SetfreexX

I'd like to think we look similar to this heading into the season -

• Moore / Anderson / Moore #2 / Rookie with similar skill set to Curtis

Guys like Kirkwood, Bayless, and even this guy I don't buy as ''sure ins'' to make it. More so than anything Kirkwood knew the offense as he was in NO, Bayless & Bryant are slow UDFA's with what seem to be good hands & ball skills. 

Biggest question for them is can they separate consistently and not have to always catch in traffic even though they seem to possess that ability. Micah Simon and the 4.3s speed also has me intrigued. 

Just happened across this, just a guy to keep an eye on likely for culture / camp body, may be an interesting guy to keep up with -- 6'3'' / 205

Confirmed -- Rhule said the 5th year option has NOT been picked up yet, May 3rd is the deadline, that is BIG news!!

Allows them to take a QB, and only have Sam at his cost of 4M ish for just this season if the draft falls our way. 

Gentlemen, are me looking at the makings of a playoff roster....share your thoughts below.

Offense -

QB - Darnold / Walker / Grier / Stevens / TB to TBD

HB - CMC / Bonnafon / Smith / Cannon / Clark the UDFA from the workout

FB - N/A (Maybe the TE Colin Thompson as needed)

WR - DJ Moore / Anderson / David Moore / Kirkwood / Zylstra / Young projects

TE - Arnold / Thomas / Sullivan

OL - Erving / Elflein / Paradis / Miller / Moton -- Key Depth - Little / Daley / Scott

---------------------------------------------

Defense - 

DL - Brown / Gross-Matos / Fox / Roy -- Could see KK return, or a rookie addition

Offball LB - Shaq / Perryman / Carter Jr -- Luvu / Orr / Johnston as depth currently

EDGE - Burns / Reddick / Haynes / Miller  

CB - Jackson / Bouye / Melvin / Pride / ST Oliver III

S - Chinn / Burris / Franklin / Robinson - We have some unknown depth atm (Would not be surprised to see Boston back if the draft doesn't fall our way)

1) Fields or Lance falls to #8 -- take them, Sam is still a huge ''?'' adding a LT doesn't resolve the ''?'' that he is, don't pass on the talent that Fields / Lance possess + up to 5 years of QB play at that low of a cost, even if we exercise / have exercised Darnold's 5th year option, for a future QB needy team he'd be cheap if we had to deal. Then use the 2nd, and possibly the 3rd to trade back and add additional Day 2 & 3 picks. 

(We're in a great position to do that since we are at the top of each round)

2) If Fields or Lance fall to #5 or #6 -- Swap 1sts, and offer the third, and a future late pick; our 2nd is high enough to trade back this year and add a 3rd or early 4th back to keep our pick count at the same for 2021(7 picks)

3) No top tier QB's available -- Take BPA at #8, I'd be fine with using the 2nd round pick as bait to trade back to add an additional Day 2 pick and would use that to draft Mond / Newman, guys we know could use 1-2 seasons to develop. 

I'm not too big a fan of other options, though there are more, these are simply my preference. 

6 minutes ago, therealmjl said:

Yes

 

Will, and HAVE aren't the same. From all I've read its not. They have until after the draft. MAY 3rd Is the deadline. 

1 hour ago, woahfraze said:

I don't have an issue with the Darnold trade itself.  For those of you saying it was Option C or D, well what did you want the man to do once the more preferred options didn't work out?  This was a modest investment of draft capital for a guy they see upside in.  Whether the coaching staff can help him reach his potential is to be seen. But in the context of the trade itself, it's fairly low risk.

Where I have a problem with it is picking up his 5th year option. Why commit to $19MM next year when you have no idea if he'll improve or not?  Why not wait until after next year to sign him to an extension if his play warrants it?  Are they worried that if he improves that they'll have an issue keeping him because the FA QB market is bonkers?  That's the only rationale for executing the 5th year option, but I'd still prefer not to risk that investment when it's more likely than not that Darnold won't prove to be worth that amount of money for next year.

I think the EXPECTATION to pick up the 5th year was floated out there by the media, but I haven't seen it made official, would be in the team's best interest to wait until the deadline May 3rd which is the Monday after the draft. 

This way if we draft a QB we can forgo his option, and if we don't we still have the option to not commit to it. I personally wouldn't commit either way because he's not getting market value money, and if he's gone in FA we sign or look to the draft. I'd rather keep that QB money low until we draft a guy, and just build the best total roster. (See SF / MIA, as recent examples of this) we can be bad until we're in position to get ''OUR" guy. Doesn't matter how much you want to win if you don't have the pieces, we had #3 locked up, we could have rested starters Weeks 16 & 17 -- the team did this to themselves. 

I understand the morale, but we saw PHI secure #6 Week 17 pulling Hurts. We see examples every year, and we also see it not work out so no matter what you do there's opportunity to fail. A lot of it is just getting lucky, see JAX as NYJ fell into enough wins to lose the #1 overall pick. 

