Pats QB Options

Status
Not open for further replies.

ElcaballitoMVP

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 19, 2008
3,970
All options have to be open for Atlanta. If they get bowled over with an offer, they can trade down, stick with Ryan for the next 2-3 years and build around him in the draft. I could also see them taking Lance and being comfortable sitting him for 2 years and then figuring it out. It's risky to wait another year or two to find Ryan's replacement when a guy like that is sitting there now.

I don't think they'll sit at #4 and take BPA. I'm sure they're already hearing from that CAR/DET/DEN group picking 7-9. Move back a few spots, add an extra pick or two and still get an impact player inside the top 10.

Edit: To add- I think the Pats could make an interesting offer to get to #4, I just don't think they can beat out that CAR/DET/DEN group without making it really hurt.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,820
Hingham, MA
I absolutely can't see Atlanta taking a QB at 4. That's not their style. They are all of a sudden going to be patient and pick a guy who won't play for at least another year or 2, and waste that year or 2 of Matt Ryan / Julio Jones? No effing way. They either take Sewell or a WR, or trade down. My bet is actually on WR, again.

Edit: or, what @JM3 said below
 
Last edited:

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
16,771
Falcons had 2 options to build their team out - trade Matt Ryan (or let him play for a year & then move on) & draft a QB #4, or build around Ryan & trade out of #4.

They already knew they had the 4th pick a week ago when they restructured Ryan's contract. This isn't some contract they signed years ago that is still handcuffing them to Ryan & therefore a sunk cost. This is them announcing that Ryan is our QB in 2021, 2022 & there's a pretty decent chance of 2023, too.

They can't then go & sink their draft capital into a QB when they need a full roster rebuild & influx of young talent around Ryan. It was crazy enough for the Packers to take Love #26 instead of a player to help build out the team. Falcons taking QB at 4 would be straight suicidal after the restructure, & not trading down, considering the likely market, seems foolhardy.
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,945
Berkeley, CA
I think SF would love to trade up for one of the QB's. I think it's no secret they've been after a JG replacement and were rumored to be in the Stafford hunt. They had an incredible number of injuries last year that led to their poor record and the roster is too talented to fall to that level again soon. Moving up now might cost less than it would in subsequent years if their picks are landing in the 20's. Also, there are 4 blue-chippers, so you don't need the first or second pick to get that QB. Given JG's injury history, it's not a stretch to think that a young QB would be sitting behind him for years. Heck, he could be starting day one.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,682
Dalton was signed to a one-year deal. I don't think the Bears should be left out of the teams looking to move up to draft a QB.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
16,771
I think SF would love to trade up for one of the QB's. I think it's no secret they've been after a JG replacement and were rumored to be in the Stafford hunt. They had an incredible number of injuries last year that led to their poor record and the roster is too talented to fall to that level again soon. Moving up now might cost less than it would in subsequent years if their picks are landing in the 20's. Also, there are 4 blue-chippers, so you don't need the first or second pick to get that QB. Given JG's injury history, it's not a stretch to think that a young QB would be sitting behind him for years. Heck, he could be starting day one.
Yeah, the 49ers are much more likely to try to get a QB than the Falcons. They can move on from JG as early as this year & save $23.6m against the cap ($2.8m dead), or just keep him around to play if he's healthy & mentor the new guy.
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,945
Berkeley, CA
Falcons had 2 options to build their team out - trade Matt Ryan (or let him play for a year & then move on) & draft a QB #4, or build around Ryan & trade out of #4.

They already knew they had the 4th pick a week ago when they restructured Ryan's contract. This isn't some contract they signed years ago that is still handcuffing them to Ryan & therefore a sunk cost. This is them announcing that Ryan is our QB in 2021, 2022 & there's a pretty decent chance of 2023, too.

They can't then go & sink their draft capital into a QB when they need a full roster rebuild & influx of young talent around Ryan. It was crazy enough for the Packers to take Love #26 instead of a player to help build out the team. Falcons taking QB at 4 would be straight suicidal after the restructure, & not trading down, considering the likely market, seems foolhardy.
Agree on all this. Was thinking of the Packers/Love draft too. Ryan at those dollars is a commitment to win now. New coach so I imagine he sees former MVP Ryan as job security for the next 2-3 years. I'm not sure of their FO and how they view the roster. Do they see a bunch of holes? If so, trading down makes the most sense as they could presumably get younger and cheaper pretty quick with a draft haul. Drafting and sitting one of the Big 4 really dooms them to mediocrity unless they absolutely crush the draft with the picks they have. Is there a hubris index and where do Blank and the FO fit on it?
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
16,771
Dalton was signed to a one-year deal. I don't think the Bears should be left out of the teams looking to move up to draft a QB.
Agree. I think the conversation tends to focus on the teams we have to jump, not the teams that need to jump us.

