What's your offer to Chicago?

[BrisbanePanther]

15 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

If Young ends up being the #1 overall target for Houston, I would shudder to think what that would cost. Keep in mind the Texans stood their ground and got a massive haul from the Browns. I don't imagine that becomes easier with what they have now.

I actually think the Browns trades makes #1 cheaper than normal...still costly, but not unheard-of. Caserio seems to be on the hotseat. He needs players now and currently has #1 and #11. They are not a QB away. He may be the busiest GM leading to the draft, and getting the chance for more potential starters in 2023 may matter to him most. Some mocks have Levis at 1. He could get him at 8, and gain more Day 2 picks.

[Khyber53]

I've come to the point where I'm not trading picks for a college player who may or may not ever develop. I might trade some picks for a proven NFL player during the season when I can see how they are doing.

But man, trading picks away for the chance to get a Vince Young or an aging Russell Wilson... I think wiser teams stick to what they have in the draft and then spend most of their resources looking to pick up the right free agents in the offseason who can fill needs. Fitterer, seems to be getting better at that, especially if you look at our offensive line. 

How about we take some time to build a strong foundation without trading away tomorrow. Too many people are willing to trade for those magic beans...

[*FreeFua*]

8 hours ago, Varking said:

First this year and first and second next year. It’s not that big of a drop. If we make the playoffs and the positioning drops for us we will have to pony up more than that. 

Which has always been my problem with winning this year 

Sneaking into the playoffs is exciting/cool and all but man it’ll cost us come April and no thanks 

[USDepartmentOfSavagery]

3 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

We will need two goalies and Pyotr and Freddie are the best two we have. I love Raanta for what he has done but he is very clearly the 3rd best goalie on the squad.

You gotta roll with your best two guys, IMO. Unless there is some chemistry issue with him.

Availability is your best ability and Freddie is never available. He has also looked very pedestrian when healthy this year. Raanta is probably one of the better backups in the league and honestly does it matter. Our system and defense is a goalies best friend. 

[MHS831]

MHS 101:  Logic by MHS.  A course for people who pretend to be logical or need input from someone pretending to be logical.

You can argue--"I ain't giving up no first rounders for no QB!!!  Does the name Robert Griffindore III ring any bells? Mitchell Trubiskee?" 

However, is that worse than paying a veteran $50 million to come in and stink it up?  I mean, you could argue that Goff has outplayed Stafford.  You could argue that Russell Wilson has crippled the Denver team for a half decade.

Half of the first rounders tend to bust or underperform.  If you really like a QB in this draft, you go get him.  However, my problem is: I really don't like the top 2 QBs in the draft.

I would rather pay Minshew, draft a project like Matt Corral again, and develop players. 

I feel pretty good about the fact that last year, I mocked Brock Purdy to the Panthers a lot in the late rounds.  So I know what I am talking about here.

Herndon in round 2?  I know that he is old, but that means you get a mature QB on a first round contract.  I like the QB from Houston, "Name that" Tune.  I dunno. 

[ncsfinest21]

8 hours ago, cookinbrak said:

Why would Chicago trade their pick? They need a QB.

Justin Fields is coming into his 3rd year and he showed promise. So Im not so sure they will go QB when they need more defensive players.

[kungfoodude]

1 hour ago, BrisbanePanther said:

I actually think the Browns trades makes #1 cheaper than normal...still costly, but not unheard-of. Caserio seems to be on the hotseat. He needs players now and currently has #1 and #11. They are not a QB away. He may be the busiest GM leading to the draft, and getting the chance for more potential starters in 2023 may matter to him most. Some mocks have Levis at 1. He could get him at 8, and gain more Day 2 picks.

Yeah, I mean I hate to break it to you but that is literally not how that works. The Texans just go exactly what they wanted, a clear shot at drafting anyone they want and the draft capital to build around a franchise QB for years to come.

To be honest, it might not only be the wildly expensive to trade up but the most expensive trade up in NFL history.

What they did was very, very, very smart when they were forced to lose their franchise QB. They blew it all up and now sit on a fuging gold mine of drafts picks. It's up to them to build it up but what they did to get there was very smart.

