Pats QB Options

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
26,787
Hingham, MA
Of course it's less risky, it's also almost certainly not going to produce a starter. The hit rate after the first round drops off a cliff, even with Bill picking the odds of getting a consistent starter out of 10-11 (or even 7-8) are in the low single digits.

This is not exclusively a draft thread, it's about QB options for the Pats. For those who don't believe in trading up or don't believe Bill will do it, what's the QB plan? After not getting one this year, what's the plan next year, hope we lost enough games in 21 to draft higher? Go after one of the rebuilding projects we avoided this year? Try again for Jimmy G?
Selecting a QB between picks 7-11 is almost certainly not going to produce a starter? I think you need to show your work here. In the last few years alone we have seen Allen, Mahomes, and Watson picked in this range off the top of my head.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
26,787
Hingham, MA
There was definitely a ton of value in proving that they could still win without Brady. You go 4-12 with Cam throwing into the ground or an unproven QB and it looks more like a shitshow and the only reason they won is because of Brady.

Winning 7 games and being 'close' definitely helped them in FA.
Exactly, I fully agree with this, 2021 first rounder be damned.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
301
@SMU_Sox

No offense taken. We're on the same page. I think an important part of evaluating QBs is seeing where the flaws were in evaluating past QBs & learning from those errors.

Even if a college offense does call for a certain type of read or simplification primarily because it's the most effective way to score in college does not mean that talented, sharp & hard-working players can't adjust to an NFL-style offense.

Figuring out the the things that can & can't be fixed, & whether a player is the type of guy who can maximize the fixable things, is huge - along with of course your point that certain parts of it may very well not even be broken to begin with.
 

ZMart100

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2008
2,167
The Leaf hype is pretty amazing in retrospect. Leaf was a bad-bodied unathletic guy who completed 55% of his passes & after being extremely lightly recruited out of high school, rose to prominence on the back of a 10-2 Washington State season which included 58-0 & 77-7 victories over Boise & SW Louisiana, & a 21-16 Rose Bowl loss to Michigan.

It turned out he had no work ethic (which probably should have been discovered pre-draft) & got injured a ton, which shouldn't have been particularly surprising either. He had to hire a personal trainer after his college career just to get down to 246 & skipped out on part of the mandatory rookie symposium.

He was also a whiner & a giant douche who blamed everyone else for his shortcomings. He reportedly was frequently golfing while other QBs watched tape.

Former Chargers GM Bobby Beathard:



But yeah, obviously it's an inexact science & no matter how well & thoroughly you do your job, there's a chance whoever you draft will bust for whatever reason.
Prospect groupthink is a helluva drug- which reminds me, I like Franks too.
 

BusRaker

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 11, 2006
948
The Leaf hype is pretty amazing in retrospect
...
He was also a whiner & a giant douche who blamed everyone else for his shortcomings. He reportedly was frequently golfing while other QBs watched tape.
Only to be later topped by Johnny Manziel on the douche index. Speaking of, wondering if the Zappers would be willing to negotiate for a transfer?
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
301
Selecting a QB between picks 7-11 is almost certainly not going to produce a starter? I think you need to show your work here. In the last few years alone we have seen Allen, Mahomes, and Watson picked in this range off the top of my head.
Watson was 12, but going 7-12:

2018
#7 Josh Allen (everyone realizes Josh Allens went #7 in back to back drafts right? I feel like this is an underpublicized fact).

2017
#10 Patrick Mahomes
#12 Deshaun Watson

2012
#8 Ryan Tannehill

2011
#8 Jake Locker
#10 Blaine Gabbert
#12 Christian Ponder

2006
#10 Matt Leinart
#11 Jay Cutler

2004
#11 Ben Roethlisberger

2003
#7 Byron Leftwich

1999
#11 Daunte Culpepper
#12 Cade McCown

1990
#7 Andre Ware

That 2011 draft (where Cam was the #1 pick) was amazing... other than those 3 awful QBs, all the other top 12 picks were Pro Bowlers (Cam, Von, Dareus, AJ Green, PPete, Julio, Aldon & Tyron Smith).

