Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Darnold part of the draft day strategy


JawnyBlaze
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, JawnyBlaze said:

I think it’s entirely possible that in addition to hedging our bets with Darnold in case a top four QB doesn’t drop to us, it could also have been a strategy to make teams behind us think we’re not going to draft a QB and therefore have no reason to trade ahead of us. Fitterer’s comment about changing nothing on our board might be next level gamesmanship, causing teams behind us to think that if that’s what Fitterer is saying publicly then his real plan is not to get a QB, making it more likely a QB falls to us. 
 

if that’s the case, then it was a cheap price to pay to increase the likelihood our guy falls to us. If not, it was a cheap price to pay to take a chance on a guy that’s never been put in a situation to succeed and then surround him with talent. 

I think the only QB we draft if he’s there is Trey Lance. But I think Fitterers next level gamesmanship is controlling pick #8.

The Falcons, Lions, Dolphins, Bengals aren’t trading out of their picks. They aren’t going to miss the opportunity to get who they want. That makes pick 8 very very valuable ahead of DEN if a QB is there. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, unicar15 said:

I think the only QB we draft if he’s there is Trey Lance. But I think Fitterers next level gamesmanship is controlling pick #8.

The Falcons, Lions, Dolphins, Bengals aren’t trading out of their picks. They aren’t going to miss the opportunity to get who they want. That makes pick 8 very very valuable ahead of DEN if a QB is there. 

If/when a qb falls and we can finagle a 2nd out of Denver to switch spots then Fit is playing next level chess

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

If/when a qb falls and we can finagle a 2nd out of Denver to switch spots then Fit is playing next level chess

I was thinking more along the lines of pitting DEN and a team like WAS (Hurney) against each other...and getting a lot more than a 2nd. 

  • Pie 3
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, jfra78 said:

We are not taking a QB at 8.  It's over, stop with the dreaming.  It's more likely we use 8 on the best LT or trade back if they can get a good haul.  If a QB is sitting there they will easily get a 1st and 2nd,  making losing next years 2nd an after thought.

In the scenario where a QB has slid to us, why do you think that we would suddenly get a haul that a team in front of us wouldn't?

In most of those "slide" scenarios historically, the draft media turned out to be more hyped on a prospect than the NFL front offices were. That probably means we aren't as likely to get a haul of picks in a trade up for a sliding QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

I like the cut of your jib

Denver has basically three realistic choices (for a team who thinks they’re a Qb away):

1 - Trade up (Falcons or Panthers) - Falcons are going to be way more expensive. I also don’t think they’re taking a QB with Ryan still able to produce. They’re going to go after more weapons bc they think they’re win now mode.

2 - Draft a QB in the second round or late first round. Maybe they trade back.

3 - Trade for Jimmy G (49ers saying they want a 1st which probably means they want at least multiple 2nd round picks. 

 

The Broncos are in a bad spot...I thinkn they’d do do what it takes to get a falling QB..including giving up a 1st next year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

In the scenario where a QB has slid to us, why do you think that we would suddenly get a haul that a team in front of us wouldn't?

In most of those "slide" scenarios historically, the draft media turned out to be more hyped on a prospect than the NFL front offices were. That probably means we aren't as likely to get a haul of picks in a trade up for a sliding QB.

Might be right,  might be the team ahead of us didnt want to trade out.  I am more than happy sticking at 8 and double dipping O Linemen.  I just think there are way more options available to us now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

In the scenario where a QB has slid to us, why do you think that we would suddenly get a haul that a team in front of us wouldn't?

In most of those "slide" scenarios historically, the draft media turned out to be more hyped on a prospect than the NFL front offices were. That probably means we aren't as likely to get a haul of picks in a trade up for a sliding QB.

Maybe the teams in front of us are going to get their guy. If QBs fly off the board 1-3 (which appears they will)...Going to be hard to pass on guys who are the best players in the draft. Chase, Pitts, Sewell to the Falcons, Bengals, Dolphins basically leaves the Lions as the trade out candidate. They really going to pass on Waddle and Slater when OT and WR are their two biggest needs and they just traded for a QB who they want to win now?

If the Panthers are in the same situation the only way I’d want them to trade out at #8 is if they’re getting 1st round picks in 2021 and 2022. Otherwise take Waddle or Slater as BPA. 

Edited by unicar15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, jfra78 said:

Might be right,  might be the team ahead of us didnt want to trade out.  I am more than happy sticking at 8 and double dipping O Linemen.  I just think there are way more options available to us now

I don't think the options have changed, nor do I think that we should abandon a QB prospect if they fall to us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, unicar15 said:

Maybe the teams in front of us are going to get their guy. If QBs fly off the board 1-3 (which appears they will)...Going to be hard to pass on guys who are the best players in the draft. Chase, Pitts, Sewell to the Falcons, Bengals, Dolphins basically leaves the Lions as the trade out candidate. They really going to pass on Waddle and Slater when OT and WR are their two biggest needs and they just traded for a QB who they want to win now?

