|
FizFashizzle posted:Oh look it's exactly what happened in Carolina The more details get filled in about this story, the better it gets. From MMQB: Peter King posted:“See if we can get one last thing with Chicago,” Lynch said to Marathe. The 49ers basically wanted Thomaas but needed so much help they were willing to trade down to get more picks even if it meant losing him and they ended up getting a bunch of picks and giving up literally nothing in return.
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 14:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 30, 2024 01:45 |
|
|
So if you're Cleveland, do you start Kizer out of the gate, or let him sit behind Osweiler until the season is already effectively over
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
Dexo posted:"I'm 100% okay with my team making a bad, dumb decision that will fail" lol yeah, ok sure buddy
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
Jiminy Christmas! Shoes! posted:I believe there's a third choice you're overlooking. 
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
DariusLikewise posted:Sign a poo poo-tier QB and then accumulate as many picks and talent around that poo poo-tier QB as possible for 2 seasons, THEN trade your entire draft away for a first round QB. That sound be the blueprint for every awful team. Nothing says "we're going to be a good team" like not being able to add good young talent around your young QB through the draft!
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 21:47
|
|
|
DariusLikewise posted:Says the guy who's team plopped a rookie QB into the literal perfect situation for a QB. I think it's backwards to let your young quarterback get pummeled behind an awful offensive, lose confidence with terrible WRs/TEs and have no one to lean on without a decent running back. To me it makes sense to assemble those pieces first and give your young QB a chance to succeed out of the gate. I think I initially read your post as "that sounds like the recipe for every poo poo team" and not "that should be the recipe" due to the typo. I don't think we are disagreeing though (I was making fun of the Bears again) But either way, I think it's bad to spend a bunch of picks to get your QB regardless of where you are in the process. It leaves you hamstrung when you try to build around him, even if your team wasn't in a bad spot before. Suddenly you're missing out on the ability to add 3-6 of college football's most promising prospects to your team at bargain rates. I agree with you that the team should build a good place for the QB first, but it's also situational--who's available when you have a chance and what you have to give up. I generally think you're better off putting a slightly worse prospect on a strong team than to put a better prospect on a worse team (emphasis: slightly). Re: Dak--he was never supposed to be the starter--The Cowboys were looking for a QB to groom into the QB of the future, but the plan wasn't for Romo to break his vertebra in the preseason. They were primarily building a team around Romo, working on the offense to make a short-term push. With Romo gone and Dak the obvious successor, that opens up a lot of possibilities to build more long-term (hence, going defense heavy this year in the draft).
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 22:11
|
|
|
fsif posted:I hope Dexo has this thread bookmarked on the off-chance he's vindicated in the next three years. the funny thing is that even if Trubisky is good, it will still have been a bad, dumb idiot move because the alternative to making the trade to get Trubisky was not making the trade and still getting Trubisky
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 22:25
|
|
|
JIZZ DENOUEMENT posted:If a team doesn't have a franchise QB and they have the opportunity to gamble on one, they absolutely should trade up. A good quarterback will be on that team for nearly two decades. There's plenty of time to build a team around them. Because of their unique value and longevity, quarterbacks are the only position where a big trade up is justified. The problem is that history doesn't validate this--teams that trade up to get a QB haven't been successful historically. And even if your argument was "Trubisky might not have been there," there were other QB options and it's not like Trubisky was the highest-rated QB prospect in the draft.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 00:30
|
|
|