[ncsfinest21]

Ill stand my ground and say draft Max Duggan in the 2nd or 3rd. He is a leader and nothing rattles this guy. He gives me Josh Allen vibes for some reason.

[Varking]

3 minutes ago, ncsfinest21 said:

Justin Fields is coming into his 3rd year and he showed promise. So Im not so sure they will go QB when they need more defensive players.

There is no chance Chicago is going QB. His own head coach called him the franchise a couple weeks ago and players around the league are praising Fields. 

[kungfoodude]

51 minutes ago, Khyber53 said:

I've come to the point where I'm not trading picks for a college player who may or may not ever develop. I might trade some picks for a proven NFL player during the season when I can see how they are doing.

But man, trading picks away for the chance to get a Vince Young or an aging Russell Wilson... I think wiser teams stick to what they have in the draft and then spend most of their resources looking to pick up the right free agents in the offseason who can fill needs. Fitterer, seems to be getting better at that, especially if you look at our offensive line. 

How about we take some time to build a strong foundation without trading away tomorrow. Too many people are willing to trade for those magic beans...

There is no clear successful formula here. Stafford was viewed as an aging player that most thought was a loser. Yet the Rams reached the pinnacle in year one. Wilson was viewed as an elite player that cost a fortune and now looks like his career could be over.

You could trade up to get Pat Mahomes or you could trade up to get an oft injured Trey Lance.

So, the reality is that you just need to be committed to the move and make it. It might work out or it might not. If our FO is committed to trading up to get a QB, do it. If it fails, that sorts itself out because they will be unemployed in as a result.

That's the thing about taking that risk. You could get everything or nothing.

[kungfoodude]

15 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

MHS 101:  Logic by MHS.  A course for people who pretend to be logical or need input from someone pretending to be logical.

You can argue--"I ain't giving up no first rounders for no QB!!!  Does the name Robert Griffindore III ring any bells? Mitchell Trubiskee?" 

However, is that worse than paying a veteran $50 million to come in and stink it up?  I mean, you could argue that Goff has outplayed Stafford.  You could argue that Russell Wilson has crippled the Denver team for a half decade.

Half of the first rounders tend to bust or underperform.  If you really like a QB in this draft, you go get him.  However, my problem is: I really don't like the top 2 QBs in the draft.

I would rather pay Minshew, draft a project like Matt Corral again, and develop players. 

I feel pretty good about the fact that last year, I mocked Brock Purdy to the Panthers a lot in the late rounds.  So I know what I am talking about here.

Herndon in round 2?  I know that he is old, but that means you get a mature QB on a first round contract.  I like the QB from Houston, "Name that" Tune.  I dunno. 

Yeah, the problem with that strategy is that historically it rarely works. You might have some good teams but you won't win it all and you will rarely sustain success.

Doesn't mean we have to go for broke this offseason to get a franchise QB but if you want to keep yourself in purgatory, consistently banking on late round QB's is a really effective way to do it.

What you should do is keep cycling through backup drafted QB's, regardless of the starting QB status. That should happen every 1-3 years. At least that way you take enough cracks to maybe hit a winner and without stressing the talent level on the roster.

[TheMaulClaw]

6 hours ago, CPF4LIFE said:

Yes...we won games with the easiest schedule left in the league and beating teams in a absolute crap division. Its nothing to brag about. 

We won some games lately against teams or are fighting for a wildcard.  Crap on the team all you want.  They definitely tripped up the first 6 games of the year, no doubt about that, but this team is a tale of two cities.

[Shocker]

Trade whatever it takes honestly

[LinvilleGorge]

1 hour ago, kungfoodude said:

There is no clear successful formula here. Stafford was viewed as an aging player that most thought was a loser. Yet the Rams reached the pinnacle in year one. Wilson was viewed as an elite player that cost a fortune and now looks like his career could be over.

You could trade up to get Pat Mahomes or you could trade up to get an oft injured Trey Lance.

So, the reality is that you just need to be committed to the move and make it. It might work out or it might not. If our FO is committed to trading up to get a QB, do it. If it fails, that sorts itself out because they will be unemployed in as a result.

This is pretty much the way I see it. At least it's trying. When you're rummaging around in the NFL's garbage bin trying to find a QB Like we have so far in the Tepper era, we've predictably found what you're mostly likely to find - garbage.