hope not.

That isn’t a “could be” underwhelming scenario. It IS underwhelming.

 

I guess you’re right though. If someone like Willis or Howell fall into the second round and we get them there this plan looks better.

[Est.1974]

35 minutes ago, KDawg said:

That isn’t a “could be” underwhelming scenario. It IS underwhelming.

 

I guess you’re right though. If someone like Willis or Howell fall into the second round and we get them there this plan looks better.

Yep.

 

For anything deemed a better outcome than this I think we need to prepare ourselves to accept that we will have to vastly overpay for that better outcome. Acquisition cost, contract cost. 
 

I really believe it is either pay a massive premium for the best/preferred outcome, or settle for second best. 
 

I do think we are considering the former option. Wonder how far we are willing to go.

[Skinsinparadise]

Football might be the ultimate team sport. Increasingly, only one position matters.

 

Even without covid cases and covid tests and covid protocols and keeping track of close contacts, an NFL season is impossibly complex. Thirty-two teams with 53-man rosters and 16-man practice squads overseen by coaching staffs that are closer to two dozen than one, each personnel decision a matter of public debate. What gets broken down weekly — cover-two or cover-three, empty backfields or jumbo packages, safety blitzes or linebackers in coverage — fills nearly endless hours on talk radio and television.

 

And what we’re left with as the second week of the playoffs approaches are quarterbacks who, according to ESPN’s Total Quarterback Ranking (QBR), are rated first, second, fourth, fifth, sixth, eighth, 11th and 13th in the NFL. Not a bum among ’em.

Put another way: Of the eight remaining quarterbacks, five were taken among the first 10 picks of their drafts, including three with the first overall pick. Put another way: The remaining quarterbacks include the MVPs from the 2017, 2018 and 2020 seasons — and almost certainly the MVP from this season as well.

 

Put another way: Still alive are the leader in completion percentage and yards per attempt (Joe Burrow), the leader in passing yards and touchdown passes (Tom Brady) and the player with the lowest interception percentage, the highest touchdown percentage and the top passer rating (Aaron Rodgers).

 

Put one more way: The NBA might be dismissed as a stars’ league in which the standard way to determine who’ll be the champ is to figure out who has LeBron, KD or Steph. But the NFL has equally specific parameters: To contend deep into the playoffs, you don’t need a Hall of Fame pass rusher or a receiver who runs the 40 in 4.3 seconds. What’s required is elite quarterback play. Turns out the ultimate team sport is distilled to a single position.

 

This analysis is neither head-scratching nor groundbreaking. Yet it is increasingly striking. The AFC championship game will feature either Burrow (first overall selection in the 2020 draft, 2021 leader in completion percentage and yards per attempt) or Ryan Tannehill (eighth overall pick in the 2012 draft, eighth in Total QBR this season) facing either Josh Allen (seventh pick in the 2018 draft, sixth in Total QBR) or Patrick Mahomes (MVP of the 2018 season and of Super Bowl LIV, fifth in Total QBR). The NFC’s version will be either Matthew Stafford (the first overall pick in the 2009 draft) or Tom Brady (the greatest to ever do it) against Rodgers (a three-time MVP who will probably win his fourth after leading the league in Total QBR) or Jimmy Garoppolo — arguably the lone outlier.

 

The composite picture: The resumes sparkle. In six telling statistical categories — completions, yards, completion percentage, touchdown passes, passer rating and Total QBR — the eight remaining quarterbacks rank in the top 10 in the league 33 of a potential 48 times. It’s stark, and it makes all the weekly haranguing during the season about whether Taylor Heinicke or Kyle Allen should start in Washington or whether a healthy Sam Darnold is better than a revived Cam Newton in Carolina seem silly and frivolous. Either you have one of These Guys or you don’t, and your season bristles with potential or is severely limited because of it.

 

...This isn’t just about what makes for team success. It’s what ruins regimes. Of the dozen quarterbacks ranked 20th or lower in Total QBR this season, only one (Pittsburgh’s Ben Roethlisberger) advanced to the playoffs. Five — Denver’s Teddy Bridgewater, the New York Giants’ Daniel Jones, Houston’s Davis Mills, Jacksonville’s Trevor Lawrence and Chicago’s Justin Fields — played for teams that fired their coaches during or after the season. Of the teams with quarterbacks ranked 17th or higher, only one — Minnesota — dumped its coach.

