On Matt Stafford and the Carolina Panthers

[thefuzz]

13 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

I'm sure they will try to get something out of him before the draft.  My hope is they will eventually cut him so we have the option of signing him off the street.  I would not trade picks for him or Watson.  I do not want to watch another QB end his career because the team didn't (in this case couldn't) build a team around him.  

Do not seek the treasure!

I'm with you...to a certain extent.

I do feel that this particular coaching staff is SO far advanced from RonCo. that with a very good QB, they could scheme around the player deficiencies much better than the previous regime.

That said, I would prefer to draft said QB, but I'm not going to raise holy hell unless the contract that we dished out for Stafford was terrible for the team, or we completely give up the farm for DW.

If we can't do that, I'm fairly open to trade back and collect picks...or try to take Wilson if we can stand pat at 8.  Lance is intriguing, but I'd rather go Stafford if given that choice.

[kungfoodude]

8 minutes ago, AceBoogie said:

History tells you that you need to draft the guy. Stafford shouldn’t be in play at all. Watson would be an outlier 

I would amend that to say "recent history." There are lots of Super Bowl winning QB's that are on other teams than they were drafted by. Not as many in the last 15 years but there is also a certain QB who keeps skewing that number, as well.

Edited January 21, 2021 by kungfoodude

[Raleigh PF]

3 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Even if we did keep both(and we absolutely wouldn't) we would be under $50 mil in 2021 and 2022. 

Remember, all the prorated bonus money for Stafford stays with the Lions. His actual pay would be $20 mil in 2021 and $23 mil in 2022. That's actually less than what we would be paying Teddy.

Okay, that's true, but there is no getting rid of Teddy now. His play last year and the size of his contract means he stays with the Panthers. So, while it's not $53M for the QB position, it's still near $40M, which is still too high if your QB1 isn't named Mahomes, Rodgers, etc.

[Raleigh PF]

7 minutes ago, Panther'sBigD said:

I want Watson, but not for three firsts. We don't have the draft capital to make a trade like that without it hurting us for years to come. We're not a QB away from being a complete team; not even close. 

If we can get Stafford for a reasonable price, I say do it. Rebuild the line through this draft, give them a year to gel with a proven QB under center and if we get to the playoffs, we package future picks together in the 2022 draft and go get Sam Howell or whoever is a good fit. 

Don't think of it as 3 first round picks - it's not.

Think of it this way. The Panthers would use their #8 pick this year on a franchise QB. So, instead of it being Lawrence, Fields, Wilson, etc, change that name to Deshaun Watson. So you've used one of those three picks on the QB. Essentially, the Panthers are giving up TWO future 1st round picks for Watson. 

Now, isn't that easier to swallow?

[thefuzz]

3 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

I would amend that to say "recent history." There are lots of Super Bowl winning QB's that are on other teams than they were drafted by. Not as many in the last 15 years but there is also a certain QB who keeps skewing that number, as well.

Eh....I was going to respond.

Tannehill, Rivers, Brady, Brees, Smith...just this season.

Now, I do think that's an outlier due to the 3 HOF QB's that were still going strong this season...but yes, for long term success, you probably need to draft your guy.

[Car123]

He’s a terrible Decision maker.

[jfra78]

Of course I would rather have Watson, but Stafford is intriguing due to how little it may cost to get him.  We could probably flip Teddy and a third for him.  This would make it easier to contend sooner.  I like Stafford over Fields and Lance. I like Wilson,  but his injuries scare me.  

[ForJimmy]

40 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

He isn't a free agent, he is under contract for the next two seasons. He isn't going to have much of a choice in the hypothetical "Lions move on from Matt Stafford" scenario.

This isn't like the Watson situation.

I get that. I just dint think he fits what we are trying to do. Build long term winning sustainability. He is at the end of his career and we are entering year 2 of rebuild. I’m wanting to draft a young QB, but Watson being 25 and one of the best is obviously tempting. I just don’t think we should trade away any assets for another rental QB.

[bigdog10]

Stafford running Brady’s offense would be insane especially with a healthy CMC. 
 

Draft best defender available at 8. 
 

We sign Stafford, draft offensive linemen in rounds two and three

Instantly a playoff team in the NFC. 

[bLACKpANTHER]

Stafford > Watson (but lose CMC + two 1st Rnd picks)

jus sayin..

[Mr. Scot]

I'm not that big a fan of Stafford, but it is fair to note he wouldn't cost as much to get.

He still might cost too much though. Depends on what the Lions want.

[Sgt Schultz]

28 minutes ago, Panther'sBigD said:

I want Watson, but not for three firsts. We don't have the draft capital to make a trade like that without it hurting us for years to come. We're not a QB away from being a complete team; not even close. 

If we can get Stafford for a reasonable price, I say do it. Rebuild the line through this draft, give them a year to gel with a proven QB under center and if we get to the playoffs, we package future picks together in the 2022 draft and go get Sam Howell or whoever is a good fit. 

Watson is intriguing because of his age (and his ability). He is essentially a first round choice that is proven, so low to no risk.  But, I am with you, if we are going to lose the ability for several years to secure starters to fill our other holes (four on the OL, maybe five, a MLB, some secondary help, a TE, and depending on what happens with Samuel, someone to fill that role), you risk becoming what we were under Rivera where our offense was a QB, maybe one receiver of some merit, and an OL that would have trouble protecting an Abrams tank (save for 2015).

I like Stafford, and believe he would be held in much higher regard if he had landed somewhere that the city did not throw a parade if they simply made the playoffs.  But he has neither the age nor dramatic ability advantage of Watson.  He does not fit in with the "younger, better, longer" philosophy.  He would just extend the QB envelop a bit before we need "the guy."  As ForJimmy said, he is basically a rental whereas Watson is (or better be) the solution. 

Still, at the right price, he might be in play.  Our current QB depth chart should not contain the word "depth."  Stafford may give us the flexibility to not draft a QB in with our first pick (especially if 3 or all of the top 4 are gone), or trade down to fill other holes and pick somebody like Jones, who may or may not become a starter but at least makes your depth chart more than one layer deep.  It really depends on what Rhule and company think about the "big 4" not named Lawrence, and what they think of the available QBs not in the "big 4."

[Kentucky Panther]

My third option as far as who I want for next season. 
 

Watson 

Fields/Wilson 

Stafford 

[Mother Grabber]

I would love stafford in front of Wilson or Lance for a year or two. ideal scenario imo. the youngin can learn the position from a solid vet, and we don't mortgage away our ability to build up the lines.

Edited January 21, 2021 by Mother Grabber