AU-panther

nobody is expecting the comp pic to replace Reddick. You can't look at moves in a vacuum like that. Maybe that 3rd round comp pic turns into a decent starting guard. With that money saved, plus the money saved by not paying Reddick you can then resign some different edge rusher you drafted with an earlier pick. With that being said if you have 5 comp picks in reality only one or 2 might work out, but overtime that is value added. Any quality starter you can get on a rookie contract is money saved that can be spent elsewhere. Go find a list of the teams that historically have the most comp picks and you will find a pretty high correlation to winning, it's not absolute but it is pretty high. Fact is you can't keep all of your good players, at the very least if you do lose one you should try to get something in return, either trade them a year early or get a comp pick.

maybe I expected people to read past the title, but thank you for adding nothing to the topic at hand

ahh, thought maybe he had some issues coming out. I do agree thought that I think some people devalue the off the field issues. When you are using a high draft pick I would think you would want to mitigate risk, especially when there is usually a 2nd option that you have rated fairly closely.

did he have concerns coming into the league?

and the reason i said Burns was our most valuable asset on the team. Outside of actually playing QB, getting to the QB is probably the most sought after skill in the league. He will get paid well. The one thing that might hurt him some is that this draft class is looking pretty good on edge.

because I started the thread, create you own if you want other options. Actually I tend to agree with you and if I had my way I would have him go with Darnold and just start over next year but like i said that isn't looking like it is going to happen. So the point of the thread was what would people prefer out of the options that are looking more likely. So basically if you can't get your way what other option would you like of the ones listed.

let's ignore the fact I listed 6 choices, but next time I'll explain it a little more clearly

I listed 6 choices, sorry if I wasn't more specific for you.

#6 almost feels like the highest upside of all the choices. Maybe you end up with the top QB anyway in the draft, plus an extra lineman. In some ways it feels like the biggest gamble, but by picking up the extra pick you mitigate the risk. If you miss on the QB but hit on the IOL you at least come out of the draft with something. To me, #6 would be very tempting.

Do you really think a coach that is on the hot seat is going to put his future into Sam's hands? Although a lot of us would like that option there is a reason that I specifically said it wasn't an option for this post.

If someone is putting out that we want a 1st, that might mean someone has offered a 2nd. I could see a playoff type of team thinking he could help, someone like the Bills or Packers, Cardinals? I'm sure there are others.

Option 5 seems like the safest route long term.

So what route are you going?

Its not the old way of thinking, its reflected in recent contracts. Positional value matters. An average LT at $8m a year is more valuable then an average C at $8m a year. An good LT at $8m a year is more valuable then an good C at $8m a year. These moves don't happen in a vacuum, you have to understand replacement cost.

I saw a tweet by someone we all appreciate and it got me thinking of what might be our realistic options to address the QB position. Lets assume sticking with Darnold isn't an option. I just don't see Rhule hitching his job to him. How are you hoping we address the QB situation this year. I'll add some specifics to the trades and a few extra choices to the above tweet: 1. Deshaun Watson for at least three 1st round picks? 2. Jimmy G for this years 5th and next years 2nd + LT@6 3. Kenny Pickett at 6, BC at LT, maybe FA guard. 4. Willis at 6, BC at LT, maybe FA guard. 5. FA QB (Mariota, Minshew, Winston, ETC) + LT@6 6. Trade down to around 15, draft QB (Howell, Ridder, or Correl), use newly acquired 2nd round pick on an IOL, and let BC play LT.

people need to stop with this. His contract is bad for us because we have to account for the signing bonus. For the team that trades for him his contract is actually pretty good. $8m for one year? Is that really too much for one of the better offensive weapons in the league. $20m for two years? If they keep him the entire time it works out to $11m a year for 4 years. How much did Robbie get? How much did Ian Thomas get? $11m a year isn't crazy for an offensive weapon that contributes in the passing game.

