Jump to content

Texans: Zero Interest in trading Watson. Stand-off mode engaged


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Oh wow.  Then what happened?  Oh yeah, Darnold lost to a 3rd string QB.  And in the process injured his shoulder on a play that was his own fault, as the doofus held onto to the ball for so long they

too f'ing bad. you didn't need to click on it

Wow, I figured he would say they are in the process of engaging in trade talks to start his press conference.....

 
He's a top 5 QB at age 25, and he's only going to get better.  He's as low-risk as you can find at QB.  Bring him in and you have over a decade of franchise QB goodness.   
The only "risk" involved is giving up the Guard, CB and WR2 you'd sacrifice with the picks.  I'm good with that.
... a tru believer I see ... I'm not this sold on Watson .. . Not even close.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using JetNation.com mobile app

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

He's a top 5 QB at age 25, and he's only going to get better.  He's as low-risk as you can find at QB.  Bring him in and you have over a decade of franchise QB goodness.   

The only "risk" involved is giving up the Guard, CB and WR2 you'd sacrifice with the picks.  I'm good with that.

He is a QB who runs a lot, maybe not for yards but as a part of the way he plays. He relies very heavily on his legs. He is undersized, has two bum knees, and doesn't have a strong enough arm for the east coast in the winter. Doesnt get much more risky than that. If you needed to get over the hump on a SB team in the next 2 years, by all means, but by the time this team is ready to compete, who the heck knows what Watson will be able to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Flea Flicking Frank said:

He is a QB who runs a lot, maybe not for yards but as a part of the way he plays. He relies very heavily on his legs. He is undersized, has two bum knees, and doesn't have a strong enough arm for the east coast in the winter. Doesnt get much more risky than that. If you needed to get over the hump on a SB team in the next 2 years, by all means, but by the time this team is ready to compete, who the heck knows what Watson will be able to do.

News flash:  Every young QB runs a lot these days.  All 4 of the top QB's in this upcoming draft class rely heavily on their legs.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/8/2021 at 4:06 PM, Gangrene said:

If the Texans, who are already 13 Million over the cap, trade Deshaun Watson before June 1st, the dead money is 21.6M with a cap saving of just 5.6M. 

Should the Texans capitulate to Watson, it's got to be in June or later.

I think the +/- sign here is backwards. If they trade Watson before June 1st then it's an initial cap hit of another $5.6MM not a cap savings. Overall they save, and it's not really a big difference if they move some of the future Watson savings to 2021 by moving someone else's current hit to next year when those Watson savings are realized.

But last I checked it's a net loss for this year. It doesn't matter for the reason I stated - the team isn't better off long term if $15MM of Watson's signing bonus hits this year or next year, with $15MM of others' 2021-2022 hits shuffled to even it out. 

***

These guys are uncuttable (well, they're cuttable but all Houston would gain is their roster spots not cap savings): Cunningham, Cobb, Mercilus, Murray, but they have lots of cap-clearing moves to make, that'd cover a Watson trade and more.

  • Tunsil isn't going anywhere - not when they're watching the Dolphins use their #3 overall pick because of him - so they could restructure him to have his 16:3 ratio for salary:bonus tilt more on the bonus side.
  • Cooks is all salary and no (signing/option) bonus since that was paid by the Rams. He's an easy one to restructure.
  • Most think they'll just cut Watt, but he might agree to a pay cut restructure, and take most of that new rate as signing bonus. Surely Watt doesn't think - particularly when the cap just dropped by ~$25MM instead of rising by ~$10MM as usual - he'd get a 1-year $17MM deal as a FA if cut, nor that as an average with him having just one $17MM type season in his last 5 (missing half or more of the season in 3 of those years).

They can clear at least $15MM just from restructuring the first two above, without killing their future flexibility. Plus Watt will be either a $17MM savings for cutting him or nearly that with a pay cut + extension, if they're so inclined. 

In addition, there are players who range from might get cut to should get cut. No one should be safe on that defense except maybe McKinney - if recovered from shoulder surgery - since he can't take too much blame for the lousy defense & isn't expensive for a typically-solid starter still in his 20s.