Nick Fairley went 13th, then 3 more Pro Bowlers (Quinn, Mike Pouncey, Kerrigan), then the Pats took Nate Solder 17.

That draft also featured many other Pro Bowlers including Cameron Jordan & Jordan Cameron, & Anthony & Richard Sherman (both Shermans were 5th round picks). Besides Cam, 2 other QBs from that draft have made the Pro Bowl - Andy Dalton (35th pick) & Tyrod Taylor (180th pick).

Bottom line? None really. Fields & Lance will be as good as they're going to be no matter where they're drafted. Some drafts are much better than other drafts & some picks are good, some picks work out poorly due to circumstances, & some picks are just lolbad.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,811
Santa Monica, CA
Lombardi on the QBs. Not sure how much to believe him. On the one hand he is fairly plugged in. On the other hand, he gives no reasons for the Pats not necessarily loving Fields or Lance.





I'm not trying to be a jerk about this, I'm genuinely asking - how much behind-paywall content is too much to cut-and-paste? I read that today on BSJ and thought it was a great piece.
 

Zososoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2009
6,477
South of North
SMU, we're so lucky to have you here and providing your insights. Thank you very much.

Your waxing poetic re Fields make me want the Pats to nab him so bad. With that said, do you think the 9ers are looking at him at #3? If not, what slot do you think he gets draft and by what club? What's the likelihood the Pats get him? If you're willing to play, what do you think the likelihood is that the Pats get Lance, Wilson, Mac, etc.?
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
6,922
Dallas
@Zososoxfan

Mac Jones is the heavy favorite in betting markets. To me it’s either him or Lance. Also thanks for the kind words. I’m really just an Infinite monkeys person but aimed at draft stuff.

If I were them I would take Trey Lance. He’s a sound processor who makes good decisions.

Mac Jones: 1/2
Justin Fields: 5/1
Trey Lance: 13/1
Zach Wilson: 14/1
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
35,436
Hartford, CT
Schefter also staked out that he’d be surprised if Jones is not the choice, and Schefter doesn’t often get dropped off of limbs he ventures out onto.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
6,922
Dallas
Re Lombardi:

What's Fields' one dimension?
Being good at football? Being really good at football?

Kidding aside... I guess if you had a lazy take on him it would be he is one dimensional in that he is primarily a one-read vertical shot guy who consistently had the horses to beat other teams talent-wise. He takes a second longer to see post-snap coverage adjustments so he will be fooled at the next level? As I am typing this I am thinking "well yeah but" and "that's one-sided" and "lazy analysis". But if I had to guess that would be the one dimension.

He also runs really well. He can extend plays by scrambling. I'd point out he doesn't just take off to run... he takes off and makes big throws down-field. Lamar Jackson in his last year did the same thing - he had progressed to making more throws on the run and scrambling to throw vs tucking and running. I guess that's why I don't get the one-dimensional thing at all. He could have been saying that as just an example. Maybe the Pats have him as a 6.7 or 6.5 or something and not a 6.9 or a 6.3.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
301
I like Franks more as a receiving prospect than a QB one.
Yeah, he has elite TE measurables.

If he could be passable receiver or special teams guy it would certainly give him more room to stay on an NFL roster & work on his QB stuff as well.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,343
Re Lombardi:

What's Fields' one dimension?
I think he was just outlining how they grade guys and so the example was a 63 might be a guy with 1 dimension.
That article was less about what the Pats truly think about Fields (he doesn't know) than how they evaluate a prospect, and why he thinks that based on how Bill grades prospects they won't have Fields or Lance high enough to justify internally a trade to 4.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
26,787
Hingham, MA
I think he was just outlining how they grade guys and so the example was a 63 might be a guy with 1 dimension.
That article was less about what the Pats truly think about Fields (he doesn't know) than how they evaluate a prospect, and why he thinks that based on how Bill grades prospects they won't have Fields or Lance high enough to justify internally a trade to 4.
Exactly, which to me makes this much ado about nothing - they aren't trading up to 4. But if "their guy" is there at 7? Different conversation IMO.
 