Redskins/Steelers/Texans(?) fall into that category, too.
 

scott bankheadcase

I'm adequate!!
SoSH Member
Nov 1, 2006
3,126
hoboken
Yeah, the 49ers are much more likely to try to get a QB than the Falcons. They can move on from JG as early as this year & save $23.6m against the cap ($2.8m dead), or just keep him around to play if he's healthy & mentor the new guy.
While a risk, I think the 49ers are hoping that Kellen Mond is still around in the 2nd round. Rumors floating around from some of the SF media that Shanahan likes him.

And using a second round draft pick as a learning backup for this year and rolling the dice with Jimmy to see if he can get back to 2019 levels seems like a Lynch/Shanahan move.

I also think they really wanted Watson, but that is now off the table in SF.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
16,771
While a risk, I think the 49ers are hoping that Kellen Mond is still around in the 2nd round. Rumors floating around from some of the SF media that Shanahan likes him.

And using a second round draft pick as a learning backup for this year and rolling the dice with Jimmy to see if he can get back to 2019 levels seems like a Lynch/Shanahan move.

I also think they really wanted Watson, but that is now off the table in SF.
I'm always confused by these type of reports - like if I'm a coach & people are leaking the name of the person I actually want to draft, I'm going to start telling all the people around me different crap so I find out who the dirty leaker is.

Agree that a big hole in all these conversations is the draft board of all these teams. Even if we can successfully determine which teams are open to drafting a QB, we can't possibly know how they really feel about the different QBs & how much they would be willing to do to get any particular one.

Like if the 49ers have a similar draft grade for Mond as they do for Lance, yes, they absolutely don't trade up for Lance, but maybe they draft Lance if he falls to them. Or maybe they hate Lance & Shanahan wouldn't draft him if he was the last QB on earth.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,576
Philadelphia
Agree. I think the conversation tends to focus on the teams we have to jump, not the teams that need to jump us.

Redskins/Steelers/Texans(?) fall into that category, too.
I don't think the Steelers are really in the conversation. Ben just gave up 2021 cash to free cap space so the team could run it back again next year, they're not going to package a huge draft haul to move up for his successor and compromise their ability to put the best team possible on the field in the fall.

The WFT signed Heinicke to a two year deal and gave Fitzmagic a deal with a six million dollar signing bonus. One of those things could be consistent with moving up to draft a QB high, but two of them make it seem very unlikely.

The Texans have no draft capital.

The Bears do seem like a realistic possibility though.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
16,771
Agree on all this. Was thinking of the Packers/Love draft too. Ryan at those dollars is a commitment to win now. New coach so I imagine he sees former MVP Ryan as job security for the next 2-3 years. I'm not sure of their FO and how they view the roster. Do they see a bunch of holes? If so, trading down makes the most sense as they could presumably get younger and cheaper pretty quick with a draft haul. Drafting and sitting one of the Big 4 really dooms them to mediocrity unless they absolutely crush the draft with the picks they have. Is there a hubris index and where do Blank and the FO fit on it?
So the Falcons brought in Terry Fontenot as the GM this off season after he spent 18 years with the Saints.

He's not going to be married to a bunch of guys who just went 4-12 last year, despite a full year of Ryan.

I expect he would want to put his stamp on the roster & the best way to do that is an influx of young talent through the draft.

The Falcons current cap is kind of a mess - Ryan/Julio/Jarrett cost about $71m against the cap this year just for the 3 of them & they have another $14m of dead cap.

Coming from the Saints, I'm sure Fontenot is OK with working way over the cap long term, but I'd expect he'd want to do it with his guys & trading out of 4 is the best way to start that process.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,820
Hingham, MA
So the Falcons brought in Terry Fontenot as the GM this off season after he spent 18 years with the Saints.

He's not going to be married to a bunch of guys who just went 4-12 last year, despite a full year of Ryan.

I expect he would want to put his stamp on the roster & the best way to do that is an influx of young talent through the draft.

The Falcons current cap is kind of a mess - Ryan/Julio/Jarrett cost about $71m against the cap this year just for the 3 of them & they have another $14m of dead cap.

