Peon Awesome

The other big point that hasn't been mentioned is that Detroit seems to be all-in on a rebuild which makes them a prime candidate to trade back, even to 19 if the package was good. Why do I think that? Well if they actually cared about being competitive at all sooner rather than later, they would've been better off taking our trade package for Stafford rather than trading with the Rams for 2 future 1sts. Passing on the #8 pick plus an extra pick this year so you can get 2 1sts in future years that will likely be in the late 20s? You don't do that unless you've written off this year and are all in for the future. Hell, Detroit is probably cool with being awful in 2021 and eyeing a top pick in 2022 to take a qb and move on from Goff. Trading premium picks for future picks helps accomplish that and make them more poised to take the leap in 2022 and beyond. So with that in mind, if we really have a much higher grade on either Lance or Fields, giving up a 3rd to ensure your choice makes plenty of sense. Obviously this trade implies as much. Otherwise you stay at 8, don't care if Detroit trades out and take whoever is left. But you have to assume Detroit is going to be aggressively trying to sell 7 especially if any of the top qbs are still available. It's almost inevitable.

It's looking more and more likely that we could have our pick of LT at 8. People are expecting a run of qbs and receivers in front of us. 2 months ago, if someone told you we could draft Sewell without trading away a single pick, who wouldn't have happily taken that? I know everyone wants a qb, but we could have an elite offensive line for the next 5 years minimum with Sewell and Moton. Granted, if we like a qb available at 8, yeah take him and opt for someone like Cosmi or Leatherwood in the 2nd. But if the choice is trade a bunch of picks to move up and take Fields or stay at 8 and take Sewell, I'd probably opt for the latter and figure out a plan B at qb.

I've got a Luxe myself (120) and have been happy with it. Of course I have nothing to compare it to but it gets the job done and it's affordable. Thinking about getting a 2nd one for my guest bathroom.

How was that an option? Trade up with Miami, a team 100% in on drafting a qb last year, for them to move back to 7 and miss out on drafting one of the coveted qbs? Realistically, the Giants were the logical trade up partner. Meanwhile we all enjoy this revisionist history where Tua wasn't the clear, consensus #2 over Herbert. If we trade up to 4, we'd probably be trying to leapfrog Miami to draft Tua and ease him slowly with Teddy while he gets up to speed after his injury. Think about that: giving up prime draft capital to take Teddy lite with even less mobility after his hip fracture. I think we scouted Herbert and would have strongly considered him at 7 if the Chargers had passed,but I don't see a scenario where we would have realistically traded up and drafted him. Not only for the reasons I mentioned but how do you invest a bunch of draft capital to trade up for a qb when you're stuck with Teddy for 2 years? Maybe at 7, but 7 and whatever else it would take? No way.

Now it's possible the 49ers really do love Mac Jones and still possible he turns into a great qb, especially on a loaded 49ers team. But it's hard to think SF decided they needed to move up to 3 to get him especially after Miami proceeds to trade that very pick to Philly to move up to 6 where Mac would almost certainly still be available and not have to lose that 2023 1st. Moving up to 3 for Fields or even Lance on paper makes a lot more sense because neither is guaranteed to be there at 6. But teams do strange things all the time. Sounds like them drafting Jones is mostly educated conjecture so I'm not hanging my hat on it either way.

Wait and see for me. I think his free agency hasn't stood out from what we've seen with Hurney the last couple years. Couple good value signings, a couple head scratchers that seem a bit of an overpay while also letting some contributors leave over fairly low salary amounts. But the draft is where you really build a team so I am reserving judgment until we see how that plays out. Really can't accurately grade things for a couple years.

Wasn't there like a dozen posts before the start of free agency from people whining about how the Panthers never have cap room? Somehow we go on a free agent spending spree, tag Moton and still have among the most cap space in the league.

Solid list. Gotta think we can snag someone of this caliber at a relative bargain to address probably our biggest immediate need. And if we can solidify our team a bit better before the draft, would make me less nervous of trading away picks to move up if necessary, within reason.

I think the argument for Pitts is that you could view and use him effectively like an elite WR and from that standpoint, drafting him in the top 10 isn't unreasonable. My issue with taking him is that we've invested enough in our receiving corps. Between DJ, Anderson, CMC, David Moore, Dan Arnold, we should be ok for the next couple years. You can't really say that confidently for CB, LT and QB, 3 positions of at least equal to higher value than receiver. If you can take a position of need and high value with a player worthy of that spot, you do it. And between Lance, Fields, Sewell, Slater, Farley and Surtain, at least a couple will still be available at 8.