  • David Johnson played well, but a team in this shape has no biz with an $8.5MM RB with the eventual wall-hitting likely coming soon. No dead cap hit because they got him in the Hopkins trade. I'm on the fence with them cutting him since they save plenty by cutting Duke.
  • Duke Johnson -- can't see them keeping him instead of $4.7MM savings.
  • Brad Roby may be their best corner but he's still meh (and is a walking injury report) for $10MM; almost $9MM of which they'd save by cutting him before 6/1 (his LTBE for his $500K per-game bonus should only be 10/16 of that, or $312K, and if he played more than that it'd hit 2022 not 2021). Blah blah blah -- if they cut him in March they save $8.8MM this year and he's off their books for good.
  • Nick Martin could save $6MM but will they consider that enough savings to add yet another OL position to their needs list? $6MM doesn't buy a team a good center in free agency. Could be they hang onto him at least until they see what they get in the draft. 

There's more, that'd add up to something put together, but those are the heavier hitting individuals. The point being they're not in nearly as omg shape as New Orleans. Restructuring Tunsil/Cooks, keeping David Johnson, and cutting the rest mentioned (including Watt) clears about $50MM in 2021. Then next year they can reassess the four 2021-uncuttables. It'll be an ugly 2021 but they'll get a lot of breathing room after this season with or without trading Watson. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

News flash:  Every young QB runs a lot these days.  All 4 of the top QB's in this upcoming draft class rely heavily on their legs.

News flash: you don’t have to give up multiple first round picks and pay them a huge portion of your cap right away.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Flea Flicking Frank said:

News flash: you don’t have to give up multiple first round picks and pay them a huge portion of your cap right away.

Eventually, you have to pay a QB.  The picks are a negligible price to pay for what you get.  Eventually, you have to use a high pick OR trade up to get a franchise QB.  Kick the can down the road this year at QB and that's exactly what the Jets would have to do to get one in the next class, and that would only be a maybe when you consider the 50+ % failure rate.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

It'll be an ugly 2021 but they'll get a lot of breathing room after this season with or without trading Watson. 

Spermin’ Herman, I don’t know who writes longer posts.... you or @football guy  That said good post. Give us Watson!!

  • Upvote 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Eventually, you have to pay a QB.  The picks are a negligible price to pay for what you get.  Eventually, you have to use a high pick OR trade up to get a franchise QB.  Kick the can down the road this year at QB and that's exactly what the Jets would have to do to get one in the next class, and that would only be a maybe when you consider the 50+ % failure rate.

The picks are not negligible in any way. Your trading premium picks.  And your trading them for a guy with two serious knee surgeries. The clock is ticking on Watson, he’s not the long term solution you think he is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Flea Flicking Frank said:

The picks are not negligible in any way. Your trading premium picks.  And your trading them for a guy with two serious knee surgeries. The clock is ticking on Watson, he’s not the long term solution you think he is.

You are spending 1 of those picks, likely 2 overall on an injury prone QB in Wilson (if rumors are true) and historically have a 50/50 shot of that pick working out. Pay the extra picks to get a top 3 player at the more important position in professional sports.

Hypothetically let's say the Jets gave up 4 firsts for Watson. 2 of those picks are likely to bust, so would you give up one proven player on a cheap deal for a top 3 QB? (Since one of the 4 would have been a QB)

  • Post of the Week 1
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
The picks are not negligible in any way. Your trading premium picks.  And your trading them for a guy with two serious knee surgeries. The clock is ticking on Watson, he’s not the long term solution you think he is.


Premium picks that have a 50+ percent fail rate.

Watson is 100 % an elite franchise QB.

The clock is ticking. lol. He’s 25. I’ll take that ticking clock any day. Knee surgeries aren’t as bad as they used to be and he hasn’t had a significant injury in 4 years.

All football players come with risk. Most notably those shiny rookies you want to draft so badly. Nevermind that there would still be plenty of picks left to draft shiny rookies.

This is getting silly.
  • Upvote 3
  • Post of the Week 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 


Premium picks that have a 50+ percent fail rate.

Watson is 100 % an elite franchise QB.

The clock is ticking. lol. He’s 25. I’ll take that ticking clock any day. Knee surgeries aren’t as bad as they used to be and he hasn’t had a significant injury in 4 years.

All football players come with risk. Most notably those shiny rookies you want to draft so badly. Nevermind that there would still be plenty of picks left to draft shiny rookies.

This is getting silly.

Dude, it is shocking how you have defended every single pick Douglas made last year as if they were all gold and now all of a sudden picks don't mean squat and many of them will utterly fail now that they don't fit your new agenda.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Eventually, you have to pay a QB.  The picks are a negligible price to pay for what you get.  Eventually, you have to use a high pick OR trade up to get a franchise QB.  Kick the can down the road this year at QB and that's exactly what the Jets would have to do to get one in the next class, and that would only be a maybe when you consider the 50+ % failure rate.