Coming from the Saints, I'm sure Fontenot is OK with working way over the cap long term, but I'd expect he'd want to do it with his guys & trading out of 4 is the best way to start that process.
Plus as noted above, the Falcons did not have the talent of a typical 4-12 team. Their pythag was 7.6-8.4. Even without some talent influx we'd expect them to be much better this year. Adding either a talented 4th overall pick like Sewell or Waddle / Chase, or trading down (using the Pats as an example) and getting the 15th and 46th picks could make them a potential 9-10 win playoff team.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
16,771
I don't think the Steelers are really in the conversation. Ben just gave up 2021 cash to free cap space so the team could run it back again next year, they're not going to package a huge draft haul to move up for his successor and compromise their ability to put the best team possible on the field in the fall.

The WFT signed Heinicke to a two year deal and gave Fitzmagic a deal with a six million dollar signing bonus. One of those things could be consistent with moving up to draft a QB high, but two of them make it seem very unlikely.

The Texans have no draft capital.

The Bears do seem like a realistic possibility though.
Roethlisberger's restructure was necessary to get under the cap this year & automatically voids after this year - basically it just kicks $10.3m of a cap hit into next year.

I don't see what that has to do with their need/ability to acquire a QB of the future. Agree that is super unlikely they would trade from 24 to the top 5, but if the Patriots don't trade up & are hoping a QB falls to them at 15, they're no reason the Steelers couldn't give up 24 + a 1st next year to move up to 13 or 14 & steal a QB they want who could sit behind Ben for a season.

I also don't see what about the WFT off season precludes them from wanting to acquire a long term QB. Signing a 39 y/o journeyman to a 1-year contract? Signing a back up QB to virtually a minimum contract (2/$4.75m/$1.5m)? They're picking 19. It would be foolish not to have such minimal contingency plans for this season available even if they're sole goal in the draft is to trade whatever it takes to get to #3.

Texans are obviously screwed, but at least their 2022 1st is a super valuable commodity lol.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
16,771
Plus as noted above, the Falcons did not have the talent of a typical 4-12 team. Their pythag was 7.6-8.4. Even without some talent influx we'd expect them to be much better this year. Adding either a talented 4th overall pick like Sewell or Waddle / Chase, or trading down (using the Pats as an example) and getting the 15th and 46th picks could make them a potential 9-10 win playoff team.
Good point on pythag. I think WR when they have Julio/Ridley & it's a deep WR draft might be a poor use of assets, though.

Regarding tackle, I guess a lot depends on what they think about Kaleb McGary, who they drafted 31st in 2019 & is their RT. They're pretty tied to Jake Matthews at least through 2022.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,820
Hingham, MA
Good point on pythag. I think WR when they have Julio/Ridley & it's a deep WR draft might be a poor use of assets, though.

Regarding tackle, I guess a lot depends on what they think about Kaleb McGary, who they drafted 31st in 2019 & is their RT. They're pretty tied to Jake Matthews at least through 2022.
Fully agree on WR, which is kind of why I expect them to do it.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I think we are getting a bit silly trying to justify how so many teams need to draft one of these 5 QBs. When was the last time a team with even an above-average QB, drafted a QB in the top half of the first round?

EDIT: Eagles in 2016 and Chiefs in 2017 seem to be the answer to my question: Bradford was their starter in 2015. He re-signed a 2 year deal in March 2016 and was traded in September after the Eagles drafted Wentz. In KC, Alex Smith was coming off a Pro-Bowl year when they traded up to get Mahomes. I guess that sort of worked out.
 
Last edited:

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
16,771
I think we are getting a bit silly trying to justify how so many teams need to draft one of these 5 QBs. When was the last time a team with even an above-average QB, drafted a QB in the top half of the first round?
Chiefs 2017 comes to mind.

Which above average QB are we talking about replacing?
 
Fully agree on WR, which is kind of why I expect them to do it.
There's some Kyle Pitts chatter for the Falcons as well - TE at #4 automatically feels like a stretch, but if Pitts is a generational talent, Ryan does love himself a TE target...

I do enjoy the fact that all options seem to be on the table for Atlanta. It's much easier to get the player or make the trade you want if nobody has any clue what your intentions are.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,820
Hingham, MA
There's some Kyle Pitts chatter for the Falcons as well - TE at #4 automatically feels like a stretch, but if Pitts is a generational talent, Ryan does love himself a TE target...

I do enjoy the fact that all options seem to be on the table for Atlanta. It's much easier to get the player or make the trade you want if nobody has any clue what your intentions are.
That's quite true, your Falcons are sitting in a great spot at #4, so long as they don't do something dumb like draft one of the WRs, and unfortunately for Falcons fans... how confident are you that they will do the "smart" thing?
 
