2021 Pats: QB Options

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
37,762
We've heard about Watson wanting out, and the speculation being 3 firsts plus, plus.
"Get Up" on ESPN speculated that the Cowboys should trade Prescott for 3 firsts.
I just read a report on NESN.com saying that if the Seahawks were to trade a disgruntled Wilson, they should expect 3 firsts. (His contract seems completely immovable from a Seattle POV from what I can tell, but I'm including him as a data point for trade costs)

So clearly there is a consensus that suggests that a top-five vet QB is worth three first-round picks.

I feel like the Pats would happily give three firsts for any of those guys.
I wouldn't give up 3 #1's for Dak. Watson definitely. Wilson is a tougher call. Great player but he's 33 in November. How well do we think he ages? And can the Pats put together a good enough team around him to make it worth it? I have my doubts on that front.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
12,642
New York City
I wouldn't give up 3 #1's for Dak. Watson definitely. Wilson is a tougher call. Great player but he's 33 in November. How well do we think he ages? And can the Pats put together a good enough team around him to make it worth it? I have my doubts on that front.
_If_ you could work out a lowish contract I'd be one hundred percent on board; I think you'd have a five year window for high quality play and that's a lot more valuable than, for example, Wynn Michel and Harry.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
No team was interested in giving up two firsts when Dak was franchised a year ago. Not a chance a team offers three firsts a year later following a horrific injury.
The Cowboys slapped the exclusive franchise tag on Dak, so other teams couldn’t sign him. I can’t think of another case where the exclusive tag was used, so JJ must have felt there was an unacceptable risk that another team would part with two 1st-rounders for the right to give Dak what JJ wouldn’t. Presumably, any team that did that would’ve been very confident those picks would end up in the 20s.
 

ZMart100

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2008
2,094
Surrounding Watson with a bad team around him gets you to 4-12. Three firsts is a lot and really hinders roster building. This Patriots roster is far away.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
37,762
Surrounding Watson with a bad team around him gets you to 4-12. Three firsts is a lot and really hinders roster building. This Patriots roster is far away.
They literally just went 7-9 with a QB who was throwing IF ground ball practice in games and they likely have guys like Hightower, Cannon, and Chung returning. Where is this 4-12 stuff coming from?

If your head coach is BB and your QB is Deshaun Watson, your baseline is 8-8. The question then becomes how do you get to 10-11 wins to become a serious contender. They also have cap space to make further improvements to the roster.

IMO, if you can get Watson, you do so and ask questions later.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
67,819
Oregon
They literally just went 7-9 with a QB who was throwing IF ground ball practice in games and they likely have guys like Hightower, Cannon, and Chung returning. Where is this 4-12 stuff coming from?

If your head coach is BB and your QB is Deshaun Watson, your baseline is 8-8. The question then becomes how do you get to 10-11 wins to become a serious contender. They also have cap space to make further improvements to the roster.

IMO, if you can get Watson, you do so and ask questions later.
Bingo
Hunter Henry is already on record that he wants to play for a team with a good quarterback situation. Watson would give the Patriots that, which immediately would make it a more likely destination for receivers.
They're a long way from 4-12 nonsense ... although this is a critical offseason
 

cournoyer

lurker
Dec 11, 2012
179
Enfield, Connecticut
They literally just went 7-9 with a QB who was throwing IF ground ball practice in games and they likely have guys like Hightower, Cannon, and Chung returning. Where is this 4-12 stuff coming from?

If your head coach is BB and your QB is Deshaun Watson, your baseline is 8-8. The question then becomes how do you get to 10-11 wins to become a serious contender. They also have cap space to make further improvements to the roster.

IMO, if you can get Watson, you do so and ask questions later.
Reasonable to think he is referring to this year's Houston Texans. Even though they were battling some coaching turnover, I think ZMart's point is valid. Let's worry about fixing some of the holes on this roster first before we trade three first round picks. Watson is an interesting example and I might be persuaded, but no way do I do that for Dak and Russ.
 

ZMart100

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2008
2,094
Yeah I meant where Watson alone gets a team, Houston. This is a very thin Pats roster. Just a QB isn't enough. The strength of the team, the secondary, is ageing. The lines are not good (a lot of FA on O we shouldn't use to evaluate the line moving forward). Skill players on offense are pedestrian at best. I'd say 20ish middle class or better NFL players are needed before this roster is just a QB away from contention.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
37,762
Reasonable to think he is referring to this year's Houston Texans. Even though they were battling some coaching turnover, I think ZMart's point is valid. Let's worry about fixing some of the holes on this roster first before we trade three first round picks. Watson is an interesting example and I might be persuaded, but no way do I do that for Dak and Russ.
And where is the QB coming from? This plan sounds great in concept but what happens when, as someone above posted, those first round picks turn into Wynn, Harry, and Michel? With Watson, you know you're getting a stud. I would absolutely lock that in for 3 #1's. Quite frankly, it would likely take more.
 

