Jump to content

NFL Superbowl: Dont Waste My Overtime


Jace, Extat

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

See, I don't know about this.  For starters, the Pats could think JImmy G's a really good QB and may trade Jimmy G for a First round pick and just think about the QB next season etc. 

But also, there is a divide between "Top Ten" QB and "Mediocre or sucks"  Here are the guys I listed above who are outside the Top Ten but also above the "mediocre" levels:  Jameis Winston, Andrew Luck, Kirk Cousins, Marcus Mariotta, and Matt Stafford.  Most teams would be very happy getting a player at or near those levels of quality.  Still not "Top Ten" but better than mediocre. 

But if the Patriots think Jimmy G really is Jameis Winston/Andrew Luck good, they can't let that walk out the door.  That is worth a helluva lot more than just a late first round pick.  He is under contract for this year, so you don't have to do anything, you can play with Brady and have an excellent insurance policy if he gets injured or starts to slip.  Then he's a free agent next year, but they still have the franchise tag to help with negotiations, and if they want to they could franchise him and trade him then.  But if they really believe in him, work out a long term deal next offseason and bite the bullet about paying two quarterbacks for a little while.  It's a bit of a disadvantage, but nowhere near the disadvantage of trying to win with a below average guy. 

I'll admit, my opinion is clouded by the fact that I think Brady having more than two good seasons in him is very unlikely.  He could be done after a few games in 2017.  Or this coming year could be his last season as an elite guy.  Or maybe he'll be great throughout the 2017 and 2018 seasons.  But I'm really skeptical that he will still be an above average quarterback for the 2019 season.  By that time he'll be 42 -hell only a couple of kickers even last that long, and they never get hit. 

So I guess this post has two prognostications in one.  1) Brady is no longer elite or even above average in the 2019 season.  and 2) IF the Patriots trade Jimmy G, he is at best average (Alex Smith good), and probably worse than that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

See, I don't know about this.  For starters, the Pats could think JImmy G's a really good QB and may trade Jimmy G for a First round pick and just think about the QB next season etc. 

But also, there is a divide between "Top Ten" QB and "Mediocre or sucks"  Here are the guys I listed above who are outside the Top Ten but also above the "mediocre" levels:  Jameis Winston, Andrew Luck, Kirk Cousins, Marcus Mariotta, and Matt Stafford.  Most teams would be very happy getting a player at or near those levels of quality.  Still not "Top Ten" but better than mediocre.  

There's maybe 3-4 teams total that wouldn't give up their QB immediately for a shot at Andrew Luck. Not sure why there's any question of him being good. He plays on one of the most talent devoid rosters in football, behind a bottom 10 O-line his entire career, and is still 43-27 as a starter. That's all him!

Granted 2015, when he was battling injuries, he was legitimately bad. But he bounced back last year to his 2014 form. I feel like he'd be good for 50 TDs in the Skins offense. If new-Grigson would rather wing it with Kirk Cousins, all lines are open at Redskin park to discuss a trade. No reasonable offer will be denied. Act now! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 My deal is that the Niners are nowhere near ready to even post a .500 season. They need pieces everywhere. If they did manage to score a good QB he'd likely be languishing behind a mediocre line with no one to throw to. Better off rolling the dice on a longshot in the draft methinks while drafting blue chippers in the early rounds. Say Handsome Jimmy turns out to be a top 20 guy. Where does that put the Niners? 6-10? I'd rather suffer through another absolutely miserable season and have the better draft position for this rebuild.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Jaime L said:

There's maybe 3-4 teams total that wouldn't give up their QB immediately for a shot at Andrew Luck. Not sure why there's any question of him being good. He plays on one of the most talent devoid rosters in football, behind a bottom 10 O-line his entire career, and is still 43-27 as a starter. That's all him!

Granted 2015, when he was battling injuries, he was legitimately bad. But he bounced back last year to his 2014 form. I feel like he'd be good for 50 TDs in the Skins offense. If new-Grigson would rather wing it with Kirk Cousins, all lines are open at Redskin park to discuss a trade. No reasonable offer will be denied. Act now! 

