A Statistical Analysis of Signing Carr vs. Trading for L. Jackson

[OldhamA]

I think for me we went conservative with the Head Coach hire. 

I'm not sure why you'd start gambling now with a trade for Jackson (I doubt he becomes available) or a trade up when the safe bet it is to just sign Derek Carr - and keep him out of New Orleans in the process. 

[top dawg]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

The guy at the top of that food chain prefers the draft and develop route.

Everyone does. He specifically does adhere to the in-on-every-deal philosophy as well (and rightfully so in my book). So...we'll see what happens.

[LinvilleGorge]

11 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

The Packers have stated they won't trade him to an NFC team.

Rodgers isn't an option.

Sure they will. If you're willing to make an idiotically high offer. That's pretty much what they're signalling with that. Don't even call us if you're an NFC team and you're not gonna blow us away with your offer.

[OldhamA]

20 hours ago, Ricky Spanish said:

Jimmy G is also available. I'd put him on the same tier as Carr in terms of play.

In terms of looks though, he's in a league of his own.

The 49ers wouldn't have traded 3 first round picks for Lance if they had Carr.

[GOAT]

1 hour ago, MHS831 said:

So when you see something you disagree with you stop reading?  

Says more about you than me. 

when you read something dumb that doesn't make sense based on facts or information you've viewed with your own eyes, do you continue to read several more paragraphs from that person?

 

[Mr. Scot]

17 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

Packers trading him for the best offer. Rodgers not playing for much longer imo. If he was younger you might have a point.

It would be worth a 2 year run with Rodgers imo.

 

12 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Sure they will. If you're willing to make an idiotically high offer. That's pretty much what they're signalling with that. Don't even call us if you're an NFC team and you're not gonna blow us away with your offer.

In other words, he's not an option.

[LinvilleGorge]

11 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

 

In other words, he's not an option.

I hope not.

[SmokinwithWilly]

36 minutes ago, top dawg said:

You can't poor-mouth your way to a championship. With the ever-increasing cap, you pay today so you can play tomorrow. KC wasn't and isn't crying because they had to pay Mahomes. And somehow they signed some weapons. Burrow will get paid. Herbert will get paid. The devil is always in the details. Jackson will get paid; how much he gets paid is anyone's guess right now. 

But neither KC, Cinci, or LA will have to give up 2-3 1sts plus as many 2nds in addition to that contract. This isn't about just getting a franchise QB. It's about having the ability to build around him.

If Carr wants 40m plus per season, he can walk on by too. If I had to choose if I would rather have LJ, DJ, TMJ, Tremble, Thomas and Chubba OR I could have Carr, DJ, QJ, TMJ, 2 of Mayer/Musgrave/Kincaid, Freeman for an offense, the 2nd option looks much more appealing to me from a talent perspective. 

[SCO96]

20 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

You can't just throw money at it either.

It's more important to be smart than bold.

Just  got a bite to eat on my lunchbreak. I was listening to Cowherd on the way to and from the restaurant. He was talking to Peter Schrager. The latter said that Tyrek made about 30 million this year with the Dolphins. The Chiefs got a #1 and a #2 in addition to the #4, #5, #6 in the 2023  draft.

KC just won the SB and the combined salary for the 5-6 WR's on the roster was $20 million. They also had about 10 rookies on the roster start or make valuable contributions to their roster. You can't pay everyone, so you have to prioritize. NFL rosters are bloated on the top in terms of pay. But you have to have solid contributions from guys lower on the pay scale. A smart from office is able to find those guys in the draft or acquire some overlooked, but 2nd tier guys in FA and stay w/in the salary cap. When you start trading away several high draft picks in several consecutive draft you can't build a solid team from top to bottom. 

You can get away for awhile if you're already a contender. However, bad to mediocre teams need those picks if they want to compete. This why I'd never trade 3 #1's for any player, or multiple picks in multiple drafts to move 5-8 spots in a draft to get the 1st or 2nd pick if my team was at the bottom of the NFL hierarchy. 

[top dawg]

13 minutes ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

But neither KC, Cinci, or LA will have to give up 2-3 1sts plus as many 2nds in addition to that contract. This isn't about just getting a franchise QB. It's about having the ability to build around him.

If Carr wants 40m plus per season, he can walk on by too. If I had to choose if I would rather have LJ, DJ, TMJ, Tremble, Thomas and Chubba OR I could have Carr, DJ, QJ, TMJ, 2 of Mayer/Musgrave/Kincaid, Freeman for an offense, the 2nd option looks much more appealing to me from a talent perspective. 

I think we'll be alright either way. Acquiring Jackson would just be the express route. Like I said, the cap increases every year. We have D.J.  for at least another 3 years. Chuba and TMJ for at least a couple. We can also be smart with draft and free agent acquisition. 

For the record, I'd be surprised if we go the FA route, much less get the top dawg . I do realize that the devil is all in the details however. Whatever our staff decides...

Edited February 16, 2023 by top dawg

[SmokinwithWilly]

12 minutes ago, top dawg said:

I think we'll be alright either way. Acquiring Jackson would just be the express route. Like I said, the cap increases every year. We have D.J.  for at least another 3 years. Chuba and TMJ for at least a couple. We can also be smart with draft and free agent acquisition. 

For the record, I'd be surprised if we go the FA route, much less get the top dawg . I do realize that the devil is all in the details however. Whatever our staff decides...

I'm not gonna lie, 50-60m per year guaranteed for 5-6 years scares the poo out of me for a QB that has missed 25% of the season the past 2 years. 

[SuperBowlBound]

2 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

Two good rules of thumb in football:

1) Pay attention to what smart teams do and learn from their ideas.

2) Pay attention to what dumb teams do and learn from their mistakes

The Ravens are a smart team. If they don't want to pay Jackson the kind of money he's asking for, I'd want to know why.

The Browns and Broncos are dumb teams. They both traded away high draft picks and huge money for someone else's "franchise quarterback" and now are regretting it.

I don't want us to be a dumb team.

Look at the Eagles, they constantly invest in the offensive & defensive lines. They’ve made mistakes in the past but they move on quickly when they make a mistake and don’t double down on them. 

[LinvilleGorge]

30 minutes ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

I'm not gonna lie, 50-60m per year guaranteed for 5-6 years scares the poo out of me for a QB that has missed 25% of the season the past 2 years. 

If Lamar pulls off a deal like that with no agent every NFL agent gonna be like

[top dawg]

2 hours ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

I'm not gonna lie, 50-60m per year guaranteed for 5-6 years scares the poo out of me for a QB that has missed 25% of the season the past 2 years. 

I seriously doubt he gets any more than 50 mil per (maybe a little more, but nowhere near 60), & perhaps it will be less. Jackson's gonna have to come to grips with reality. The market will speak, but I don't think he'll like what it says if it's too over the top.