RG33

Potty Mouth
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2005
4,549
CA
And where is the QB coming from? This plan sounds great in concept but what happens when, as someone above posted, those first round picks turn into Wynn, Harry, and Michel? With Watson, you know you're getting a stud. I would absolutely lock that in for 3 #1's. Quite frankly, it would likely take more.
Yeah, I don’t get all of the angst at giving up 3 #1 picks for Watson. The reality is that with Belichick this team will be reasonably competitive anyways — so giving up #15-30 picks in the NFL is somewhat of a crapshoot. Getting a top 5 QB on a good contract who is 25 years old is once in a generation type stuff. You don’t do it for everyone, but you do it for “Michael Jordan” in my opinion.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
19,595
Yeah I meant where Watson alone gets a team, Houston. This is a very thin Pats roster. Just a QB isn't enough. The strength of the team, the secondary, is ageing. The lines are not good (a lot of FA on O we shouldn't use to evaluate the line moving forward). Skill players on offense are pedestrian at best. I'd say 20ish middle class or better NFL players are needed before this roster is just a QB away from contention.
I mean, if you can turn 3 1sts into an elite QB on what would become a slightly under market deal, that's a great way to be able to afford the other players.

There is literally no strategy for building a team in the NFL more effective than having an elite QB on a reasonable contract, it's how the Patriots built for years, it wasn't their brilliant use of 1sts, it was having Tom Brady at a reasonable cap number year after year.

The Patriots team is not bad at all given the combination of cap space and players. They have a good O-line, and an excellent secondary, (whether to keep, or in the case of the secondary to trade) they have a ton of cap space relative to the league in a season that should have a lot of cap related cuts.

You are wildly over-pessimistic about the Patriots' roster options. HOU won't trade us Watson for three 1sts, but if they would Bill would rightly jump all over it and we'd have a team that slots into the contender mix by opening day.
 

Mooch

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
2,064
Yeah, I don’t get all of the angst at giving up 3 #1 picks for Watson. The reality is that with Belichick this team will be reasonably competitive anyways — so giving up #15-30 picks in the NFL is somewhat of a crapshoot. Getting a top 5 QB on a good contract who is 25 years old is once in a generation type stuff. You don’t do it for everyone, but you do it for “Michael Jordan” in my opinion.
I'm with you there. Watson is the one guy who you empty the bank for in terms of picks.

The whole "Houston was bad with him" thing is ridiculous: They were FIRST in the league in Net Passing Yards per attempt but dead last in yards per rush allowed and turnovers created. Watson wasn't on the field enough to win games. Simple as that.
 

cournoyer

lurker
Dec 11, 2012
179
Enfield, Connecticut
And where is the QB coming from? This plan sounds great in concept but what happens when, as someone above posted, those first round picks turn into Wynn, Harry, and Michel? With Watson, you know you're getting a stud. I would absolutely lock that in for 3 #1's. Quite frankly, it would likely take more.
So I know this probably isn't a favorable answer here but the more and more I think about it and read through these threads, I'm starting to think that this is not the year that the Patriots find the next great New England quarterback. None of the free agent quarterbacks are worth getting excited about, and I really don't see Bill getting crazy and trading for that fourth pick. Trading anything for Mariota feels like a mistake because he's not that great, and Jimmy G is way too overpaid. I know the Patriots have the cap room but they should still spend it wisely. The 15th pick isn't that enticing to a lot of teams, mainly because there are multiple teams ahead of them that could make a move.

With regards to Watson, I don't disagree that he could be worth that much to a team. There are plenty of teams that would be interested in Watson, and I don't know if I want this Patriots team as it's currently assembled to be the top bidder if the bidding goes crazy. We can always play the "what if 1st round pick turns into x, y, and z?". Sometimes they pan out, sometimes they don't and I think we all know that. My personal opinion is that they are not ready to make that leap, and would be better suited to wait it out. If they aren't crazy about the options at 15, I wouldn't even be opposed to them trading down in this draft. It's reportedly pretty deep at the skill positions, and they are well positioned to reload the roster. I'm not convinced Hightower/Chung/Cannon are coming back and being legitimate healthy starters for this team, nevermind real contributers. Now I know I'm rambling, back to lurking haha

Edit- Long story short, I don't know where the QB is coming from. Feels like a Cam/draft pick/Stidham year to me.
 