But you're a Colts fan, so you're totally biased! (Wait, for some reason just confused with with Jace.  For the purposes of this post, let's pretend you're Jace and not a dirty Washington fan).

Of course, the people that have no horse in the race, and watch every snap for every player, and who possess a great knowledge of football to bring to that evaluation than almost every (read as every) person in this board grades him as the #2 starting QB of the season, better than paragons of this season Aaron Rodgers or Matt Ryan.  He sure does suck and you're just a homer not-Jace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Rockroi said:

So I think SF will do it, then possibly Cleveland and then Chicago … and if Cinci signs him I want money…. 

rw-

Quote

According to Mary Kay Cabot of the Cleveland Plain Dealer, new Browns QBs coach David Lee likes Tyrod Taylor "a lot" after the two worked together in Buffalo the past two seasons.

Cabot says Lee "would welcome the opportunity to continue working with [Taylor]" if the Browns were to acquire him. Coach Hue Jackson reportedly wants a veteran quarterback for 2017, and Taylor would be a great get for his offense. The Browns have plenty of ammo to swing a trade or make a signing. They have a whopping $105 million in cap space and five top-65 draft picks.

Sounds like Cleveland may go for just signing Tygod and using their plethora of picks on D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Jaime L said:

If new-Grigson would rather wing it with Kirk Cousins, all lines are open at Redskin park to discuss a trade. No reasonable offer will be denied. Act now! 

In my defense, I listed Cousins below Luck.  

Again, I want to point out that my rankings are not meant to be absolute or anything; just to give people a gauge on why certain teams would not trade for Jimmy G.  The "why" is vital.  

 

30 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 My deal is that the Niners are nowhere near ready to even post a .500 season. They need pieces everywhere. If they did manage to score a good QB he'd likely be languishing behind a mediocre line with no one to throw to. Better off rolling the dice on a longshot in the draft methinks while drafting blue chippers in the early rounds. Say Handsome Jimmy turns out to be a top 20 guy. Where does that put the Niners? 6-10? I'd rather suffer through another absolutely miserable season and have the better draft position for this rebuild.

Don't be so certain.  I'm not saying the 49ers don't need help at WR and O-Line, but Shanahan is going to do a few things on that team, they have money to spend and ... it may only cost a second-round pick.  

I could be wrong but I think it could work.  A good Qb can do wonders with decent talent and the right O-coordinator, especially after a year to get used to the system.  

 

13 minutes ago, Week said:

rw-

Sounds like Cleveland may go for just signing Tygod and using their plethora of picks on D.

Or... its counter-info to make the Pats lower their asking price?  If the Pats are pushing for the #12 pick and Cleveland is trying to change the dynamics so they can get Jimmy G for the #33 pick?  Seems like one way to do it is pretend you like Tyrod Taylor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JonSnow4President said:

But you're a Colts fan, so you're totally biased! (Wait, for some reason just confused with with Jace.  For the purposes of this post, let's pretend you're Jace and not a dirty Washington fan).

Of course, the people that have no horse in the race, and watch every snap for every player, and who possess a great knowledge of football to bring to that evaluation than almost every (read as every) person in this board grades him as the #2 starting QB of the season, better than paragons of this season Aaron Rodgers or Matt Ryan.  He sure does suck and you're just a homer not-Jace.

You'd give up Dak for him wouldn't you?

54 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

In my defense, I listed Cousins below Luck.  

Again, I want to point out that my rankings are not meant to be absolute or anything; just to give people a gauge on why certain teams would not trade for Jimmy G.  The "why" is vital.  

Yeah, fair. It was more directed at the comment in your last post "are we sure he's good?" and Kal saying the debate was over between Wilson and Luck.

I actually did think it was over after 2015  when Wilson ascended to another level and Luck was awful. But Luck was the better QB between the two last year. Turns out both have a finite supply of magic in terms of staying healthy behind paper mache offensive lines and once it runs out...they become mere mortals. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 You're assuming Handsome Jimmy is good. I'm not sold.