So reflecting on it more, my guess is the team felt at minimum he could come in and be one of our starting guards with the versatility to serve as an injury replacement at tackle if needed. Which if you think about it, is effectively what Dennis Daley is when healthy, for under a million dollars. So very likely an overpay, particularly in a year with a depressed cap and fewer teams with ample space, but at least we're talking 5 million and not a Matt Kalil level contract. If he somehow revives himself on the level of Michael Oher in 2015 then it'll be a great signing but nothing in his play to this point suggests he has that in him.

Main thing I would say is that these moves basically reek of our free agency from last year. High end backup/cheap starter level deals on players a bit below that grade. Recall Schofield, Burris, Whitehead, Weatherly. It's super early of course but between that and restructuring a bunch of contracts, if you didn't know Hurney got fired, could you even tell? I'm all for finding bargains in free agency but we're basically paying these guys to show us more than they have so far and to come across as a successful offseason, several of them will have to. I hope they do.

I was going to suggest exactly this. Makes a lot of sense. From what I recall, he was a disappointment for Minnesota. But even if he underperforms, at worst he becomes a slightly expensive backup on a team with significant injury history on the line or just a straight up sunk cost of $6 million spread over 2 years. But the potential upside of getting a 3 year starter on the offensive line for $4.5 million per year makes it a reasonable roll of the dice.

The Saints have 2 problems: a) they have to make massive cuts to get under the cap, even before factoring in Wilson's salary and b) they have to offer a huge enough package to convince the Seahawks to agree to a trade when they're drafting at the end of each round. All reports suggest this isn't a Watson scenario; Wilson isn't demanding to be traded and the Seahawks aren't going to be eager to dump him without a tremendous haul. So the only scenario involving the Saints that might make sense would be a HUGE assortment of picks and players. Seahawks aren't going to want just a couple late 1sts. They've already shown a propensity to miss when drafting in the late 20s. Bottom line, if the Saints actually pull it off, which seems HIGHLY unlikely, between the cuts they have to make to get under the cap and the picks/players they'll have to give up in a trade, they'll barely look like a full team. I'm not even remotely worried one way or the other.

Again you seem to be completely missing my point. If we have to trade up into the 10-20 range, we absolutely 100% should not trade up for Mac Jones. Apparently my 2 posts where I said if he slides into the 20s we can consider it wasn't clear enough. As far as building the whole O line, you can typically find competent guards as cheap free agents or later round picks. I'm not too worried about that. Finding a LT is the challenge. We have an opportunity to do that at 8 and we shouldn't dismiss that.

My suggestion is less about putting all our eggs in the Jones basket and more about exploiting an opportunity. If Jones slides, you offer a modest trade package to move up. This isn't about doing whatever it takes to move back up and get Jones. This is about getting a potential franchise left tackle on a rookie contract and considering buying low on Mac Jones if and only if the value is there. If the Panthers are all in on Mac Jones, which seems like a mistake, then trading back from 8 probably makes the most sense. But the chances of solving our OL problems are a lot dicier after round 1. And that's a lot more important to me than ensuring we walk away with Jones if the other 4 qbs are gone.

Exactly. I never bought the statement that they would bring in Bridgewater as a backup. They'd have 40+ million tied up in two mediocre qbs when they have more pressing needs like trying to resign Trent Williams. I think they view Garoppolo the way we view Bridgewater: not good enough and not worth the price tag but until they get an alternative on the roster it'll be a bit tough to move on right away. They figure they may as well explore buying low on Teddy, seeing if Shanahan can make something out of him and save some money in the process by jettisoning Garoppolo. But until they're fully ready to get rid of Garoppolo, they have to publicly pretend he's still their qb and they're just looking for backup options.

I think one potential pathway for Jones is to take a top tackle at 8, e.g. Slater, and then hope Jones slides in the 1st round and trade up from our 2nd round pick to take him. Obviously this requires him to slide more than predicted which is the biggest gamble but it hasn't been unheard of for a qb to slide towards the end of the 1st when people had them mocked in the top 10, especially one with those question marks. You might jump up to pick 24 or so if he's there, give up our 2nd, 4th and next year's 2nd maybe. Resign Moton, get an interior lineman on day 3 and the line is looking a lot better. Jones probably doesn't last that long but I think if we're counting on him to turn around this franchise, we have to hope he does or the chances of him fulfilling that don't look as good.

Over the cap uses the same savings razorwolf quoted. The discrepancy seems to hinge on whether the player performance escalator, which makes Thomas base salary so much higher this year, is guaranteed or not. I looked through the language in the CBA and it says that it isn't, so I'm inclined to believe the $2 million in savings. And at that rate, I can definitely see him being a cap casualty. But probably best to wait and see how our tight end situation settles out first unless we really need that money now.