Phil Plantier

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Mar 7, 2002
2,881
With regards to Watson, I don't disagree that he could be worth that much to a team. There are plenty of teams that would be interested in Watson, and I don't know if I want this Patriots team as it's currently assembled to be the top bidder if the bidding goes crazy. We can always play the "what if 1st round pick turns into x, y, and z?". Sometimes they pan out, sometimes they don't and I think we all know that. My personal opinion is that they are not ready to make that leap, and would be better suited to wait it out. If they aren't crazy about the options at 15, I wouldn't even be opposed to them trading down in this draft. It's reportedly pretty deep at the skill positions, and they are well positioned to reload the roster. I'm not convinced Hightower/Chung/Cannon are coming back and being legitimate healthy starters for this team, nevermind real contributers. Now I know I'm rambling, back to lurking haha

Edit- Long story short, I don't know where the QB is coming from. Feels like a Cam/draft pick/Stidham year to me.
I would pay an unreasonable price for Watson. I think the problem is that the Patriots offer would have to be clearly better than any other team's, because of the media shitshow that would ensue and the antipathy Easterby (thinks Pats are ratting him out to SI) feels towards NE.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,149
Mansfield MA
The Patriots, at pick 15, can't realistically win a bidding war because they don't have a QB to offer in return. It's really not even worth speculating whether you would trade 3 firsts for Watson; it's not an option.

The Patriots team is not bad at all given the combination of cap space and players. They have a good O-line, and an excellent secondary, (whether to keep, or in the case of the secondary to trade) they have a ton of cap space relative to the league in a season that should have a lot of cap related cuts.
They had a good OL and excellent secondary last year; we'll see when it comes to the future. Thuney, Andrews, and Eluemunor are all FAs. The core secondary players (DMac, Gilmore, and Chung) are all old, J.C. Jackson is a RFA. Gilmore might demand a trade. The OL and secondary could look at lot different in 2021 and unrecognizable in 2022.

Last year was the first year of a rebuild. They fixed the cap. That's nice. They still have a major talent problem. They have FIVE veteran players under contract past 2021: Cannon, Mason, Jonathan Jones, Chung, and Joe Cardona. That's it.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
19,595
The Patriots, at pick 15, can't realistically win a bidding war because they don't have a QB to offer in return. It's really not even worth speculating whether you would trade 3 firsts for Watson; it's not an option.


They had a good OL and excellent secondary last year; we'll see when it comes to the future. Thuney, Andrews, and Eluemunor are all FAs. The core secondary players (DMac, Gilmore, and Chung) are all old, J.C. Jackson is a RFA. Gilmore might demand a trade. The OL and secondary could look at lot different in 2021 and unrecognizable in 2022.

Last year was the first year of a rebuild. They fixed the cap. That's nice. They still have a major talent problem. They have FIVE veteran players under contract past 2021: Cannon, Mason, Jonathan Jones, Chung, and Joe Cardona. That's it.
I mean sure... they also have a ton of cap space. You would much rather have minimal commitments and tons of cap space in the best buyer's market in years than the opposite. Gilmore and Jackson possibly could go, but they would bring back value. The point is the Patriots are in a really strong position to build around a top QB if they could acquire one. Without one... well they can still build pretty well, but the finished product will be much lower ceiling.