That's quite true, your Falcons are sitting in a great spot at #4, so long as they don't do something dumb like draft one of the WRs, and unfortunately for Falcons fans... how confident are you that they will do the "smart" thing?
I'm willing to give a new braintrust the benefit of any doubt at this point - the Atlanta malaise won't have infected Fontenot yet, surely.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
35,511
I think the top 4 QBs all go fairly quickly, BUT... the top 4 picks have never been QBs, never. And we saw in the 2017 and 2018 drafts... some teams are always going to stay put because they have a much higher grade on a position player than they have on the guys they could trade back and get. Also, teams looking to move up are unlikely to have all 4 of the top QBs (or 5 if you buy the Mac Jones rocket fuel) graded the same, it may be that once one of the guys goes a bunch of the trade up or borderline draft a QB teams are less interested. I would guess that some teams have clear tiers among Wilson, Fields, Lance and aren't going to scramble up for the last one left if he's their 4th guy.

Edit- my guess is QBs 1 and 2, 3 is the wild card... MIA probably doesn't draft a QB, but do they trade out or take the best position player? If they love Sewell I think they stay and take him because CIN is sitting at 5 salivating over him.
My guess is one of 3/5 is Sewell, and another of the top 5 picks is a position player. I think at least 1 QB gets to 6.
 
Last edited:

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
16,771
That's quite true, your Falcons are sitting in a great spot at #4, so long as they don't do something dumb like draft one of the WRs, and unfortunately for Falcons fans... how confident are you that they will do the "smart" thing?
Eh - the Falcons last 3 WRs drafted in the 1st round:

2018 #26 Calvin Ridley
2011 #6 Julio Jones
2005 #27 Roddy White
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,820
Hingham, MA
Eh - the Falcons last 3 WRs drafted in the 1st round:

2018 #26 Calvin Ridley
2011 #6 Julio Jones
2005 #27 Roddy White
Correct, they've all been good picks... it just seems like positional excess when the draft capital could be better spent elsewhere. It's a slightly better track record than N'Keal Harry, Chad Jackson, and Terry Glenn.
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
10,182
Westwood MA
Does anyone have any idea what the Jets plan on doing with Darnold; he's got one year left on his rookie deal and if they draft a QB like everyone thinks they will, then what?

Cutting him would not be an option, they won't be working from a position of strength regarding a trade; would they trade him pre draft and who would want him/what is the market for him?

They had him for three years, he's clearly not the answer, so they draft another QB instead.

Rinse, lather, repeat.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,576
Philadelphia
Roethlisberger's restructure was necessary to get under the cap this year & automatically voids after this year - basically it just kicks $10.3m of a cap hit into next year.

I don't see what that has to do with their need/ability to acquire a QB of the future. Agree that is super unlikely they would trade from 24 to the top 5, but if the Patriots don't trade up & are hoping a QB falls to them at 15, they're no reason the Steelers couldn't give up 24 + a 1st next year to move up to 13 or 14 & steal a QB they want who could sit behind Ben for a season.

I also don't see what about the WFT off season precludes them from wanting to acquire a long term QB. Signing a 39 y/o journeyman to a 1-year contract? Signing a back up QB to virtually a minimum contract (2/$4.75m/$1.5m)? They're picking 19. It would be foolish not to have such minimal contingency plans for this season available even if they're sole goal in the draft is to trade whatever it takes to get to #3.

Texans are obviously screwed, but at least their 2022 1st is a super valuable commodity lol.
I don't think preclude is a very useful word in this kind of discussion. Nothing really strictly precludes anything. The question is whether teams have a high probability of moving up for a QB that we would want and the degree to which other offseason activity should make us update our priors about that probability.

Look at the big picture of Ben's restructure. He takes less cash in 2021, which is a legitimate sacrifice, to free up cap space to make the team more competitive. And then he and Colbert have a press conference in which they both talk about how determined they are to do everything possible to compete in 2021. Is that consistent with the team then going and packaging 24 plus a boatload of other picks to move up to 6 or 7 to get one of the top four QBs (I don't really care about them moving up to 13 or 14 to get Mac Jones)?

Same deal with WFT. Of course they could do it. But if they were really planning on doing it, why would they both give Fitz a six million signing bonus and sign Heinicke to a two year deal? It doesn't make any sense.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,059
Mansfield MA
I also don't really see Matt Ryan doing the team a solid by agreeing to a restructure and not seeking a trade without some assurance that they're actually going to try to improve next year through FA and the draft, rather than spending by far their most valuable asset on his successor. I'm pretty sure when he talked with the Falcons top brass about different scenarios (trade, restructure) they agreed broadly on a plan for the team.
Ryan didn't do them a solid. Teams write it into players' contracts that they can convert salary to bonus at will. Ryan still gets the same money on the same schedule, it's purely an accounting move.