 

Excellent quarterback play makes anything possible. Poor quarterback play costs jobs. Make the right choice at the position and solidify or enhance a legacy. Just ask Andy Reid, who traded up to the 10th slot in the 2017 draft to select Mahomes. Make the wrong choice and check the want ads. Just ask Ryan Pace, the Bears’ general manager who selected Mitchell Trubisky over Mahomes and Deshaun Watson in that same draft. Pace was fired last week.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/01/20/quarterbacks-nfl-playoff-success/

 

Edited January 21, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[JamesMadisonSkins]

It's always fun to put some Twitter fandom content in here. I assume this guy is a poster on here, but you never know. He's always got good insights.

 

 

https://twitter.com/RedskinsCult/status/1484366227162079235?s=20https://twitter.com/RedskinsCult/status/1484366227162079235?s=20

 

Edited January 21, 2022 by JamesMadisonSkins

[skinzplay]

We'd be better off letting Howell start than sign Trubisky. I'm not giving up valuable draft capital or a valuable player for Trubisky. Ever.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

Russ would be fun. I would prioritize Watson because ... he's a lot younger. Russ might only get you another 4-5 good years. But I'll take that at this point. The team is pretty strong around him, and hopefully the price isn't crippling.

 

The reason I lean away from the veteran trade is because it's a double-whammy. You give up draft capital, and salary cap. You deplete your resources to make moves to improve around the QB. I think Ron and Squad have done a decent job of building back the talent of this team, so we really are a QB away from competing. I just want the best of both worlds where we somehow manage to get "the guy" ala Josh Allen, Mahomes, Watson in their respective drafts, WITH a solid foundation in place for them to succeed quickly, AND the draft capital and cap space to continue to fine-tune the roster going forward.

 

BUT, I wouldn't be afraid of Wilson. He'd instantly make us a contender. We'd just need to get judicious with our remaining cap and draft picks.

 

1 minute ago, skinzplay said:

We'd be better off letting Howell start than sign Trubisky. I'm not giving up valuable draft capital or a valuable player for Trubisky. Ever.

 

Trubisky will be a free agent. As will Mariota.

Edited January 21, 2022 by JamesMadisonSkins

[skinzplay]

1 minute ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

Trubisky will be a free agent. As will Mariota.

 

Thanks for the clarification, hoss. Let my QB inclinations get the best of me. Would rather start Howell than sign Trubisky, who would command a slice of the salary cap (relative to his capabilities) we could devote elsewhere.

[Skinsinparadise]

6 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

Russ would be fun. I would prioritize Watson because ... he's a lot younger. Russ might only get you another 4-5 good years. But I'll take that at this point. The team is pretty strong around him, and hopefully the price isn't crippling.

 

 

Cooley-Sheehan-Finlay think they got nothing to lose with going for Watson.  In their mind the organization is already at a low PR wise, it can't get any lower. Some others disagree.  

 

I am closer to the disagree crowd.  the fallout for this organization of all organizations I think will be insane PR wise.    If you delve into the specifics of the lawsuit, there is some wild stuff. 

 

 

 

Edited January 21, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[HigSkin]

Just poking around speculation on Russell Wilson trade values -

 

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-realistic-trade-value-landing-spots-quarterbacks-aaron-rodgers-russell-wilson-derek-carr

 

Terms: Saints send 2022 1st, 2023 1st, 2022 2nd, 2023 3rd
Seattle Seahawks dead money: $26,000,000
New Orleans Saints inherited contract: Two years, $51 million

 

https://sportsnaut.com/seattle-seahawks-rebuild-2022-strategy/

 

 

• Seattle Seahawks trade: Russell Wilson
• Denver Broncos trade: 2022 first-and second-round picks, 2023 first-round pick, 2024 second-round pick, Drew Lock

https://heavy.com/sports/seattle-seahawks/russell-wilson-trade-rumors-declining-value/

 

“’I think it would take at least two ‘ones’ (first-round picks) and a player — maybe three ones,’ an exec speculated. ‘The (Matthew) Stafford trade is pretty informative, but it would be more than that.’”

