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!

     

Day of Draft Rumors


Bear Hands
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Basbear said:

I think that's the deal, the Dallas or miamis are sick and tired of the contracts that are 60mill per for a QB that struggle in the playoffs, get a cheaper and better player. (others teams may join)

I'd do the same, there's maybe 4-5 QBs Id give that insane bag to, dak and tua are not there...

Yet they think they deserve it because the market is set.  I think we are in the era where you should draft a QB every 2-3 years if not every year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MHS831 said:

Yet they think they deserve it because the market is set.  I think we are in the era where you should draft a QB every 2-3 years if not every year.

I just would not pay a QB top money unless he's truly top 5. Look at giants, look at what rams did, its the largest problem to have. 

Honestly you have 4 year deal, then the 5th year option, THEN you can tag for 3(I think) years. That's (carry the 2.....add the 1, divide by root of 3)... 8 years of control!!! If its got to the breaking point a massive trade haul too. 

I'd stay drafting one every 5 or so years and not paying the 500 million, Id make Mike brown look like Bernard Arnault....

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

4 AZ plan: -Stay at 4 and take MHJ. -Trade back to 6 with NYG or NE (* see 👆 ) and still take MHJ.

5 LAC plan: -Stay at 5 and take OT Alt (or I’m hearing maybe Latham over Alt?). -Move back to 11 and take OT Latham.

 

6 NYG plan: -Plan A: Want to move up to 3 for Maye. Don’t think NE will agree to move, but that’s what I hear NYG wants most. -Plan B: Odunze. I’m told they’re not gonna risk another OBJ/K. Toney situation.

 

7 TEN plan: -Take OT Alt if he’s still available (which could happen if LAC moved out of 5 and a QB was taken there. -Take OT Latham ***ATL at 8 and CHI at 9 could have multiple offers to trade back when they get on the clock, as teams behind them could be jockeying to move up for one of these guys: QB McCarthy, WR Nabers or Odunze, OT Alt or Latham, and TE Bowers.

 

8 ATL plan: -Take the top DEF player in the draft (EDGE Turner or DT Murphy) -Trade back a few spots and still take best available DEF player (EDGE Turner, DT Murphy or CB Arnold)

 

9 CHI plan: -Trade back and recover picks (only four picks this year). -DT Murphy II or best-available WR/EDGE/OT would be priorities after trade down. -Only caveat; CHI could stick at pick No. 9 if Odunze or Nabers falls.

 

10 NYJ plan: -Best available weapon for Aaron (Nabers, Odunze, Bowers) or LOT protector Aaron (insurance in ‘24 and long-term). -Can’t rule out a slight trade up (for a weapon) or a trade down (probably would wind up with OT at that point).

 

11 MIN plan: -Trade up for Maye -Trade up for JJ (but only if it doesn’t require breaking the bank with draft picks!) *I hear there’s a real cost-analysis going on in Minn… is it better to keep picks and land Penix at 11 or to pay a haul to move up for JJ. Very interesting debate! -Stay home at 11 and hope JJ falls. If not, take Penix. Finally, Saints, Rams, Steelers and Eagles are making a LOT of calls about moving up (NO = OT). And teams I’m hearing have interest in potentially moving up for TE Brock Bowers: -IND -JAX

Edited by Basbear
  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Basbear said:

I just would not pay a QB top money unless he's truly top 5. Look at giants, look at what rams did, its the largest problem to have. 

Honestly you have 4 year deal, then the 5th year option, THEN you can tag for 3(I think) years. That's (carry the 2.....add the 1, divide by root of 3)... 8 years of control!!! If its got to the breaking point a massive trade haul too. 

I'd stay drafting one every 5 or so years and not paying the 500 million, Id make Mike brown look like Bernard Arnault....

My rules (if they mattered):  Don't pay a RB a second contract--pay the QB if top 5 (stealing your phrasing), and scout the hell out of the bottom of the draft.  Hurney once said on WFNZ, "I focus on the first round talent and don't get too involved with the later round picks.  Brandon has been doing that--it is good experience for him (paraphrasing)."  I think he was making an excuse as to why his drafts were good in round 1, not so much later.  However, Marty drafted players that gave him an immediate return (RB, LB, etc).  In the only draft where he was on his own without a coach's input was Fox's lame duck year.  2. Clausen, 3. Lafell, Armanti Edwards, 4. Norwood....

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Basbear said:

 

 

4 AZ plan: -Stay at 4 and take MHJ. -Trade back to 6 with NYG or NE (* see 👆 ) and still take MHJ.

5 LAC plan: -Stay at 5 and take OT Alt (or I’m hearing maybe Latham over Alt?). -Move back to 11 and take OT Latham.

 

6 NYG plan: -Plan A: Want to move up to 3 for Maye. Don’t think NE will agree to move, but that’s what I hear NYG wants most. -Plan B: Odunze. I’m told they’re not gonna risk another OBJ/K. Toney situation.

 

7 TEN plan: -Take OT Alt if he’s still available (which could happen if LAC moved out of 5 and a QB was taken there. -Take OT Latham ***ATL at 8 and CHI at 9 could have multiple offers to trade back when they get on the clock, as teams behind them could be jockeying to move up for one of these guys: QB McCarthy, WR Nabers or Odunze, OT Alt or Latham, and TE Bowers.

 

8 ATL plan: -Take the top DEF player in the draft (EDGE Turner or DT Murphy) -Trade back a few spots and still take best available DEF player (EDGE Turner, DT Murphy or CB Arnold)

 

9 CHI plan: -Trade back and recover picks (only four picks this year). -DT Murphy II or best-available WR/EDGE/OT would be priorities after trade down. -Only caveat; CHI could stick at pick No. 9 if Odunze or Nabers falls.

 

10 NYJ plan: -Best available weapon for Aaron (Nabers, Odunze, Bowers) or LOT protector Aaron (insurance in ‘24 and long-term). -Can’t rule out a slight trade up (for a weapon) or a trade down (probably would wind up with OT at that point).

 

11 MIN plan: -Trade up for Maye -Trade up for JJ (but only if it doesn’t require breaking the bank with draft picks!) *I hear there’s a real cost-analysis going on in Minn… is it better to keep picks and land Penix at 11 or to pay a haul to move up for JJ. Very interesting debate! -Stay home at 11 and hope JJ falls. If not, take Penix. Finally, Saints, Rams, Steelers and Eagles are making a LOT of calls about moving up (NO = OT). And teams I’m hearing have interest in potentially moving up for TE Brock Bowers: -IND -JAX

It feels like besides a bunch of teams reaching for QB's and a few elite receivers, the value doesn't change much from the teens to the late 30's

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a rumor I am starting:  Supposedly, there could be interest in a trade between the two queen cities.  Trey Hendrickson (who could be an interesting fit able to play 3 tech to 7 or 6i tech--best as a 4-3 DE, prolly) and Tee Higgins (WR) have both requested a trade. 

Stay tuned---could be nothing, but it could not be not nothing. 

Taika Waititi Puppies GIF by BuzzFeed

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

    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...