If the Panthers are in the same situation the only way I’d want them to trade out at #8 is if they’re getting 1st round picks in 2021 and 2022. Otherwise take Waddle or Slater as BPA. 

There are a lot of variables to crunch for these scenarios. If it is a team outside the top 12 trying to trade up into the top 8, there is a reasonable chance the price could get high(potential to miss out on your guy if you trade down that far). However, if it is just a marginal move down(say, 5 from 9) this is a deal that might make sense for both teams and be easier to close. Conversely, you also have the scenarios in which perhaps a top 8 team doesn't really "love" the players left more than the guys they are looking at in the 12-16 range. 

It's very tough to tell what will go down or how likely or unlikely these trade up/down scenarios are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a QB that New England likes is available at 8, any chance that they trade JC Jackson + 15 to move up to 8? We would still get a franchise-caliber starting LT at 15 (Darrisaw/Vera-Tucker) and a stud CB1 that is only 25 years old. 

We would then be able to add another game changing player at 39 and already have our LT and CB1 of the future locked in. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • If we pay Bryce like a franchise QB we're completely and utterly buttfuged.
    • In my view, the realistic expectation for this team to compete will start 2027.  At that time, I think we could be looking at the following (this is HIGHLY speculative):   QB:  You know, Bryce.  I am not a fan, but they don't ask me.  But there is reason for hope--and here it is.  Bryce will be entering his prime.  Since we are likely to pay him, there will be changes that I include throughout this exercise--I realistically speculate on what they are going to do with Bryce and then I realistically speculate on what means in terms of the cap and other positions. Bryce HAS IMPROVED.  The idea is that if you give him more weapons and protection, that will continue.  His career:   At this rate, if his growth continues, by 2027 we should expect nearly 30 TDs and about 12 Interceptions and a Rating of about 98.  His completion percentage should settle at 65-66% or so.  If that happens, you can win with it. The following stats demonstrate how the Panthers will be able to afford it (and re-sign Ickey) My guess is they will require about $60m per year. This is why rookies who can play are important.  It also helps us see the blueprint.  You may disagree, but this is the cruel realities of the salary cap. Robert Hunt:  Cut post June 1 and save $19m.  Who do you replace him with?  Ickey. Tershawn Wharton:  Cutting him saves nearly $15m.  We should all hope to see Aaron Hall (UDFA) make the roster and play well.  Regardless, this is a position we would likely have to address in the next draft. Trevin Moehrig:  Cutting Moehrig as the starting SS saves this team $16.5m.   Ransom will be on year 3 of a cheap rookie deal and should be more than ready to take the reins.  their styles are similar.  Furthermore, FS Wheatley (R, 4th round) will be starting. Taylor Moton:  So much depends on his knee, but I have an idea that he can play another 3 years.  extending him could save the team about $5m per year.  Cutting him outright would save the team about $21m. In the most drastic situation, we have to cut Moton and the other three players mentioned.   We would need (in all likelihood) a starting DT and RT.  It is possible that the DE would be addressed, but Wharton's production (so far) could be equaled by a rookie.  Look for a cut free agent and a 2027 draft pick here.  If you cut Moton, you save $21m, and that would be the only big hole to fill.  Having Ickey at RG gives you some depth at T, and Ickey could be the guy.  T could be pick in the 2027 draft (first round), fwiw.  It saves you $21m while costing you $5m, for example. We get younger, creating a core of Freeling, Hecht, and the RT first rounder in 2027) along with Ekownu (second contract in the $15m range, and Lewis, whose contract would be in the $16m range if not extended.)  The OL cuts (Hunt, Moton) would save $40m.  The OL would get younger and still solid with veterans at G.   By cutting Wharton (no brainer if his play stays the same) and Moehrig (good player--but we have Ransom on a rookie contract who would not be that much of a drop off--if any) in addition to Hunt and Moton, we would save over $70m in cap room. We would be able to give Bryce bag  and we would have enough to re-sign Ickey (if the knee is not too risky) to a Guard contract (probably at a discount, coming off that injury).  Furthermore, we could add a RT in the draft (or a RG if Ickey moves to RT) and that would be the only large hole to fill. Correct my logic if you see issues-- On defense, in addition to the aforementioned, Scott ($2m contract) is out, replaced by a 4th round rookie contract. CB Jackson's contract ($7.8m) expires and he is (possibly) replaced by a rookie contract.  At Edge, patrick Jones II's $10m contract expires and he is likely a reserve, and his role is absorbed by Phillips, Scourton, Princely, and possible an UDFA like Isaiah Smith or a 2027 draft pick.   These productive developmental players over the past 2 drafts will pay huge dividends.  On paper, I see the team getting much younger and possibly better while cutting nearly $100m and reallocating that money to get more production.          
    • If everything played out and that last thing happened, I probably just quit. 
×
×
  • Create New...