Again, this is my entire point.  I believe a GM should take the risk because if he IS good the upside is far far far greater than the down side is bad.  I hope that made sense.  

49 minutes ago, Jaime L said:

Yeah, fair. It was more directed at the comment in your last post "are we sure he's good?" and Kal saying the debate was over between Wilson and Luck.

I actually did think it was over after 2015  when Wilson ascended to another level and Luck was awful. But Luck was the better QB between the two last year. Turns out both have a finite supply of magic in terms of staying healthy behind paper mache offensive lines and once it runs out...they become mere mortals. 

The "are we sure he's good" was a very childish joke on my part. 

As far as Luck v. Wilson, I will say that when he is on the field, Luck seems more dangerous.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we have more confidence that Jimmy G will be good than we do for whoever the best QB prospect this year. He's thrown only 90 passes, but that's 90 more than Deshaun Watson. And Jimmy's thrown some good passes-some of them in third and long and for a game winning drive against a very good NFL defense.

We're not sure, but there's some evidence that he could be good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

Again, this is my entire point.  I believe a GM should take the risk because if he IS good the upside is far far far greater than the down side is bad.  I hope that made sense.  

When you're starting from zero as the Niners are, missing on your 1st round draft pick is very bad. Honestly, I wouldn't mind if they trade down for more picks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, White Walker Texas Ranger said:

I think we have more confidence that Jimmy G will be good than we do for whoever the best QB prospect this year. He's thrown only 90 passes, but that's 90 more than Deshaun Watson. And Jimmy's thrown some good passes-some of them in third and long and for a game winning drive against a very good NFL defense.

We're not sure, but there's some evidence that he could be good.

I totally disagree.  I think that the fact that the Patriots ship him out is compelling evidence that he will never be great.  Best case scenario he's pretty good, and he could be a lot worse than that.  He could easily be a slightly less talented Matt Cassell.

A draft pick on the other hand, is always a bit of a crapshoot.  Yes, you do all you can, but some guys get dramatically better and some guys regress.  You evaluate who is most likely to flourish instead of regress, but nobody really knows.  Guys like Brady, Wilson and Prescott were passed over multiple times by every talent evaluator in the league.  When it comes to NFL drafting, there's no substitute for luck. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait - are y'all seriously debating whether or not a Patriots player will do well on another team?

I mean, not just a QB - any Patriots player? Has that, like, ever happened? I suspect there will be like one or two examples of it not being a complete train wreck, but this is Lucy and the football levels of forgetfulness here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

I mean, not just a QB - any Patriots player? Has that, like, ever happened? I suspect there will be like one or two examples of it not being a complete train wreck, but this is Lucy and the football levels of forgetfulness here.

 Yeah, that's also foremost in my mind. If I have a choice I'm not making any deals with Belichick. He seems to almost always come out on top. If he's willing to deal him for a late first, his upside can't be all that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jaime L said:

You'd give up Dak for him wouldn't you?

 

As much as that would hurt (I really like Dak, both as a future player for my team and as the type of person I simply want to root for.  The man turned down going to an early week Kanye West concert to make sure he was good on sleep for f***'s sake! And turned down meeting with potential endorsements so he could go see his family!), from a football standpoint, I would take  Luck over any QB not named Rodgers, Wilson, Brady, or Brees in a heartbeat (and Brady/Brees only because my team has a good supporting cast and he could still win a couple Super Bowls before retiring).  I'd take him over Wilson personally, but it's a more careful evaluation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 Yeah, that's also foremost in my mind. If I have a choice I'm not making any deals with Belichick. He seems to almost always come out on top. If he's willing to deal him for a late first, his upside can't be all that.

That all said - it makes the Goff and Wentz trades look even worse.

Would you trade a 1st round, two 2nds, a 3rd as well as a 1st and a 3rd next year for Jimmy G and a 4th and a 6th? 

Or

Would you trade a 1st round, a 3rd, a 4th as well as 1st next year and a 2nd the year after for Jimmy G and a conditional 5th next year? 

No? Would you for Goff or Wentz?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Week said:

That all said - it makes the Goff and Wentz trades look even worse.