Restructuring Ryan to kick all this money forward into the future just to basically punt on this year anyway, alienating your franchise player in the process, also doesn't make much sense from the team's perspective.
They had to create 2021 cap room. OTC has them with less than $3.5 MM even with this move and jettisoning a bunch of guys to clear cap room. They will need to clear even more cap space just to sign their draft picks.

I absolutely can't see Atlanta taking a QB at 4. That's not their style. They are all of a sudden going to be patient and pick a guy who won't play for at least another year or 2, and waste that year or 2 of Matt Ryan / Julio Jones? No effing way. They either take Sewell or a WR, or trade down. My bet is actually on WR, again.
I think the ship has sailed on the Ryan / Jones combo producing a real contending team. Ryan is gonna be 36 this year; Julio is 32 and has a laundry list of injuries. This isn't the Saints of the past couple years (or even the 2017-2019 Pats) where it makes sense to squeeze blood from a stone to maximize their chances of contention in the near term; this team went 4-12 last year.

Plus as noted above, the Falcons did not have the talent of a typical 4-12 team. Their pythag was 7.6-8.4. Even without some talent influx we'd expect them to be much better this year. Adding either a talented 4th overall pick like Sewell or Waddle / Chase, or trading down (using the Pats as an example) and getting the 15th and 46th picks could make them a potential 9-10 win playoff team.
They were better than their record, but they still weren't good and they've gotten worse this offseason.

So the Falcons brought in Terry Fontenot as the GM this off season after he spent 18 years with the Saints.

Coming from the Saints, I'm sure Fontenot is OK with working way over the cap long term, but I'd expect he'd want to do it with his guys & trading out of 4 is the best way to start that process.
Fontenot is a real wild card. The scouting hiring and firing cycle happens after the draft, so Fontenot is running this draft with Dimitroff's people, not his own. If he were coming from a college scouting background, he might feel comfortable just calling his own shots, but he's coming from the pro scouting side so he's not all that experienced with college scouting. Will be interesting to see what he does.

The Falcons probably should take a QB at 4, but I totally get why Fontenot would prefer a less risky approach.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
16,771
I don't think preclude is a very useful word in this kind of discussion. Nothing really strictly precludes anything. The question is whether teams have a high probability of moving up for a QB that we would want and the degree to which other offseason activity should make us update our priors about that probability.

Look at the big picture of Ben's restructure. He takes less cash in 2021, which is a legitimate sacrifice, to free up cap space to make the team more competitive. And then he and Colbert have a press conference in which they both talk about how determined they are to do everything possible to compete in 2021. Is that consistent with the team then going and packaging 24 plus a boatload of other picks to move up to 6 or 7 to get one of the top four QBs (I don't really care about them moving up to 13 or 14 to get Mac Jones)?

Same deal with WFT. Of course they could do it. But if they were really planning on doing it, why would they both give Fitz a six million signing bonus and sign Heinicke to a two year deal? It doesn't make any sense.
Everything is varying levels of probability. There is nothing in the Roethlisberger resigning or the WFT signings that makes them less likely to try to acquire a QB than before those things happened.

It's true Roethlisberger took a $5m paycut, but the Steelers could have just cut him & saved themselves $19m. They already have $10.4m in dead cap for next year on his contract, whether they re-sign him or not, & he'll be 40 & is declining hard.

They have a very strong need for a QB, & you or I may not care about being sniped on Mac Jones, but the premise of my post was about teams behind the Patriots who might move ahead of where they sit now.

I honestly don't understand your insistence on the WFT thing... even if they draft a QB, they're keeping Fitz. This has literally been his role forever - backing up young QBs or starting over them if they aren't ready. Plus it's a 1 year deal & Lance may sit for a year anyway. Who cares how much of the contract is guaranteed? & Heinicke has a nothing contract that wouldn't really be an overpay even if he's their 3rd QB. They could cut him tomorrow & eat $1.5m or trade him for a late round pick at the same price. Nbd.

WFT Scout: Hey, I really love Trey Lance. I think he's going to be an amazing QB for our franchise for 15+ years.

GM Martin Mayhew: I know & agree, but we have Fitz under contract this year & Heinicke signed for 2 years. I don't see how that could work out...

WFT Scout: What if the asking price to trade up isn't too high? Fitz is 39 & has never been a long term solution to anything & Heinicke is 6'1, 28 & has thrown for 467 career yards. What even is our plan for 2022?