Jiminy Christmas! Shoes! posted:This just feels like a sample size problem. I don't see how trading up to get a QB can somehow be intrinsically bad. Trading up for another position, like WR or DE is fine, but not a QB? It doesn't past the smell test. It's not that it's intrinsically bad, but what it signals--typically you're talking about trading up into the top 5 spots, which already requires a ton of picks, but you're also more likely to get fleeced by a team willing to trade down that *knows* you need a QB. And comparatively, if you need a QB really badly, you're probably in a much worse place than if you need a top WR really bad (you probably already have your franchise QB), so the cost weighs more heavily, because your team probably needed the extra picks to build around your QB. kiimo posted:I guess it depends on what you mean by success. Because "franchise quarterbacks" are few and far between. Wentz looks good. Philly traded up for him. RG3 was looking real good before he kept breaking himself like a drat fool. Gabbert and Sanchez didn't. Atlanta traded up for Vick, he was definitely a franchise QB even if he had big time issues. And then Ryan Leaf. Goff is still jury out. Technically Eli and maaaybe Vick. Jury's still out on Wentz, and his cost was partially offset by trading Bradford. Abugadu posted:I think people are judgmental of trading up for a QB this year because the class was seen as weak. But there's always an element of chance in this poo poo anyway. Some 1st pick QBs bust, some undrafted guys become starters. Some suffer horrible injuries, some mentally check out of the game. You're never going to know if you made the right move until 4-5 years down the road. Sure but the problem is that the risk is close to the same for most of the top prospects, it's the cost that changes. How much better is Trubisky than Mahomes? Than Watson? Than Dobbs? Is he a 2nd, two 3rds and a 4th better? If Trubisky is a bust, it's going to hurt much more than if someone else had traded up and the Bears had to settle for their second choice. And by giving up those extra picks, the chances that he'll be a bust because you were worse off adding cheap talent to the team goes up a little bit. You pay these costs longer than you think; Atlanta definitely felt the costs of the Julio Jones trade. Same for Washington and RG3, even though they lucked into Cousins. In the salary cap era, particularly the post-rookie-pay-scale era, the easiest way to build a superior team is to take advantage of rookie contracts and have guys outpay their costs.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 01:50
|
|
|
Jiminy Christmas! Shoes! posted:It's absurd to draw any conclusions from those five guys, who success or failure were affected by a variety of factors far beyond what their teams gave up to get them. You could expand the sample to the last 40 years and it doesn't get any better (think you end up with about 12 total examples and only 2-3 success) But then I could just say the same--there isn't enough evidence to suggest that trading up is a good idea, either. You just say "it's the most important position on the team, so it must be worth it," and I agree that it's important, but so far we don't have a lot of examples to point to where we'd go "yeah, see, this is why you have to do this." And if you look at the success rate on 1st-round QBs over the same time frame (last 20 years or so), you still find that the trade-up picks underperform compared to 1st-round QBs (in terms of hit rate). It could just be bad luck, but I suspect that the additional costs and expectations placed on a QB that a team traded up to get decreases their chance of success. Bad Moon posted:Lol if you don't draft your backup and he takes over the starter position by being awesome. srsly TheChirurgeon fucked around with this message at 14:58 on May 2, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 14:55
|
|
|
Fenrir posted:Carr wasn't as bad as most of that list, but getting destroyed for a few years behind a line held together by scotch tape and paper clips can gently caress up a QB pretty hard. Still the only Carr brother with a Super Bowl ring, though
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
Vertical Lime posted:https://twitter.com/Ourand_SBJ/status/859834472543526914 lol no one is even going to try to watch that game
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 19:30
|
|
|
FizFashizzle posted:I guarantee I will watch it because once you hit thirty sleeping past like 630a is physically loving impossible. I'll see your "being older than thirty" and raise you "having a 7-month old that never sleeps past 6:30" But I'm not going to spend a lot of time searching for whatever shithouse weeaboo platform they're streaming it on
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
Intruder posted:The Texans are so dumb I hope "guys the Texans should have hired at QB go into broadcasting instead" becomes a regular thing BET please sign Kaepernick to be a sports correspondent tia
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
Chilichimp posted:Nah, I'm fine with Cam being Willie Wonka. Nah, Obama won Bernie is McNabb, since he's clearly hated by other members of his party
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 14:20
|
|
|
achillesforever6 posted:https://twitter.com/ESPNNFL/status/860521914200203265 DIdn't they draft Josh Dobbs, e.g. "This year's Dak Prescott" and "extremely weird-looking dude"