No, let’s have another facepalm season and then use two first rounders and more to trade up for the next Sanchez/Darnold next year. That’s much smarter. 

Also lost in the Darnold half of the equation is it’d be shocking if the Jets went with Darnold and another dirt cheap backup with no chance of overtaking him in a head-to-head. If they keep Darnold I half expect a good chunk (i.e. no less than the $10-16MM range) of that precious “don’t use it on Watson” cap room to go towards a QB with multiple recent seasons of starting experience, whether via FA or trade (e.g. Brissett, Trubisky, Garoppolo, Mariota).

  • Upvote 1
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
No, let’s have another facepalm season and then use two first rounders and more to trade up for the next Sanchez/Darnold next year. That’s much smarter. 
Also lost in the Darnold half of the equation is it’d be shocking if the Jets went with Darnold and another dirt cheap backup with no chance of overtaking him in a head-to-head. If they keep Darnold I half expect a good chunk (i.e. no less than the $10-16MM range) of that precious “don’t use it on Watson” cap room to go towards a QB with multiple recent seasons of starting experience, whether via FA or trade (e.g. Brissett, Trubisky, Garoppolo, Mariota).
Darnold / Wilson ... or Darnold / Fields would not be a bad camp lineup.

Darnold gets a chance to dominate ... if not play him in preseason and trade him.

Lots of good options that dont include Watson ... plus I dont think JD wants a guy that wants not only to be QB ... but also , as has been recently been reported... wants control over the roster.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using JetNation.com mobile app


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Beerfish said:

Dude, it is shocking how you have defended every single pick Douglas made last year as if they were all gold and now all of a sudden picks don't mean squat and many of them will utterly fail now that they don't fit your new agenda.

I would likewise trade out entire 2020 draft class for Deshaun Watson

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I think the +/- sign here is backwards. If they trade Watson before June 1st then it's an initial cap hit of another $5.6MM not a cap savings. Overall they save, and it's not really a big difference if they move some of the future Watson savings to 2021 by moving someone else's current hit to next year when those Watson savings are realized.

But last I checked it's a net loss for this year. It doesn't matter for the reason I stated - the team isn't better off long term if $15MM of Watson's signing bonus hits this year or next year, with $15MM of others' 2021-2022 hits shuffled to even it out. 

***

These guys are uncuttable (well, they're cuttable but all Houston would gain is their roster spots not cap savings): Cunningham, Cobb, Mercilus, Murray, but they have lots of cap-clearing moves to make, that'd cover a Watson trade and more.

  • Tunsil isn't going anywhere - not when they're watching the Dolphins use their #3 overall pick because of him - so they could restructure him to have his 16:3 ratio for salary:bonus tilt more on the bonus side.
  • Cooks is all salary and no (signing/option) bonus since that was paid by the Rams. He's an easy one to restructure.
  • Most think they'll just cut Watt, but he might agree to a pay cut restructure, and take most of that new rate as signing bonus. Surely Watt doesn't think - particularly when the cap just dropped by ~$25MM instead of rising by ~$10MM as usual - he'd get a 1-year $17MM deal as a FA if cut, nor that as an average with him having just one $17MM type season in his last 5 (missing half or more of the season in 3 of those years).

They can clear at least $15MM just from restructuring the first two above, without killing their future flexibility. Watt will be either a $17MM savings for cutting him or nearly that with a pay cut + extension, if they're so inclined. 

In addition, there are players who range from might get cut to should get cut. No one should be safe on that defense except maybe McKinney - if recovered from shoulder surgery - since he can't take too much blame for the lousy defense & isn't expensive for a typically-solid starter still in his 20s.

  • David Johnson played well, but a team in this shape has no biz with an $8.5MM RB with the eventual wall-hitting likely coming soon. No dead cap hit because they got him in the Hopkins trade. I'm on the fence with them cutting him since they save plenty by cutting Duke.
  • Duke Johnson -- can't see them keeping him instead of $4.7MM savings.
  • Brad Roby may be their best corner but he's still meh (and is a walking injury report) for $10MM; almost $9MM of which they'd save by cutting him before 6/1 (his LTBE for his $500K per-game bonus should only be 10/16 of that, or $312K, and if he played more than that it'd hit 2022 not 2021). Blah blah blah -- if they cut him in March they save $8.8MM this year and he's off their books for good.
  • Nick Martin could save $6MM but will they consider that enough savings to add yet another OL position to their needs list? $6MM doesn't buy a team a good center in free agency. Could be they hang onto him at least until they see what they get in the draft. 