Beomoose

Member
SoSH Member
May 28, 2006
18,236
Wherabouts Unknown
Selecting a QB between picks 7-11 is almost certainly not going to produce a starter? I think you need to show your work here. In the last few years alone we have seen Allen, Mahomes, and Watson picked in this range off the top of my head.
My mistake, I got confused between later round advocacy and later pick advocacy, and I'm a dumbass to boot. Sorry about that.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
301
Being good at football? Being really good at football?

Kidding aside... I guess if you had a lazy take on him it would be he is one dimensional in that he is primarily a one-read vertical shot guy who consistently had the horses to beat other teams talent-wise. He takes a second longer to see post-snap coverage adjustments so he will be fooled at the next level? As I am typing this I am thinking "well yeah but" and "that's one-sided" and "lazy analysis". But if I had to guess that would be the one dimension.

He also runs really well. He can extend plays by scrambling. I'd point out he doesn't just take off to run... he takes off and makes big throws down-field. Lamar Jackson in his last year did the same thing - he had progressed to making more throws on the run and scrambling to throw vs tucking and running. I guess that's why I don't get the one-dimensional thing at all. He could have been saying that as just an example. Maybe the Pats have him as a 6.7 or 6.5 or something and not a 6.9 or a 6.3.
I think he was just outlining how they grade guys and so the example was a 63 might be a guy with 1 dimension.
That article was less about what the Pats truly think about Fields (he doesn't know) than how they evaluate a prospect, and why he thinks that based on how Bill grades prospects they won't have Fields or Lance high enough to justify internally a trade to 4.
Oops, yup, just realized I misread that.

A system where a 69 is a great player & a 63 is a mediocre player seems like not a great system, but I'm sure there's more to it.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
26,787
Hingham, MA
Watson was 12, but going 7-12:

2018
#7 Josh Allen (everyone realizes Josh Allens went #7 in back to back drafts right? I feel like this is an underpublicized fact).

2017
#10 Patrick Mahomes
#12 Deshaun Watson

2012
#8 Ryan Tannehill

2011
#8 Jake Locker
#10 Blaine Gabbert
#12 Christian Ponder

2006
#10 Matt Leinart
#11 Jay Cutler

2004
#11 Ben Roethlisberger

2003
#7 Byron Leftwich

1999
#11 Daunte Culpepper
#12 Cade McCown

1990
#7 Andre Ware

That 2011 draft (where Cam was the #1 pick) was amazing... other than those 3 awful QBs, all the other top 12 picks were Pro Bowlers (Cam, Von, Dareus, AJ Green, PPete, Julio, Aldon & Tyron Smith).

Nick Fairley went 13th, then 3 more Pro Bowlers (Quinn, Mike Pouncey, Kerrigan), then the Pats took Nate Solder 17.

That draft also featured many other Pro Bowlers including Cameron Jordan & Jordan Cameron, & Anthony & Richard Sherman (both Shermans were 5th round picks). Besides Cam, 2 other QBs from that draft have made the Pro Bowl - Andy Dalton (35th pick) & Tyrod Taylor (180th pick).

Bottom line? None really. Fields & Lance will be as good as they're going to be no matter where they're drafted. Some drafts are much better than other drafts & some picks are good, some picks work out poorly due to circumstances, & some picks are just lolbad.
Thanks for putting in the work. Completely agree with your conclusion - they're going to be good if they're going to be good (and put in position to be good)

My mistake, I got confused between later round advocacy and later pick advocacy, and I'm a dumbass to boot. Sorry about that.
No worries.
 