[JamesMadisonSkins]

Here's my theory on roster-building ...

 

Scenario 1 (Not us):

Your team sucks, you get a high pick, you take and nail your franchise QB. You don't have many assets around the QB but over the course of 2-3 years you build from the ground up and slowly become a contender in Year 3 or 4 of the rookie deal.

 

Scenario 2: Purgatory luck out (ideal)

You've got a solid team but you're stuck in neutral with no real solid options at QB. You don't give up the farm, and are able to move slightly up or stay pat and get a QB that ends up being a "nailed pick." You're immediately a contender by Year 2 because your team is solid and your rookie plays well. You also have the draft assets and salary cap to keep surrounding your rookie with talent to truly become an elite team throughout the player's rookie contract.

 

Scenario 3: Purgatory all-in

You've got a good team, but lack the QB. You go all-in to get the veteran QB, giving up valuable picks out 2 years and lots of cap space. You're positioned to win immediately but the window is shorter, and your ability to fine-tune the roster to be truly "elite" isn't completely eliminated, but your hands are a bit tied because you lack top-end draft capital and salary cap to round out the roster.

 

We are either Scenario 2 or 3. The Scenario 2 is "luck out" because the odds of hitting on a Mahomes/Watson/Allen/Lamar as franchise defining QBs outside the Top 10 is more 30/70 than 70/30. I'd obviously prefer Scenario 3. I think Willis, Corral or Howell COULD be that guy, the chances are certainly less than other years. I'd rather have Fields than Willis. But either way, we're going to likely be Scenario 3, because Ron is going into Year 3, and he doesn't have time to waste and chances to fail.

 

Scenario 2 let's us add a rookie on a cheap contract and have the picks in the future to add top-end talent AND the cap space to bring in high quality free agents. Downside her is you miss on the QB, and you stay in purgatory for longer until you can "luck out" ... For the record, every year has a plyer you can luck out on. This year it was Mac Jones and Davis Mills.

 

Scenario 3 is going to make us a contender day 1 ... but we will lack future draft capital and cap space (this year at least) to make any major moves to "fine tune" the roster to truly make it elite.

8 minutes ago, skinzplay said:

 

Thanks for the clarification, hoss. Let my QB inclinations get the best of me. Would rather start Howell than sign Trubisky, who would command a slice of the salary cap (relative to his capabilities) we could devote elsewhere.

 

That's fair, I figured. I just wanted to make sure you knew we weren't losing the draft capital.

 

FWIW, Trubisky is on a 1 year, $3 milllion deal in Buffalo and Mariota reduced his salary to 1 year, $3.5 million last year in Vegas. They wouldn't eat much much space. Fitz was 1 year, $10 million, and that signing did actually make quite an impact on our bottom line. I don't think that's necessarily the case with Trubisky or Mariota. In the above scenario, I am absolutely getting a Mariota or Trubisky to push to start with Heinicke and a rookie QB because you just can't afford to rely on Heinicke and a Rookie to drive your BMW in hopes that they don't crash it. You need another option in the room, but we'll see how it plays out.

Edited January 21, 2022 by JamesMadisonSkins

[JamesMadisonSkins]

13 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Cooley-Sheehan-Finlay think they got nothing to lose with going for Watson.  In their mind the organization is already at a low PR wise, it can't get any lower. Some others disagree

 

I'm on the fence. I think the short-term PR hit would be worth the long-term impacts BUT, that is only if this legal thing gets settled out. I would hate to trade for Watson only for him to be suspended for a season.

 

From a pure talent perspective, it comes down to price. Watson for our next 3 1st round picks is a no brainer. Watson for our next 3 1st round picks, Montez Sweat and Daron Payne will probably greatly benefit us for the next 10 years, but it will be a really hard pill to swallow and our team will essentially be gutted on the DL and we won't have the picks to neccesarily recoup it.

 

Wilson for #11, #42 and a 2023 1st might be a bit more palpable. I also wonder if Russ starts falling into the Tom Brady category. Wants to be paid because he doesn't want to be disrespected, but has made a lot of $$ already and just wants to win and might cut pay a bit to get it done. His wife is also super rich, so money isn't necessarily an issue (not that it should be an issue for anyone makign $30+m a year anyway haha)

 

Again, beggars can't be choosers. I would love to nail a QB at Pick #11 and build this team in the most successful way possible. But I also know we (and Ron) aren't in a position to be patient.