I do agree the Patriots couldn't get Watson for three 1sts, but the point was that if they could they should do it in a heartbeat and are well set up to build a contender around Watson quickly.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,149
Mansfield MA
I mean sure... they also have a ton of cap space. You would much rather have minimal commitments and tons of cap space in the best buyer's market in years than the opposite. Gilmore and Jackson possibly could go, but they would bring back value. The point is the Patriots are in a really strong position to build around a top QB if they could acquire one. Without one... well they can still build pretty well, but the finished product will be much lower ceiling.
I don't agree that they are in a strong position to build around a top QB. They are bottom-10 in the NFL in young talent and maybe bottom-five. Yes, they have cap space. I don't think the market is going to be as promising as you and many others do; I expect there will be a lot of bargains / value in one year deals, but the high-ticket / prime age free agents aren't going to be discounted much at all (teams can backload deals with limited Y1 hits). That will let the Patriots assemble some pieces for 2021, but I don't think it addresses the fundamental lack of core players / young talent.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
12,642
New York City
I don't agree that they are in a strong position to build around a top QB. They are bottom-10 in the NFL in young talent and maybe bottom-five. Yes, they have cap space. I don't think the market is going to be as promising as you and many others do; I expect there will be a lot of bargains / value in one year deals, but the high-ticket / prime age free agents aren't going to be discounted much at all (teams can backload deals with limited Y1 hits). That will let the Patriots assemble some pieces for 2021, but I don't think it addresses the fundamental lack of core players / young talent.
I agree with this although I will quibble on the young talent question simply because young talent changes so much so quickly--I view young talent as players in years 1-4 (I'll give you first round picks on option years) and we don't know a quarter of those players pre-draft, and like every team there are still a lot of questions about last year's rookies and there's still some hope that that crew has more ability than we've seen so far. But the pats absolutely need to nail a couple of years worth of player acquestions to get back to being a 10-6 or better, AFC contender again.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
12,152
If I were Bill, I call Caserio and say "I'll give you four assets for Watson. They can be draft picks, any round, any year, or players on the current roster. Or any combination thereof."
I think you make that call, get the story leaked, and hope that Watson gets intrigued by the idea of playing for the Patriots and forces their hand.

Maybe he wants to go somewhere else and there’s nothing you can do, but make the call.
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Staff member
Dope
Gold Supporter
Apr 9, 2007
12,025
Washington
I think BB is probably better at the personnel game if he can find his QB first. He built great teams around Brady without always following the same template. Sure, he made lots of compromises, and ones that Brady didn't always appreciate, but using his QB's strength and weaknesses to figure out where to assume risk for the team is right in his wheelhouse.

I know he could do that with Watson or Wilson, but I don't think he has much of a chance to get them. I think he could probably do it with Prescott or Carr. Maybe better chance to acquire them.
 
Last edited:

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,149
Mansfield MA
I agree with this although I will quibble on the young talent question simply because young talent changes so much so quickly--I view young talent as players in years 1-4 (I'll give you first round picks on option years) and we don't know a quarter of those players pre-draft, and like every team there are still a lot of questions about last year's rookies and there's still some hope that that crew has more ability than we've seen so far. But the pats absolutely need to nail a couple of years worth of player acquestions to get back to being a 10-6 or better, AFC contender again.
That's fair - young talent can change pretty fast. But the two classes we do know about, the 2018 and 2019 classes, look pretty bad so far.

The issue extends beyond that, too. This team has little second contract talent. You go through the 2015, 2016, 2017 draft classes, those are the guys who should be in their primes or just past. Only two players got extensions from those classes, and one is a long snapper (Mason is the other; Thuney and Wise still could get extensions. Fair to mention that Jonathan Jones, while undrafted, also got an extension, and Adam Butler could as well). The D was very good in 2018 when you had a bunch of key guys (Gilmore, Guy, Hightower) who were 28; those guys are 30 now. Flowers, Van Noy, and Harmon were key players that were gone. Younger guys who were part of that team like Malcom Brown and Danny Shelton didn't live up to what was invested in them, didn't get extensions and are gone. They didn't maintain the D, too many guys left, and they either didn't replace them or the replacements weren't good.

This isn't a "Belichick sucks" rant or anything; I think he's still a great GM and I'm glad he's calling the shots. I think they just hit an inflection point like they had with the D around 2010 when their good guys got old and they had to rebuild; unfortunately, they hit that inflection point on both sides of the ball at the same time. It's not a trivial turnaround.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
12,642
New York City
That's fair - young talent can change pretty fast. But the two classes we do know about, the 2018 and 2019 classes, look pretty bad so far.

The issue extends beyond that, too. This team has little second contract talent. You go through the 2015, 2016, 2017 draft classes, those are the guys who should be in their primes or just past. Only two players got extensions from those classes, and one is a long snapper (Mason is the other; Thuney and Wise still could get extensions. Fair to mention that Jonathan Jones, while undrafted, also got an extension, and Adam Butler could as well). The D was very good in 2018 when you had a bunch of key guys (Gilmore, Guy, Hightower) who were 28; those guys are 30 now. Flowers, Van Noy, and Harmon were key players that were gone. Younger guys who were part of that team like Malcom Brown and Danny Shelton didn't live up to what was invested in them, didn't get extensions and are gone. They didn't maintain the D, too many guys left, and they either didn't replace them or the replacements weren't good.