Was (Not Wasdin)

family crest has godzilla
SoSH Member
Jul 26, 2007
2,586
The Short Bus
....

Look, Fields had the lowest of the big 5 QBs yards come from screen passes. Mac Jones had close to 30% of his yards come from screens. Lawrence was 22-23%. Fields was like 6%. But Dwayne Haskins threw a ton of screens there so what changed aside from Urban Meyer? Day's system got the best out of Fields. Many times he was just doing half field reads for longer vertical shots. When you have the arm and accuracy like Fields does you can afford to wait for plays to develop. Day's offense required Fields to wait because it was a ton of vertical routes. Oh sure he had the usual mesh crossers which Haskins feasted on but Fields was even better at because he actually hit his receivers in stride (like all the fucking time too it was ridiculous). Day doesn't have a standard offense other than he likes power running backs. He adjusts his offense each year to the skillset of his players. Aside from NDSU and a handful of college programs most college QBs are in shotgun only and run less traditionally complex offenses compared to the NFL.

Mac Jones ran an RPO based offense with a ton of screen plays in it. He made fewer reads than Fields. I think if you look at how much RPO and/or screen stuff Mac Jones did you're talking about nearly half his plays. And yet here we are talking about Justin Fields and if he can process fast enough when his offense was a bunch of slower developing vertical plays. Sometimes I love the draft. Sometimes I get so frustrated by the god-awful and lazy narratives I want to punt my laptop into a black hole (Kyle Pitt's catch radius).
....

QUICK edit: 58% of Jones plays are either RPOs, Play-Actions, or Screens. Drops mic.
This is a really good point, and I'm surprised teams are not focusing on this more. Over the last couple of years, there have been two "big time" QB prospects who threw a ton of short stuff, and generated a lot of passing yards via YAC-Jones and Tua. We've already heard the concerns about Tua.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/news/2021-nfl-draft-mac-jones-despite-gaudy-statistics-at-alabama-lacks-in-key-areas-as-a-prospect/

It is not a knock, at all, on Jones or Tua. They executed the Alabama offense perfectly, exactly what their coaches wanted, and they were throwing to guys like Henry Ruggs, Devonta Smith and Calvin Ridley. Get the ball to your playmakers and let them do their thing. Now, maybe that is the kind of offense Shanahan wants to run in San Francisco, and Jones (in theory) should be capable of executing it. But Jones this year played behind a line where, on almost every play of every game, the O lineman blocking for him was better than the D lineman he was blocking, and where Smith, Waddle, et al. were better than the guys trying to cover them. that is not going to happen in the NFL. They'll get matchups to exploit from time to time, but it isnt going to be like it was at Alabama. There is an awful lot of value in a guy who can run that offense AND make some plays when things break down. I dont think Jones is that guy.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
301
One last ridiculous 2011 draft fact:

4 players with the 1st or last name "Cameron" were drafted & they all have made the Pro Bowl at least once:

#1 Cameron Jerrell Newton (3x)
#24 Cameron Tyler Jordan (6x)
#31 Cameron Phillips Heyward (4x)
#102 Jordan Cravens Cameron (1x)
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
11,993
There was definitely a ton of value in proving that they could still win without Brady. You go 4-12 with Cam throwing into the ground or an unproven QB and it looks more like a shitshow and the only reason they won is because of Brady.

Winning 7 games and being 'close' definitely helped them in FA.
Also consider the free agents the Pats retained like James White, Nick Folk, and David Andrews. Those guys aren't staying if they get a hint that their head coach is tanking games for draft position. Not sure Karras, Van Noy, or even Trent Brown come back here either.

Of all the criticisms of Belichick, the one that he tried, and succeeded, at winning games last season is by far the most absurd.
 