Mayhew: You fool - I have committed like $12m to the QB position this season. I don't care how good Lance is or how far he slips, what am I going to tell Taylor's family???

WFT Scout: (shakes head & begins touching up his resume)
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 9, 2007
17,399
Washington
Same deal with WFT. Of course they could do it. But if they were really planning on doing it, why would they both give Fitz a six million signing bonus and sign Heinicke to a two year deal? It doesn't make any sense.
I think it could make sense if WFT isn't confident that they'll be able to move up to get a QB they want. Is a 2021 cap hit of $1,593,750 really going to prevent them from taking advantage of such an opportunity? Heinicke is almost certainly the backup for 2022 and Fitz is gone. Seems like a good way to keep options open and be somewhat competitive while still managing risk.

https://www.nbcsports.com/washington/football-team/real-details-taylor-heinickes-contract-reveal-winwin-situation

Got more info on Taylor Heinicke’s two-year, $4.75 million deal that includes $1.5M guaranteed with a $1M signing bonus, per source. His cap hit in 2021 is $1,593,750 and in 2022 is $2.75M.
edit: beaten by JM3
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
16,771
The Bears are actually far more committed to their QBs than WFT.

Dalton has $7m guaranteed for this year of his $10m contract & Foles would cost $10.3m in dead cap to cut this year.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,576
Philadelphia
Everything is varying levels of probability. There is nothing in the Roethlisberger resigning or the WFT signings that makes them less likely to try to acquire a QB than before those things happened.
I can't make heads or tails of these two sentences together. "Everything is varying levels of probability" yet you'll double down on the idea that other QB moves by teams, as well as (in the case of Pittsburgh) cheery statements by GMs about their intentions to do everything possible to compete in 2021, should have literally zero impact on an estimate of the probability of these teams packaging a huge amount of draft capital to move up and select a QB who probably won't play in 2021?

Your snarky little fantasy dialogue is not only shitty message boarding at its finest, it also completely misconstrues the claim I made. Nobody is saying that WFT wouldn't draft Trey Lance even if they thought he was a franchise QB just because of the presence of the other QBs on the roster. Rather, the fact they signed two other QBs - something they absolutely did not have to do, especially the second one who comes at a real cost - is a piece of evidence that should get us to update our priors somewhat about their intentions re drafting a QB. If you can't understand the distinction between those two ideas, I don't know what else to say.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
16,771
I can't make heads or tails of these two sentences together. "Everything is varying levels of probability" yet you'll double down on the idea that other QB moves by teams, as well as (in the case of Pittsburgh) cheery statements by GMs about their intentions to do everything possible to compete in 2021, should have literally zero impact on an estimate of the probability of these teams packaging a huge amount of draft capital to move up and select a QB who probably won't play in 2021?

Your snarky little fantasy dialogue is not only shitty message boarding at its finest, it also completely misconstrues the claim I made. Nobody is saying that WFT wouldn't draft Trey Lance even if they thought he was a franchise QB just because of the presence of the other QBs on the roster. Rather, the fact they signed two other QBs - something they absolutely did not have to do, especially the second one who comes at a real cost - is a piece of evidence that should get us to update our priors somewhat about their intentions re drafting a QB. If you can't understand the distinction between those two ideas, I don't know what else to say.
Signing old QBs to 1 year deals does not change the likelihood of drafting a QB. Signing journeyman QBs to minimal deals does not change the likelihood of drafting a QB.

If the Steelers had extended Roethlisberger or WFT had committed to multiple years of Fitz, then the calculus changes.

Teams don't literally show up at the NFL draft without QBs on their roster, especially when drafting late with no guarantee of being able to draft the QB of the future.

I'm sorry for the snark. But I'm honestly at a loss regarding the insistence that Heinicke has a "real cost" or moves the needle.
 

Beomoose

is insoxicated
SoSH Member
May 28, 2006
21,603
Exiled
Does anyone have any idea what the Jets plan on doing with Darnold; he's got one year left on his rookie deal and if they draft a QB like everyone thinks they will, then what?

Cutting him would not be an option, they won't be working from a position of strength regarding a trade; would they trade him pre draft and who would want him/what is the market for him?

They had him for three years, he's clearly not the answer, so they draft another QB instead.

Rinse, lather, repeat.
Rumor mill is they're shopping him, but also that there's members of the Jets "brain trust" that are still high on him. I tend to think they'd get more back trading him before the draft, but selling low on Darnold after everything else would be pretty in line with their MO.
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 9, 2007
17,399
Washington
Rumor mill is they're shopping him, but also that there's members of the Jets "brain trust" that are still high on him. I tend to think they'd get more back trading him before the draft, but selling low on Darnold after everything else would be pretty in line with their MO.
I suspect the offers haven't been that good so far, so there might not be too much of a difference between now and selling low(er) later. It seems like there might be a few teams left standing when all the musical chairs are filled after the draft, so we'll see.