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 17:35
|
|
|
Jiminy Christmas! Shoes! posted:What teams most likely had their window close after last season? Cardinals, definitely. Also maybe the Bengals? It seems like they get a little worse each year
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2017 04:34
|
|
|
Kalli posted:Raiders and Cowboys have top notch olines, mediocre defenses and young promising quarterbacks on good offenses. It's easy to see them winning a dozen games next year, or having two injuries in the secondary and missing the playoffs. The Cowboys are in a good place, especially next year when they can start spending in earnest on defensive players. That said, I think it's a pretty safe bet that the team falls short of 13 wins again this year, in part because of a harder schedule and in part because Dak Prescott will have a worse season. Not in a terrible 'sophomore slump' kind of way, but rather in a "he's going to throw more than 5 INTs this season" way. MrLogan posted:The AFCW has more good teams than the entire NFC. On the other hand, this is just nonsense. 6-7 of the 10 best teams last season were NFC teams. The good teams in the AFC West are KC and Oakland. a neat cape posted:Denver Given the erosion on defense and the lack of a clear franchise QB right now, I'd agree with this.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2017 14:38
|
|
|
MrLogan posted:I think you are vastly overestimating the NFC teams if you think that 6 or 7 of the best 10 teams were NFC. The Ravens are better than every team in the NFC other than the Falcons and Cowboys and they aren't considered immediate contenders in the AFC. Nah, you're overestimating the Ravens, who were maybe an average team last year. They're worse than the Giants and the Redskins, which is also why they lost to both of those teams last year en route to an 8-8 finish. There are a lot of bad teams, but the split favors the NFC, which has the Cowboys, Falcons, Packers, Giants, Redskins, Seahawks, and (maybe) the Eagles. Comparatively, the AFC has the Pats, Steelers, Raiders, Chiefs and...? e: Seriously, what evidence can you offer that the Ravens are an above-average team? TheChirurgeon fucked around with this message at 15:13 on May 10, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 10, 2017 15:08
|
|
|
Amy Pole Her posted:Yeah I'm straight up confused on Mangold. Winston wasn't a mystery; he got blackballed for the same reason as Mawae: Being president of the NFLPA
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
Intruder posted:What a shock that a lot of people don't care how much you beat up women if you can play football well We live in a world where people are trying to build a new Paterno statue In other words, the world is a terrible place filled with subhuman garbage
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2017 16:40
|
|
|
Coldforge posted:Every member of the Cowboys o-line will get a minor, but season ending injury. Dak will regress and turn into a "one read" QB. Zeke will develop an eating disorder and dwarf Eddie Lacy. you should post that in the NFC East thread with the rest of the fanfiction
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:99% of the SUPPORT ARE TROOPS types are human garbage who never did a single thing for their country, in any capacity, at any point in their loving lives. For every leftie who is guilty of "virtue signaling" by (insert stereotypical hippie thing here) there are 1,000 of these worthless chuckle-fucks making a big show of their fraudulent, never did poo poo and never will do poo poo, excuse for "patriotism." In my experience, they also seldom even have family members in the military, which is why they support deployments
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2017 15:25
|
|
|
Flikken posted:Dude is still getting tested 10 times a month, sheesh. Wait is that true
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
SKULL.GIF posted:http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2017/05/08/nick-buoniconti-dolphins-cognitive-decline-nfl-head-trauma-concussions gently caress
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2017 03:50
|
|
|
swickles posted:Refs still figuring that out. 
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2017 16:36
|
|
|
Boosh! posted:David Irving just got popped for PEDs, 4 game suspension. Oh hey Cowboys offseason in full swing I see
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2017 21:22
|
|
|
Jaylon Smith, I guess
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2017 22:24
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2017 10:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 30, 2024 01:45 |
|
|
Intruder posted:Uh baseball chat is in SAS not TFF lol those Cardinals aren't gonna win it all either go Stros
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2017 04:18
|
|