Phil Plantier

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Mar 7, 2002
2,974
For those who don't believe in trading up or don't believe Bill will do it, what's the QB plan? After not getting one this year, what's the plan next year, hope we lost enough games in 21 to draft higher? Go after one of the rebuilding projects we avoided this year? Try again for Jimmy G?
1. Cam might work out
2. They could trade for Mayfield if he has a blah year
3. Replace Mayfield with Tannehill, Goff, Stafford,... someone will be cheap/cheaper that they like
4. Chad Kelly finds Jesus? Easterby might have been helpful here.
 

boca

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
280
2011
#8 Jake Locker
#10 Blaine Gabbert
#12 Christian Ponder



That 2011 draft (where Cam was the #1 pick) was amazing... other than those 3 awful QBs, all the other top 12 picks were Pro Bowlers (Cam, Von, Dareus, AJ Green, PPete, Julio, Aldon & Tyron Smith).

Nick Fairley went 13th, then 3 more Pro Bowlers (Quinn, Mike Pouncey, Kerrigan), then the Pats took Nate Solder 17.

That draft also featured many other Pro Bowlers including Cameron Jordan & Jordan Cameron, & Anthony & Richard Sherman (both Shermans were 5th round picks). Besides Cam, 2 other QBs from that draft have made the Pro Bowl - Andy Dalton (35th pick) & Tyrod Taylor (180th pick).

Bottom line? None really. Fields & Lance will be as good as they're going to be no matter where they're drafted. Some drafts are much better than other drafts & some picks are good, some picks work out poorly due to circumstances, & some picks are just lolbad.
D4_nwBAXoAAekqL.jpg

"Toughest call in Football"
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
26,787
Hingham, MA
This is good news for the Pats if true, right? There is no way Pitts falls to Dallas at 10. That means they need to trade up if they want to get him. It means they won't be trading down and letting someone else jump the Pats for a QB. I suppose if one of Atlanta, Cincy, or Miami trades down to Dallas, they could trade down again, but then they'd be trading pretty far down at that point.

PFT: Jerry Jones reportedly infatuated with Pitts

View: https://twitter.com/ProFootballTalk/status/1380468735245492224
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
43,666
This is good news for the Pats if true, right? There is no way Pitts falls to Dallas at 10. That means they need to trade up if they want to get him. It means they won't be trading down and letting someone else jump the Pats for a QB. I suppose if one of Atlanta, Cincy, or Miami trades down to Dallas, they could trade down again, but then they'd be trading pretty far down at that point.

PFT: Jerry Jones reportedly infatuated with Pitts

View: https://twitter.com/ProFootballTalk/status/1380468735245492224
Then again, if Atlanta trades down and picks up extra picks, they may be more willing to take Ryan's successor at #10 if he someone falls because they'll have extra picks elsewhere.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
26,787
Hingham, MA
Then again, if Atlanta trades down and picks up extra picks, they may be more willing to take Ryan's successor at #10 if he someone falls because they'll have extra picks elsewhere.
It's not like Dallas has two firsts though, so they would be passing on getting a premium player in this year's draft to help the current team for the next 2-3 years until they part with Ryan
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
68,245
Oregon
Will the fourth and fifth quarterbacks to be chosen even be there at 10?
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
26,787
Hingham, MA
Will the fourth and fifth quarterbacks to be chosen even be there at 10?
Highly unlikely that a 4th QB survives to pick 10 IMO, since Denver seems at least somewhat likely to pick one if only three are taken through 8 picks, otherwise there is likely to be a trade somewhere between 4-8, and it's even possible that Atlanta, Miami, Detroit, or Carolina take a QB. But I think there is a fair chance of a 5th QB falling to 10.

Edit: by fair I mean still under a 50% chance, but definitely non-zero.
 

