Jump to content

Smittymoose

HUDDLER
  • Content Count

    81
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

25 Kinda Meh

About Smittymoose

  • Rank
    Rookie

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hah! I think that guy is a fanboy blogger who is making more of a generic report than is really there. Basically of course they’d “explore” it to see if they can get a good deal, like every team should, but I don’t think they are getting 7 or 8 for a third rounder if QBs are still on the board. It’s not going to happen because the cost will be more than they’re willing to give up for a WR.
  2. But that's the point. Miami could afford to trade up because it spent years trading back and accumulating a surplus of picks. Carolina should get on that train too. Trading down at 8 is a no-brainer if the appropriate value is there.
  3. No you don’t. Lance is a major project. You don’t sink a top 10 pick into him if you think anything of Darnold. If you don’t think anything of Darnold, then you shouldn’t have given up more than a mid-round pick for him.
  4. Why would the Eagles do this when they just traded down from 6 to 12? What has materially changes for them? I think the targets are NE and WFT. Maybe CHI, but I can’t see them trading up to draft a QB. That staff and FO has one year to look good, or the Bears will clean house. NE has the flexibility to move up after their FA spending spree. WFT has the flexibility because they have a really good talent foundation and a coach with a lot of job security. You might extort Denver and get a third out of them if they are really hot on Lance or Fields and want to box out one of these other
  5. More proof that the hero worship of PFF grades is silly. That being said, Hurst and Key have a lot more talent than the end-of-roster scrubs Carolina has signed over the last two weeks. Wouldn’t be mad about claiming either of them off of waivers.
  6. Agreed. Carolina will not get a 2022 first out of Denver to move up one pick, even for a QB. It will take Washington or New England (or Chicago or Pittsburgh, even) making a big move up.
  7. Trading down is the absolute best move if one or more of Fields/Lance are available at 8. Get a pick in the teens, get a first round pick next year, probably get 1-2 additional mid-round picks in 2021 or 2022. You're on point that it gives Carolina the ammo to move up next year if necessary.
  8. It's funny, you don't even understand PFF's business model. Teams are not buying their grades (which are, by the way, completely subjective grades). They're buying their tendency breakdowns and tracking stats because they would take hundreds of man hours per week for the team to put together like the old days. So you can make fun of the hero worship of the public grades that people think are objective when they're really subjective while also appreciating the parts of PFF that make it marketable to NFL and CFB teams. Draft pedigree is practically irrelevant after a guy has been in the lea
  9. Did you start watching football last year? It's the season for draft posturing. Of course they aren't going to say "nah we're good at QB." It only hurts the value of the pick to do so. Doesn't mean they're really planning on drafting one, but they have to signal that they COULD draft one. This is elementary, really. So a bad, non-sense metric is better than simply having a subjective opinion based on decades of watching football? This kind of thinking is what the garbage PFF generation hath wrought. You don't play football on a spreadsheet. By the way, if my post was so poor, you coul
  10. You must trade down. Someone will want to get in front of Denver for a QB. It's really the only move.
  11. 1. What we gave up is essentially the equivalent of a low second round pick for 2021 by pushing those picks into 2022 and giving up a sixth this year. It's cheap-ish for a starting QB, but it's not cheap from a total value standpoint. 2. I'm not assuming that at all. It's just bad asset allocation to give up a high 1st and the equivalent of a low 2nd this year on a position where you can only play one guy, particularly when you can spend that high 1st round pick on another position of need. 3. This is complete speculation, and I honestly have no reason to trust your opinion on this
  12. This is a foolish way of evaluating QB hit rate. Jamarcus Russell started more than half of his career. Would you consider him a hit? He's a "hit" rather than a "miss" under this metric.
  13. No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that it makes no sense to draft a QB at #8 when you just gave up a not insignificant draft haul for one. It's not a choice between drafting a QB and not drafting a QB. It's a choice between drafting a QB and having invested either the 8th overall pick or a 2+4+6 in a backup or having a starting-caliber QB PLUS an impact player at another position. If Darnold is awful, Carolina will be in a position to draft a QB next year. The smart choice is to give him at least a year and give him an impact player at #8 rather than drafting his replacement. It's unrea
  14. You told me that it was "objectively" untrue that QBs are a 50/50 proposition at best. That's 22 QBs. At best, you can say Stafford, Bradford, Newton, Luck, Goff, and maybe Wentz weren't busts with the teams that drafted them. Bradford and Wentz are stretches, and the Rams have already jettisoned Goff in search of an upgrade.
×
×
  • Create New...