If you are spending the 6th overall pick you better know if he is scheme dependent or not. I'm not saying he is going to bust, my only point is if I'm picking that high I want all of the boxes checked, great measurables, great production, great attitude. The #6 pick is going to get a 4yr contract for almost $32m, you are tryign to reduce risk as much as possible. Also you have to account for positional value, at almost $8m a year he better a top 10 center from the start or you just lost value. The 11th highest paid center is at $7m a year. Where as $8m a year gets you the 20th highest LT. In a lot of ways drafting the center is riskier because he has to be so much better to justify the cap hit. If you draft a LT at 6, and pay him $8m a year and he is just average it still a good pick. If you draft the center at 6 and pay him $8m a year and he is average its a terrible pick. There is actually less margin of error in picking the LT.

in college he might be going against guys that are within 10-20 pounds of him on a weekly basis, in the NFL it might be 30-40 lbs. That might be the "cutoff" to cause him to be not as productive. and the guy he is going against has technique and skill also. He has great tape, and he might very well turn out to be a great pro. As an evaluator you are gambling on whether the player can transition to a more difficult level. If a player has ideal measurables that reduces the risk somewhat, now there are plenty of players with ideal measurables who fail, and plenty with bad measurables that succeed but here again you are just playing the adds, and when picking in the top-10 I would prefer to have every box checked. Also pretty much every evaluation I have read about him says he is going to be somewhat scheme dependent, do you even know what scheme we are running next year? What if we get a new coach that brings in a new scheme? Do you really want to spend a top 10 pick on a guy that is scheme dependent?

He defientaly went to a good situation for him, but it also exposes some of the weaknesses in the evaluation process. I've saw an article by an evaluator talking about it, scouts got caught up in how he was doing things and some of his faults mechanically and not what the actual results were. They started focusing on things they didn't like, such as throwing across his body or off of his back foot and lost track of what the actual results were.

Great points. For years accuracy was a big deal in evaluating QBs, one of those traits that a lot of people thought you couldn't really improve. Then Josh Allen proves everyone wrong and now everyone is looking for a "toolsy" QB. I really believe Allen helped Lance get drafted high last year and will end up helping Malik. Same with Mahomes, some of his fundamentals were terrible, evaluators dinged him for that, but his sucess helped a guy like Zach Wilson get to drafted. I'm sure Burrow's sucess will play into some team's evaluations of Pickett. Chasing exceptions is a risky proposition.

any team that trades for Burn's will do so based on his ability to get to the QB. We were talking about which player would be more valuable in general, not who got ran on the most. Poll 31 teams, all things being equal which player on our team would be the most desired?

He could turn out great. His college tape is great, but as with any player you are trying to forecast if they can transition that same success to the next level, measureables help you calcualte that risk, same as level of competition. In the top-10 I'm trying to mitigate my risk as much as possilble, I want every box checked. If a player has to become an all time great to be worth a pick it might be too risky of a pick to start with. What if he becomes average? What if the LT you pick becomes average? Which is one is worth more? The LT easily. In some ways the LT is a lot safer pick because he doesn't have to be as good to justify his draft spot and subsequent cap hit. Well said. Your O-line just has to be good enough to allow your offense to be good. Would you prefer Joe Burrow behind our line or Sam Darnold behind Dallas' line?

This ^ Look at free agency every year, always seem to be more quality WRs than edge on the market, and they also tend to go for less. Also look at the recent drafts, succesfful WRs seem to be coming into the league at a greater rate than other positions, not to mention they seem to a position that gets up to speed quicker. Being able to get to the QB might be the most sought after and expensive skill in all of the NFL, outside of playing QB). Good teams will maximize what he does well and minimize what he doesn't. Not to mention D-lineman tend to substitute more than other positions so that alone allows you to specialize somewhat with him. All things being equal Burns is easily our most desirable trade piece. Of course, there might be a single team that has a much greater need at WR but overall it would be Burns. On a side note, all of this talk about us having to pay part of CMC's salary is most likely wrong. Everyone thinks his contract is bad, but for the next team trading for him its not. We have already paid his signing bonus. The most a team would be responsible for is one 1yr at $8.4m, his next year's aren't guaranteed in anyway. If he stays healthy and plays great then they can keep him for 3 more years at around $11m a year which is still not to bad for a premier playmaker, but they don't have to keep his at all. They can just view him as a one year rental for $8.4m Is there a contending type team out there what would pay CMC $8.4m for one year. Some team that thinks they are close to a Super Bowl? The Bills? Washington? How much are we paying Thomas? Robbie?

So Pickett?

Making room for Jimmy G???