The Jetsiest move of all would be to not take a QB at #2 and still have Darnold not develop into the long term solution at QB.
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
4,993
I bet they keep Darnold and draft Wilson at #2 to make Wilson “earn it” in camp because they’re the Jets.
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
10,182
Westwood MA
Rumor mill is they're shopping him, but also that there's members of the Jets "brain trust" that are still high on him. I tend to think they'd get more back trading him before the draft, but selling low on Darnold after everything else would be pretty in line with their MO.
Thanks for the reply/input.
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
10,182
Westwood MA
I suspect the offers haven't been that good so far, so there might not be too much of a difference between now and selling low(er) later. It seems like there might be a few teams left standing when all the musical chairs are filled after the draft, so we'll see.

The Jetsiest move of all would be to not take a QB at #2 and still have Darnold not develop into the long term solution at QB.
Imagine if they pass on a QB who goes on to have a HOF career and keep Darnold............and he keeps being Darnold, then they cut ties with him after the season and now HAVE to draft a QB for need in 2022.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,576
Philadelphia
Signing old QBs to 1 year deals does not change the likelihood of drafting a QB. Signing journeyman QBs to minimal deals does not change the likelihood of drafting a QB.

If the Steelers had extended Roethlisberger or WFT had committed to multiple years of Fitz, then the calculus changes.

Teams don't literally show up at the NFL draft without QBs on their roster, especially when drafting late with no guarantee of being able to draft the QB of the future.

I'm sorry for the snark. But I'm honestly at a loss regarding the insistence that Heinicke has a "real cost" or moves the needle.
You’re really ignoring the human side of the decision in Pittsburgh. They had to negotiate with Ben, who is a massively central player to the franchise, and get him to give up money in 2021. They had a press conference in which Ben and Colbert both talked about their commitment to winning in 2021. That absolutely should move the needle in thinking about the likelihood of them spending the lion’s share of their draft capital to move up to 6 or 7 and pick a guy who will contribute zero to winning in 2021.

WFT I admit is a more speculative reading of the tea leaves. But it’s consistent with a lot of reporting out of DC that suggests Snyder sees this as a playoff team and wants to try to win right now.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
16,771
You’re really ignoring the human side of the decision in Pittsburgh. They had to negotiate with Ben, who is a massively central player to the franchise, and get him to give up money in 2021. They had a press conference in which Ben and Colbert both talked about their commitment to winning in 2021. That absolutely should move the needle in thinking about the likelihood of them spending the lion’s share of their draft capital to move up to 6 or 7 and pick a guy who will contribute zero to winning in 2021.

WFT I admit is a more speculative reading of the tea leaves. But it’s consistent with a lot of reporting out of DC that suggests Snyder sees this as a playoff team and wants to try to win right now.
I don't think we disagree about it being unlikely that the Steelers trade up for a top 6 pick from 27 - I don't think they were doing that regardless, though. My premise was just about teams that might jump ahead of the Pats if they intend to wait for a QB to fall in their lap, & the Steelers are certainly a team with a QB need, & they could trade 2022 assets to move up & help fill that void this year. Maybe I also have a hard time seeing Roethlisberger as a human worthy of being catered to...

Anyway, I'm sorry this got heated over such minor disagreements.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,576
Philadelphia
I don't think we disagree about it being unlikely that the Steelers trade up for a top 6 pick from 27 - I don't think they were doing that regardless, though. My premise was just about teams that might jump ahead of the Pats if they intend to wait for a QB to fall in their lap, & the Steelers are certainly a team with a QB need, & they could trade 2022 assets to move up & help fill that void this year. Maybe I also have a hard time seeing Roethlisberger as a human worthy of being catered to...

Anyway, I'm sorry this got heated over such minor disagreements.
Yeah, I think we were talking past each other a bit and I'm sorry as well if some of my comments were a little barbed. All good and happy to have you on the forum!
 

67YAZ

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2000
8,981
The Bears are actually far more committed to their QBs than WFT.

Dalton has $7m guaranteed for this year of his $10m contract & Foles would cost $10.3m in dead cap to cut this year.
The Bears aren’t moving up. They are already light on young, rookie contract talent due to the Mack trade & don’t have a ton of capital this year (20th, 52nd, 83rd, 164th, & the 4 6th rounders).