TB IMO set up his own exit after the MIN game and blaming a call coming in late as the reason he missed a wide open receiver directly in front of his face. 

Then trying to dive over the pile in GB only to fumble, and the 4th and 9 in the final moments of a game where he just checks it down to a 2 yard drag. 

There's several examples, IMO they bought into the Saints hype, he looked better on a better team, I dunno who was responsible for the money, but if you're paying a guy that much they need to at times be the reason you win; especially at QB. 

He's a game manager with below avg arm talent -- Darnold has the potential to be more with + arm talent, this is a step in the right direction, but I don't think it's viewed as the answer long term either. 

Just watch the presser, TLDR

1) We can draft a QB if one falls that we like

2) We can move up, down, or stay put

This is what Fitterer said yesterday, also OL / DL / CB are points of interest in the draft in general. 

3 minutes ago, BrianS said:

That's nowhere near what it would cost to move to 5.  Just to get close to moving with Cincy, we'd need to offer our 1st and 2nd this year.  Going off strict value we might get a 3rd or 4th back from Cincy, but because other teams will be calling Cincy and because the pick is a QB, in your scenario we'll probably have to offer 1 & 2 and get nothing else or perhaps offer future considerations.

I am not advocating for this scenario.  Just saying that in presenting scenarios we need to be realistic.

8 >>> 5 is not nearly the jump from where SF was (12) to get to #3. We're talking a 9 spot jump versus 3. 

Pick 5 is worth - 1700

Pick 8 is worth - 1400 and our 3rd is worth 225 (1625)

If this required our 4th (68) or 5th (29.4)

Those are throw ins when talking about a QB, and we can make up for some of that via trading back at the top of Rd 2. Realistic enough for you 

(I looked into all of this before when talking about a potential trade to get to 3 or 5 weeks before SF pulled the trigger -- that was the scenario for us that was going to require a future 1st -- IF we did that to jump three spots, that would be overkill, and to be fait given the market it COULD happen, but when talking about the points; the cost isn't large to move up three spots)

https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp

3 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Not until draft night.  The hand-wringing over all 4 QBs being gone is a bit overblown.  It certainly could happen, but I say the odds that either Lance or Fields is still there is higher than both being gone.  That's why we wait.  We know Sam's market and we certainly can trade a 3rd. 

This ^^^ IMO the media is using the availability of QBs to drive media consumption whether it's for clicks, or tv ratings. 

The value teams would have to give up can't be overlooked, we're not the only teams with holes. Each of these teams has a QBs in place with NFL experience / talent. 

Locke on a DEN team that's not decimated by injuries could make a push as a WC team. OAK and LAC still have a ways to go as well the main comp is KC. 

Fitz & Allen in WAS seem like the move this year, doesn't make a ton of sense to trade UP for a guy that will be the 3rd QB. If it was just Allen I could buy this a bit more.

Newton in NE with what they've done could also push for a playoff spot, and given theirs woes in the draft in recent years it makes more sense for them to keep acquiring picks so they have more chances to hit.

Like I said, it all boils down to price, will teams want to pay the cost to move UP for the 4th QB. IF Fields or Lance gets to #5 I could see us trying to jump, swapping firsts and adding our 3rd to move up 3 spots. 

We could easily trade back at the top of Rd 2, swapping 2nd's and adding a 3rd early 4th to keep our total pick count the same depending on the value.  

1 minute ago, 45catfan said:

Yeah, I just mocked this scenario because if 'our QB' is gone at #8, this almost certainly will go down.

You talking about what I posted, or something else?

Need to simply say, I'd rather draft a mid round prospect like Mond over trading for Darnold. He only has the 5th year option left at this point, and that is IMO too high a cost for a player that remains in question. 

If we can't get Fields / Lance at #8 or maybe a trade up to #5 if ATL takes Pitts, I'd like to see us take SeWell or Slater in the 1st, and then look to bring in Mond or Newman on Day 2 with a solidified OL in front of him. 

OL - Sewell or Slater / Elflein / Paradis / Miller / Moton -- Key Reserves -- Erving / Little / Scott 

WR - Moore / Robby / Moore / our depth behind this

TE - Arnold / Thomas

HB - CMC / Draft Pick

QB - Teddy / Mond / Newman

------------------------------------

I think I'd like the potential of this collection of players, especially if we're able to trade back in Rounds 2 & 3 and use the additional picks to make use of taking a QB and extending our depth in other areas. 

Not to mention in this scenario TB is likely the stop gap QB to give the rookie time to get acclimated. 

Yeah ATL >> CAR trade is nigh impossible. One can only hope the asking price is too high. If number 3 got a swap of 1st's, two future firsts, and a 3rd -- you'd have to imagine that the price will be similar. 

The question is will teams want to spend that much on the ''4th best QB''. I think that's what it will boil down to. DEN would make the most sense as they (ATL) could move down to #9 and still acquire a great player, and the cost cost for DEN would be a little less that what it may take for WAS, or NE to jump. 

I also see a trade with an NFC opponent unlikely so WAS seems more of a longshot -- DEN / NE are the teams to watch IMO. 