I don't think the situation is as dire as some make it. With the way most teams line up in nickel coverage half the snaps, we may only play 2 linebackers a good portion of the game. If we do keep Shaq, it'll be Carter and Shaq (or Chinn, but then we need another safety). So it comes down to finding a part-time starter and some depth. Throw in Christian Miller who can easily jump in on blitz packages (and hopefully more) and some combination of cheap free agents or mid to late round picks and we're fine. I'd much rather invest more heavily in offensive line and cb

Thanks brothers. You always have the inside scoop

Looks a lot worse for Judon. How insecure and vindictive do you have to be to lash out so juvenilely because someone reported from a source some numbers on a contract offer that were reportedly not true? And the writer responded multiple times to say he would happily update the report with his side of the story. Also, what is in the picture that is anymore damning then him just announcing that he was at the strip club with him? Was he snorting cocaine off a stripper's chest? Otherwise you kind of already played your cards buddy. Anyhow, I think this might keep some teams away from Judon. I mean, a lot of teams probably were going to stay away by his asking price with only 6 sacks but this doesn't help.

Ideally if he can adjust to becoming a 4-3 OLB, we would shore up a weakness and allow Chinn to play as a defensive back full time. I could see him thrive in the role as a the 5th pass rusher in blitz packages. If he can be even semi-competent in coverage and run support, he could force himself into the starting conversation. Lots of ifs but I'm hoping he surprises.

Let's do away with the narrative that there's little chance to find a qb in 2022. Most people agree there are at least a couple college qbs that are on a similar level as Fields or will be after another year like Howell and Rattler. Every year a fringe prospect or 2 launches up draft boards, like Wilson this year or Burrow last. So there's a good chance we'll have another top 3 or 4 on par with this year (minus Lawrence). Now add veterans that teams might move on from or make available for trade: Aaron Rodgers, Carr, Russell Wilson, Kirk Cousins, and even possibly Watson if the team stands firm this year. Possibly others: who thought Watson might be available this time last year. And even if some of those names aren't long-term answers, they could put us in immediate contention with good drafts and free agency and buy us a couple more years to find the long term answer. Don't get me wrong; I'm totally fine with drafting a top qb prospect at 8 if available. Or you could even sell me on trading 8 and a 4th to move up to 6 or 7 to get one. But if neither of those is a realistic option, I'd much rather sit tight, draft Slater or Sewell, cover other critical positions of need like CB and IOL in the 2nd and 3rd and figure out qb later. To me that's much more likely a recipe for success than sacrificing that much for an unknown that will be asked to play behind a patchwork offensive line with limited resources to upgrade.

Both Fitzpatrick and Hopkins were good trades but let's not get carried away by calling them blockbusters. They got Fitzpatrick for a single 1st round pick. Hopkins was had for a 2nd round pick. Your definition of blockbuster seems way skewed. I'll give you Adams as a "blockbuster" perhaps but if we look back in 3 years are we sure we're going to say that was a definite win for Seattle? They gave up 2 1sts and an ok starter for 1 year of Jamal Adams. And in that 1 year they couldn't make it out of the wildcard round after making it to the divisional round the year before. Now if they want to keep him, they're looking to have to pay him $20 million per year on a multiyear deal. Not many winning teams succeed giving that much to a box safety. He might be worth it more than others but it leaves less money for more prominent positions, like the offensive line that's letting Wilson get hammered and may drive him out of Seattle. I have a feeling history is not going to say that was a slam dunk win for the Seahawks. But we'll see.

Because if we trade a bunch of picks this year and miss, we're doing it with the base of a 5-11 team and the future picks we give up will be much higher value with no hope of improving anytime soon. If we invest our picks in players we are confident can contribute at positions of weakness and build a complete team with fewer deficiencies, we can get to the position where we're effectively one piece away from true contention and can afford to sacrifice a few picks. And it doesn't actually have to be draft picks. We can sign a free agent qb or trade for 1. Sure, doing what the chiefs did exactly is not common. But building a complete team and then finding your franchise qb isn't that rare. That's exactly what Tampa did. And seems to be what the Rams are trying this year. And to a less successful extent, what the 49ers did that launched them to a super bowl in 2019 (and what they might end up doing again this offseason). It's honestly incredibly rare to think of teams with a lot of holes giving up valuable draft capital moving up to the top of the draft and ending up happy with the decision when all is said and done. The Redskins with RG3, both the Rams and Eagles happily dumping their qbs (and yeah the Eagles won a super bowl.. with Nick Foles) and the Jets probably not far behind with Darnold.