BigJimEd

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
3,205
It's not like Dallas has two firsts though, so they would be passing on getting a premium player in this year's draft to help the current team for the next 2-3 years until they part with Ryan
If Atlanta picks a QB in the top half of round 1, I'd say they would likely look to move on from Ryan in 2022. He'd probably have decent value on the trade market as his contract would be about 2/52 for the receiving team. For Atlanta it is a $40M dead cap hit but he's a $48M cap hit if he's on the roster.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
26,787
Hingham, MA
The Cowboys gave up 475 points last year and Dak already has three good WRs plus Zeke. Sounds like a great time to move up to draft another weapon in the passing game! Never change Jerry.
Right, the smartest play for them is to draft Surtain or Horn at 10. Or even trade down a couple spots and do that if you can find a buyer and are confident one of them will be on the board (e.g., Lance is on the board, Pats want to trade up).
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
43,666
It's not like Dallas has two firsts though, so they would be passing on getting a premium player in this year's draft to help the current team for the next 2-3 years until they part with Ryan
No, I get it.

I just meant it's a *bit* easier to pick a QB that dropped to 10 that you may have liked at 4 if you've picked up an extra pick or so, especially if you were thinking of it at 4. At some point, BPA might come into play.
 

simplyeric

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 14, 2006
13,126
Richmond, VA
Don’t know how useful this guy’s opinion is but:

https://www.masslive.com/patriots/2021/04/tom-bradys-throwing-coach-tom-house-perfect-storm-for-patriots-qb-cam-newton-to-excel-in-2021.html

“But Cam will throw the football better this year than he did last year. He was in a reframing, a repatterning mode during the COVID stuff and because of the all the weird, unpredictable things, wasn’t able to focus on mechanics as much as he should. Don’t bet against him because he’s physically one of the best athletes I’ve ever been around.”
I’m still on the Cam Wagon.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
301
Albert Breer suggested 15, 120 & 122 this year + our 1st next year would be a fair return for 4 from the Falcons, but that the actual price might be more due to demand.

Would do that trade in a heartbeat, though.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,343
Albert Breer suggested 15, 120 & 122 this year + our 1st next year would be a fair return for 4 from the Falcons, but that the actual price might be more due to demand.

Would do that trade in a heartbeat, though.
As a comparison Schraeger on NFL.com projected a tradeup with a price of 15, 46, 2022 1st, 2022 3rd, which is more what I expect the price to be (maybe 96 instead of 46).
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
26,787
Hingham, MA
As a comparison Schraeger on NFL.com projected a tradeup with a price of 15, 46, 2022 1st, 2022 3rd, which is more what I expect the price to be (maybe 96 instead of 46).
I would do the former and not the latter. That said, they are better off waiting to see what happens until 7-8 and not giving up ANY future firsts.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
301
I would do the former and not the latter. That said, they are better off waiting to see what happens until 7-8 and not giving up ANY future firsts.
That kind of depends. If they love l only 1 of Lance/Fields, they kind of need to do what it takes to get to 4 if they can stomach the price.

I think giving up 3 1sts & a 2nd this year seems crazy when the 49ers gave up 3 1sts & a 3rd next year, even though 12 is obviously a better pick than 15.

I don't see any way they're getting Lance/Fields without giving up at least 1 extra 1st, even if they fall to 8/9, but we shall see.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
68,245
Oregon
Without knowing for certain who SF will pick, I'm not crazy about dealing what it would take to get to 4.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
301
Without knowing for certain who SF will pick, I'm not crazy about dealing what it would take to get to 4.
Agree. Would have to get a great deal to do it in advance.

Technically there's no guarantee the Jets take Wilson, so even if BB talked to his buddy Shanny & he told him he planned on Mac, if the Jets zagged & drafted the one of Lance/Fields they had traded up for, & the 49ers audible to Wilson they would feel silly about giving up so much & not even getting their target.

I think it's much better to talk generalities & frameworks with the Falcons & maybe some other teams now, & wait until the actual draft to finalize anything.
 

Joe Sixpack

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2002
5,153
Canton, MA
Yeah, I think it goes without saying that if they agree to a deal with the Falcons for 4, it would be contingent on the player they want being available and would not be finalized until after pick 3 is made.