JAX - Lawrence

NYJ - Wilson

SF via MIA - Fields / Lance / Jones

ATL >> DEN - Fields / Lance / Jones

CIN - 

MIA

DET

CAR

DEN >> ATL

--------------------------------------------------------

In this scenario with four picks before us at #8 several great players could still be available, so no matter what happens we will get a good prospect. UNFORTUNATELY it will likely lead to another year of mediocre QB play, while the roster / coaching seems good enough to keep us out of the top 5. 

Pitts

Chase

SeWell

Parsons

Slater

2 hours ago, davos said:

Not really saying I love him, but if we want to be a potential contender and have a QB to groom (I'm unsure if Lance is a D1 starter), then I'd prefer him over TB.  They may be similar but he's on a rookie contract.  And if he looks good, then we've got a potential stud rookie & very solid 24 y/o with immense value.  I'm looking at this like the Brees/Rivers situation back in the day.

SanDiego didn't trade for a QB though, so you don't make any sense. They simply drafted the replacement. Brees was coming off of a shoulder surgery as well when he was released.

In your scenario you're adding a 3rd QB, and looking to eat dead cap to cut TB and sacrificing a draft pick to get Minshew. Makes 0 sense.

The Minshew love on this board is also blowing my mind, do ya'll not remember us beating JAX in 2019. Minshew was not, and is not impressive, I had a similar run to what Kyle Allen did that year and quickly fizzled out, and has now landed JAX the #1 pick and you guys want to trade away draft capitol to get him when we LITERALLY have a bridge QB already on the roster with a similar skill set to Minshew. 

I just do not get it with this infatuation for JAG. He will be cut before a team trades for him outside of a conditional 6th / 7th. And most teams are smart enough to know he's on the way out, so it's better to wait to sign him as a FA ''if'' a team has interest. 

9 hours ago, Madwolf said:

I like it all except for cutting Teddy and trading for Minshew. You're piling another CAP hit onto the team in Minshew to be a bridge QB.

 

Agreed there is 0 reason to trade for a QB, Teddy's contract has significantly less dead money after this season, and that is the perfect segway to a future starter at the QB position, this season or next. 

I personally am on the fence regarding Mac over Fields or Lance to SF at #3. Considering Shanahan has worked with RGIII (Athlete) and Ryan (Traditional) I can't commit to a QB selection, I just don't think anyone knows. When you think about how much the (SF) runs the ball, having a run threat at QB that can deliver just takes the offense up a tic, so I'm inclined to believe Fields or Lance heads out West. 

I could see ATL passing on a QB considering the financial ramifications of the Ryan re-structure. They essentially locked themselves in for two more years. He's a dead money hit of $65M 21' / 40.5M 22' / 15.6M 23'. Sitting a first round QB a season is one thing, but two years...that's a long time to wait for the investment. I could see them trading back, or selecting Pitts. Pitts with Jones, and Ridley take that passing attack with Ryan and a solid OL to a different level. And when Jones and Ryan are gone you still have two elite offensive weapons for the next QB. 

I do think we will need to trade up, but I believe it will have to be to #5, I do think Lance or Fields will still be there unless someone jumps to #4, and Mac Jones is not the pick at #3. There's a lot to unpack with this draft and just under a month before it all comes to head. 

Not to mention a year off to train, he's listed at 6'1 / 185 that's not a Philly Brown type like someone mentioned. Philly was 5'11 / 175 as a rookie. 

I don't know why people can't be happy with the fact we are looking at unconventional options, and turning over stones. 

2 minutes ago, joemac said:

Who gives a poo what he was "projected" to run?  He ran what he ran.

4 hours ago, Trainwreck said:

Roy should be the NT. Fox will probably be an OLB. 

Nah my friend, Fox is a 3, or a 5 tech on the DL. Burns, and Reddick as the OLB's in an Odd front, Matos has experience in a 2pt stance, then add in Haynes / Miller / Luvu as depth on the edge of the front 7. 

1 minute ago, NYPantherFan said:

Can someone explain why they needed to add voided years to the deal rather than just a 1 year deal?

I do believe it allows them to keep the cap hit for ''this'' season lower. The voidable years allow you to artificially spread out the bonus money.

Another good example is JuJu's contract with PIT, it's set up in similar fashion. 

6 minutes ago, Trainwreck said:

every year it’s the same for Bama. The problem is most Bama guys just don’t pan out in the NFL. 

Their QBs, and DBs tend to fall into that trend, the WR / OL / DL / LB / HB tend to translate over consistently overall -- You could include their S's as well in most cases regarding some NFL success. 

5 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'd have to look back.

He did in his presser before Fit, that 13M was for draft, and post draft / trying camp, in season FA's.

If we draft Fields or Lance, Teddy is likely the opening day starter as the young QBs get acclimated (we don't know how COVID may affect the off-season)

Since I'm not a fan of dead money I wouldn't want to release TB until after this coming season, if a trade can soften the dead money blow, I'd pursue that and sign a veteran back up.