Would you trade a 1st round, two 2nds, a 3rd as well as a 1st and a 3rd next year for Jimmy G and a 4th and a 6th? 

Or

Would you trade a 1st round, a 3rd, a 4th as well as 1st next year and a 2nd the year after for Jimmy G and a conditional 5th next year? 

No? Would you for Goff or Wentz?

No, I thought those were idiotic moves at the time. Trading up to get anything short of a sure thing is a bonehead move. I don't think either of those 2 guys qualified as a sure thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

No, I thought those were idiotic moves at the time. Trading up to get anything short of a sure thing is a bonehead move. I don't think either of those 2 guys qualified as a sure thing.

Agreed.  Which is why I'm terrified of everything with the QB position this year in SF.  Personally, I'm all in favor of taking whoever the team feels is the best available at number 2 and then picking up someone in the third/fourth to see if they can hit lightning in a bottle.  Bring in the corpse of Matt Schaub and roll the dice on getting someone next year in the draft when the class is much deeper.

The team needs entirely too much to be mortgaging the future on a QB just yet.  Build the lines, grab a few skill players with flaws in middle rounds and repeat for the next two years essentially then sell out for a QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Maithanet said:

I totally disagree.  I think that the fact that the Patriots ship him out is compelling evidence that he will never be great.  Best case scenario he's pretty good, and he could be a lot worse than that.

Again, this is my theory- because he's got this great upside, you almost have to trade for him.  Sure, he may suck, but you have about a 50% chance that he's good to very good/  As a GM you have to take that.

I do not believe Garoppolo will be as bad as many of the guys who have been playing QB in the NFL in the "Cutler" zone.   

1 hour ago, Maithanet said:

He could easily be a slightly less talented Matt Cassell.

Hey, lets take it easy, take it easy... lets not say anything that could start something... no need to insult anyone here; we're all just having fun... no need to start yelling out fighting words... 

 

59 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Wait - are y'all seriously debating whether or not a Patriots player will do well on another team?

I mean, not just a QB - any Patriots player? Has that, like, ever happened? I suspect there will be like one or two examples of it not being a complete train wreck, but this is Lucy and the football levels of forgetfulness here.

So, this answer is really complicated because I believe that over the last 15 years the Pats have done great in trades; also, the Pats rarely let a guy go who has extreme upside and I don't think I have ever seen a player "come back to haunt" the Pats.  However, the Pats have absolutely traded players or let players go who ended up being very valuable for the team that got them.  Here a re a few examples:

Matt Cassell: Oh yeah, I went there. Pats traded Cassel and Mike Vrabel to KC for a 2nd round pick.  Cassel went on to lead the Cheifs into the playoffs the following season.  And he played really well in the playoffs... okay that's a total lie, he completed 50% of his passes threw no TDs and 3 picks.  But in the three seasons he played for the Cheifs he git hurt a lot and the one season he did play the whole way he made it to the playoffs.  

Asante Samuel: After dropping the game clinching INT in the 2007 Superbowl, the Pats franchised Samuel and then agreed to let him go on the market.  Samuel was fine, playing for the Eagles and then the Falcons for five more relatively productive seasons.  

Deion Branch: Pats traded Branch for a #1 pick to the Seahawks after the 2006 season.  Branch played for the Seahawks for over four seasons before returning to the Pats in 2010.  While with the Seahawks, Branch played well and the Seahawks made the playoffs twice.  

Brian Hoyer: Hey... the Bears liked him!  

Richard Seymour: the Patriot that Time Forgot, Seymour was a monster for the Pats before getting traded to the Raiders for a #1 pick.  There, Seymour played four more seasons at a pretty high level.  The problem? Well, he did play for the Raiders.  Not his fault the Raiders were a terrible franchise.  

Randal Gay: Had three okay seasons with the Saints after leaving the Pats.  But I confused him with long-time Steeler DB William Gay who has been with the Steelers since 2007 so... that ... that counts, right?  

 

Okay, so no .. nobody should trade with the Pats.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...