This isn't a "Belichick sucks" rant or anything; I think he's still a great GM and I'm glad he's calling the shots. I think they just hit an inflection point like they had with the D around 2010 when their good guys got old and they had to rebuild; unfortunately, they hit that inflection point on both sides of the ball at the same time. It's not a trivial turnaround.
Agreed with all of this. They’re not good and they need to do a lot of good things to get good again.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
A few years ago, I looked at player turnover year on year. It seemed to run about 1/3 of the 53-man roster changed each year. The challenge for Bill this year will be that many of those 17 new players have to be key starters, likely 4-5 on each side of the ball, plus 2-3 key rotation guys (ie 3rd down back, designated edge rusher, etc).
 

koufax32

He'll cry if he wants to...
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2006
7,617
Duval
A few years ago, I looked at player turnover year on year. It seemed to run about 1/3 of the 53-man roster changed each year. The challenge for Bill this year will be that many of those 17 new players have to be key starters, likely 4-5 on each side of the ball, plus 2-3 key rotation guys (ie 3rd down back, designated edge rusher, etc).
Not as big of a challenge with all that cap space and the BB method of having a deep middle class instead of the old Colts top heavy approach.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
67,819
Oregon
Reiss resets the table, makes a budgetary case that Mariotta

The Raiders face a salary-cap crunch, they need to improve their defense, and Mariota ($10.625 million base salary) might be a backup-QB luxury Las Vegas cannot afford. Thus, if they can land a mid-to-late-round draft pick for Mariota, they might be motivated sellers for a player who could also be in jeopardy of being released.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,660
Santa Monica, CA
Forget trading for Jimmy G.

The Niners can cut Jimmy G and save $27M from their cap. Would any team in the NFL pay him that much if he were a FA right now? I have to imagine no, and also wonder if they cut him loose soon and use a chunk of that $27M to solve other problems on their roster.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Forget trading for Jimmy G.

The Niners can cut Jimmy G and save $27M from their cap. Would any team in the NFL pay him that much if he were a FA right now? I have to imagine no, and also wonder if they cut him loose soon and use a chunk of that $27M to solve other problems on their roster.
I feel like this same bit could also be said for Mariota, Teddy B (conceivably, post-draft), and a few others.

If I am BB, the only QB I trade for is one of the big-3 (Watson, Wilson, Prescott) and I'm not even sure the latter two are on the table.

Otherwise, I keep all my picks, and wait to sign a vet QB who gets cut.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
19,595
I feel like this same bit could also be said for Mariota, Teddy B (conceivably, post-draft), and a few others.

If I am BB, the only QB I trade for is one of the big-3 (Watson, Wilson, Prescott) and I'm not even sure the latter two are on the table.

Otherwise, I keep all my picks, and wait to sign a vet QB who gets cut.
Honestly yeah. If I'm worried about guys not signing without a QB (I don't totally buy it) I just offer Cam a new deal with the knowledge he's well liked on the team and in the league, and he'll be cheap enough that if I get the opportunity to sign or draft someone else he can be a useful enough backup.
 

EL Jeffe

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 30, 2006
957
Forget trading for Jimmy G.

The Niners can cut Jimmy G and save $27M from their cap. Would any team in the NFL pay him that much if he were a FA right now? I have to imagine no, and also wonder if they cut him loose soon and use a chunk of that $27M to solve other problems on their roster.
NE would almost certainly pay him $27M if he were a FA right now. WFT and Carolina both have the cap room to absorb that figure, and the need as well; I'd think they both would be interested in him too.
 

FL4WL3SS

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
12,164
Andy Brickley's potty mouth
NE would almost certainly pay him $27M if he were a FA right now. WFT and Carolina both have the cap room to absorb that figure, and the need as well; I'd think they both would be interested in him too.
He's not worth $27M. He's an injury prone player that has been inconsistent. Just look at Cam last year, if Jimmy gets released, I don't expect him to get close to $27M. He'll get a $10M prove it deal with incentives.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,149
Mansfield MA
I feel like this same bit could also be said for Mariota, Teddy B (conceivably, post-draft), and a few others.

If I am BB, the only QB I trade for is one of the big-3 (Watson, Wilson, Prescott) and I'm not even sure the latter two are on the table.