Edited January 21, 2022 by JamesMadisonSkins

[JamesMadisonSkins]

@HigSkin I think I'd be okay with the Saints scenario. 1&2 this year and 1&3 next year. We might need to get a bit creative from a roster construction standpoint ... like try and trade Payne for a 2nd and 3rd. Idk if we could get a 1st. Re-sign Settle. That way you free up some $$ long-term that would be allocated for Payne on a cheaper deal for Settle, and you recoup some picks to utilize this year to address some holes you might not be able to fill in the off-season.

 

2 years, $51 million remaining is chump change for a QB. I'd imagine you keep his 2022 cap hit around $25m, and an extension bumps up the future years to $35+ million a year, which would be "easily absorbed" because we have lots of space going out 2-3 years (as does everyone, really). But by trading Payne and adding a 2 and 3 ... you still have 2/3/3/4 in this draft to get some cheap talent in the building.

 

"Wilson, as part of the trade to Washington, will get a 5 year $170 million contract extension" ... would probably seem cheap ... but back out the 2 years and $50m remaining and we are essentially adding 3 years @ $40 million per year to bring the next 5 year average to $34m APY

Edited January 21, 2022 by JamesMadisonSkins

[Est.1974]

Anyone trading for Wilson is going to have to rip that 2yr 51mil remaining contract up and give him nearer 4 year 140-160mil range.

[skinzplay]

No to Wilson, too, though I highly doubt he's leaving Seattle anyway.

 

Watson's situation is bonkers. From a PR perspective, it's a nightmare no matter how you shake it. And in the context of a rebrand, it would be tough as hell for the Skins to sign the guy amidst all the unresolved questions. I do, however, recognize an old fashioned shakedown when I see one, so I'm not actually convinced that smoke equals fire in all cases. Let the judicial process play its course. Still don't want him.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

To double-down on my posts about the different QB scenarios that are floating around (from rumors and pure craziness to actual likely things) ... these are also in the order I would prefer to go if I knew Rivera had a full 5 years to play this out.

 

1. Draft Wills/Corral/Howell at #11 to pair with Mariota and Heinicke

2. Trade #11 and a 2023 2nd for Justin Fields

3. Trade 1/1/1 and Payne for Watson (if cleared)

4. Trade 1/3 and 1/3 for Russell Wilson

5. Trade 1/1 for Carr

 

1 = Most risk, but best for team-building

2 = Slightly lesser risk, but still good for long-term team building

3 = Most expensive, but least risky and most impactful long-term

4 = Slightly less expensive, instant contender, but more short-term "window now" move

5 = Lowest upside, but annual playoff contender, not crippled into the future

Edited January 21, 2022 by JamesMadisonSkins

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

I'm sorry but given this team's own history with sexual harrassment and being in the midst of a rebrand, you simply cannot afford to bring in a guy like Watson.

 

If he's the target of a shakedown, it's a shakedown of epic proportion - because there's a whole lot of smoke, spread out amongst a bunch of women from different cities with zero connections to one another.  At bare minimum, this dude has some serious sexual issues he needs professional help for.  Professional help he can't seek at the present time because it presumes some level of guilt.  

 

I get the whole 'Washington PR can't be much worse' angle of it all, but we've got to do better.

[Redskins 2021]

19 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

To double-down on my posts about the different QB scenarios that are floating around (from rumors and pure craziness to actual likely things) ..

 

1. Draft Wills/Corral/Howell at #11 to pair with Mariota and Heinicke

2. Trade #11 and a 2023 2nd for Justin Fields

3. Trade 1/1/1 and Payne for Watson (if cleared)

4. Trade 1/3 and 1/3 for Russell Wilson

5. Trade 1/3 for Carr

 

1 = Most risk, but best for team-building

2 = Slightly lesser risk, but still good for long-term team building

3 = Most expensive, but least risky and most impactful long-term

4 = Slightly less expensive, instant contender, but more short-term "window now" move

5 = Lowest upside, but annual playoff contender, not crippled into the future

Good list 

They will push for 2 first rounders for Carr.

Edited January 21, 2022 by Redskins 2021