But really, the Bears are becoming a cautionary tale about why you don’t give your coach-GM team just one more year to prove themselves. In their haste to win now, they created cap problems over the next few years by restructuring Mack, Jackson, & Whitehair to get the space to find a QB this year...and ended up with Dalton & Foles. (We should just combine them into 1 QB and call them Falton.)

They also let the dependable Kyle Fuller walk instead of cutting Jimmy Graham. No slight on Graham, who had a nice season, but he should be replaced by Kmet this year while there is now a gaping hole in the secondary that will likely be filled by one of those early draft picks.

I fully expect Pace to target day-1-ready rookies at CB, OT, WR in the first three rounds in a desperate bid to make the playoffs and keep his job.

What the McCaskeys should have done was fire Pace & Nagy, empower a new coach-GM tandem to run a full rebuild, draft the best players available, maybe kick the tires on Darnold, and role with Foles to a high pick next season.

Edit: In hindsight, Pace got a lot of the strategy right - he focused on getting a QB high in the draft, used the cap savings from the QB slot to trade for Mack and build up an excellent defense, hit on some budget FAs and late-round picks. But picking Trubisky torpedoed the whole effort. If Pace has stayed at 3 and selected Watson, the Bears would have been contenders the past 2 seasons (even if it would have all blown up with Watson this week).
 
Last edited:

RobertS975

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
369
Signing old QBs to 1 year deals does not change the likelihood of drafting a QB. Signing journeyman QBs to minimal deals does not change the likelihood of drafting a QB....

Teams don't literally show up at the NFL draft without QBs on their roster, especially when drafting late with no guarantee of being able to draft the QB of the future.
Uh, didn't the Patriots check both those boxes last year?
 

simplyeric

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 14, 2006
14,037
Richmond, VA
You’re really ignoring the human side of the decision in Pittsburgh. They had to negotiate with Ben, who is a massively central player to the franchise, and get him to give up money in 2021. They had a press conference in which Ben and Colbert both talked about their commitment to winning in 2021. That absolutely should move the needle in thinking about the likelihood of them spending the lion’s share of their draft capital to move up to 6 or 7 and pick a guy who will contribute zero to winning in 2021.

WFT I admit is a more speculative reading of the tea leaves. But it’s consistent with a lot of reporting out of DC that suggests Snyder sees this as a playoff team and wants to try to win right now.
Wont a QB drafted in 2021 be more likely to contribute meaningfully in 2022?
And what are the chances Ben doesn’t finish the season due to being bad, or being injured?
A commitment to winning in 2021, and in 2022, would ideally have someone ready (give or take) to step in for their aging QB who has a history of recent injuries and a lifetime of concussions.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,059
Mansfield MA
In NFL offenses, at least, it's expected the QB can still make anticipation throws because he knows what the conversions are going to be. These are all just reading one high vs two high and then there's a hot adjustment vs blitz or pressure look. So if it's one-high coverage with no blitz, it shouldn't be a mystery what route the receivers are going to run.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,820
Hingham, MA
Draft experts: you may have posted this before, but how do you rank the non-Lawrence QBs?

Let's assume three things for this exercise:

1) Lawrence goes 1
2) the Jets take a QB (but we don't know which one)
3) Miami and Atlanta stand pat with their QB situation

so it gets to 4 or 5 in the draft, and Lawrence and another QB are gone. Which QB(s) at this point do you think are worth trading up for? (assuming it will take 15 + 2022 first + 46 or something else pretty good - JCJ, Gilmore, whatever - a decent haul)
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,858
deep inside Guido territory
Draft experts: you may have posted this before, but how do you rank the non-Lawrence QBs?

Let's assume three things for this exercise:

1) Lawrence goes 1
2) the Jets take a QB (but we don't know which one)
3) Miami and Atlanta stand pat with their QB situation

so it gets to 4 or 5 in the draft, and Lawrence and another QB are gone. Which QB(s) at this point do you think are worth trading up for? (assuming it will take 15 + 2022 first + 46 or something else pretty good - JCJ, Gilmore, whatever - a decent haul)
Trey Lance or Justin Fields are your two options to trade up for. I don't think Zach Wilson is going to be as good as these two guys especially with how McD has evolved the offense for success with a dual-threat QB.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,820
Hingham, MA
Trey Lance or Justin Fields are your two options to trade up for. I don't think Zach Wilson is going to be as good as these two guys especially with how McD has evolved the offense for success with a dual-threat QB.
Thanks, so basically we are rooting for the Jets to take Wilson at 2 (or even better, a non-QB, but doubtful)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.