Otherwise, I keep all my picks, and wait to sign a vet QB who gets cut.
This probably makes sense. I don't think there's a big market for these guys. Like SF and CAR are only going to make Garoppolo / Bridgewater available if they get someone better (i.e., Watson, Dak, or maybe one of the rookies). They're not gonna cut Jimmy to go sign Mariota or Trubisky. The only teams that are likely looking for a starting QB in this tax bracket are the Patriots, Washington, and maybe Chicago (even then - is Mariota an upgrade on Foles?). Pittsburgh looks like they're bringing back Ben. Then these guys will have opportunities to sign with a team that has a shaky young starter (Denver, Miami, Giants), but they won't start day one.

NE would almost certainly pay him $27M if he were a FA right now. WFT and Carolina both have the cap room to absorb that figure, and the need as well; I'd think they both would be interested in him too.
It doesn't make sense for Carolina. He's probably a lateral move from Bridgewater and they have to eat $20 MM in dead money to cut Bridgewater ($10 MM if they trade him). WFT is a possibility.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
67,819
Oregon
NE would almost certainly pay him $27M if he were a FA right now. WFT and Carolina both have the cap room to absorb that figure, and the need as well; I'd think they both would be interested in him too.
Right, and that's when this becomes a game of musical chairs, crossed with a game of chicken. On both sides, really -- do teams wait out any of these types of quarterbacks, or do they strike quickly? Do the quarterbacks take the first good deal, or wait to see if what they see as a better fit comes calling?

If neither Watson or Wilson is dealt, we pretty much know the teams in the market for this level of QBs. This list doesn't count the Jets and Jags who likely will be drafting their No. 1

Patriots
Steelers
Broncos
Eagles (to at least challenge Hurts)
WFT
Bears
Panthers

I suppose you could add the 49ers and Giants as possibles. Maybe the Dolphins as Tua insurance as well.

There are only so many Newtons, Fitzpatricks, Daltons to go around at this point. Alex Smith looks as though he could get cut. Until JG and Mariota become available, they're not really in this game.

Looks like there's more chairs than QBs to fill them
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
Forget trading for Jimmy G.

The Niners can cut Jimmy G and save $27M from their cap. Would any team in the NFL pay him that much if he were a FA right now? I have to imagine no, and also wonder if they cut him loose soon and use a chunk of that $27M to solve other problems on their roster.
The Panthers gave TBW 3/63 with $33M guaranteed. Someone will give up value to get Jimmy G at 1/27 if the Niners don’t want him —it’s a slightly higher cap number, but the lack of long-term commitment is huge.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Kiper (I know) has a new mock up with the Pats trains up to 9 to take Trey Lance. He also has the Jets and Falcons swapping picks so ATL can get Wilson and the Niners jumping to 7 to get Fields, while CAR sits tight at 8 with Mac Jones. In all, he has the first 9 picks all going offense, with all 5 QBs among them:
  1. JACX -- Lawrence
  2. ATL -- Wilson
  3. MIA -- Smith
  4. NYJ -- Pitts
  5. CIN -- Sewell
  6. PHI -- Chase
  7. SF -- Fields
  8. CAR -- Jones
  9. NE -- Lance
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
9,570
Kiper (I know) has a new mock up with the Pats trains up to 9 to take Trey Lance. He also has the Jets and Falcons swapping picks so ATL can get Wilson and the Niners jumping to 7 to get Fields, while CAR sits tight at 8 with Mac Jones. In all, he has the first 9 picks all going offense, with all 5 QBs among them:
  1. JACX -- Lawrence
  2. ATL -- Wilson
  3. MIA -- Smith
  4. NYJ -- Pitts
  5. CIN -- Sewell
  6. PHI -- Chase
  7. SF -- Fields
  8. CAR -- Jones
  9. NE -- Lance
So we can rule one name out for the Pats QB.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
43,086
Kiper (I know) has a new mock up with the Pats trains up to 9 to take Trey Lance. He also has the Jets and Falcons swapping picks so ATL can get Wilson and the Niners jumping to 7 to get Fields, while CAR sits tight at 8 with Mac Jones. In all, he has the first 9 picks all going offense, with all 5 QBs among them:
  1. JACX -- Lawrence
  2. ATL -- Wilson
  3. MIA -- Smith
  4. NYJ -- Pitts
  5. CIN -- Sewell
  6. PHI -- Chase
  7. SF -- Fields
  8. CAR -- Jones
  9. NE -- Lance
Mac Jones going #8?
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
19,595
It's silly season. Casserly's first mock, out today at nfl.com, has the Falcons taking a running back at #4
#8, after trading down, but yeah still ridiculous

Even more ridiculous honestly since some teams are dumb and take RBs too early, is his take that Fields will fall to #24? There is nothing Casserly loves more than a RB and nothing he hates more than a Black QB.