There's more, that'd add up to something put together, but those are the heavier hitting individuals. The point being they're not in nearly as omg shape as New Orleans. Restructuring Tunsil/Cooks, keeping David Johnson, and cutting the rest mentioned (including Watt) clears about $50MM. Then next year they can reassess the four 2021-uncuttables. It'll be an ugly 2021 but they'll get a lot of breathing room after this season with or without trading Watson. 

Absolutely, the Texans are not in as bad a shape as New Orleans. Like other over the cap team in the the NFL can restructure  and kick the financial can down the road .

They have  a top four quarterback at 25 years of age. The questions is why would they trade a superstar QB, Watson away and make a poor cap situation  worse?  Because he wants away from toxic management and asked for a trade? 

It's my guess,  but until Watson shows up in camp and starts misbehaving like Darrelle Revis or starts  personally attacking like Jamal Adams the Texans are not yet under much pressure to capitulate.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Dunnie said:

Darnold / Wilson ... or Darnold / Fields would not be a bad camp lineup.

Darnold gets a chance to dominate ... if not play him in preseason and trade him.

Lots of good options that dont include Watson ... plus I dont think JD wants a guy that wants not only to be QB ... but also , as has been recently been reported... wants control over the roster.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using JetNation.com mobile app

 

If you honestly believe this, I honestly have a bridge to sell you. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gangrene said:

Absolutely, the Texans are not in as bad a shape as New Orleans. Like other over the cap team in the the NFL can restructure  and kick the financial can down the road .

They have  a top four quarterback at 25 years of age. The questions is why would they trade a superstar QB, Watson away and make a poor cap situation  worse?  Because he wants away from toxic management and asked for a trade? 

It's my guess,  but until Watson shows up in camp and starts misbehaving like Darrelle Revis or starts attacking personally attacking like Jamal Adams the Texans are not yet under much pressure to capitulate.

They know Watson isn’t a bad dude so they will take advantage of that fact. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dunnie said:

Darnold / Wilson ... or Darnold / Fields would not be a bad camp lineup.

Darnold gets a chance to dominate ... if not play him in preseason and trade him.

Lots of good options that dont include Watson ... plus I dont think JD wants a guy that wants not only to be QB ... but also , as has been recently been reported... wants control over the roster.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using JetNation.com mobile app

 

Question: If you believe in Fields enough to invest the #2 overall pick in him, why are you still keeping Darnold instead of trading him for a pick before the draft, that could help surround Fields or the defense?

IMO = better to pair the rookie with a veteran who won’t rob the team of a (minimum) day 2 pick who’ll be cheap for the upcoming 4 seasons.

If you think there’s that much of a chance of blowing the pick with Fields (i.e. he’s worse than Darnold), then don’t draft him in the first place. Throw that #2 pick and more to Houston for the sure+real thing, take what you can get for Darnold, and pick up a cheap veteran behind Watson (or just go with last year’s QB4 Morgan for all I care lol). 

  • Upvote 2
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Waka Flocka Flacco said:

Shocking to whom?

It’s one thing to gamble on Darnold suddenly becoming a good starter in year 4. It’s another thing to gamble on that with no serious backup plan.

But if it better satisfies your sense of pessimism, replace “shocking” with “unlikely” instead.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Question: If you believe in Fields enough to invest the #2 overall pick in him, why are you still keeping Darnold instead of trading him for a pick before the draft, that could help surround Fields or the defense?
IMO = better to pair the rookie with a veteran who won’t rob the team of a (minimum) day 2 pick who’ll be cheap for the upcoming 4 seasons.
If you think there’s that much of a chance of blowing the pick with Fields (i.e. he’s worse than Darnold), then don’t draft him in the first place. Throw that #2 pick and more to Houston for the sure+real thing, take what you can get for Darnold, and pick up a cheap veteran behind Watson (or just go with last year’s QB4 Morgan for all I care lol). 
I think Darnolds value is low right now ... and is capable of improving his return. I also give like a 5 percent chance that he can still be THE man.

So by holding onto him .. I'd hope to improve on his trade return and couch that bet with Wilson/Fields.

Either way someone is getting traded for more than Darnold can command right now, and we make the wise decision on who to keep based on performance

Always sell high.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using JetNation.com mobile app


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, fullblast said:

The Texans are apparently sniffing around the Wentz situation. Sounds like they know they're preparing for life without Watson, either via trade OR hold out.

Only via trade. No cap relief from a holdout and there's no way they could have both Watson and Wentz on their cap long term

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Gangrene said:

Absolutely, the Texans are not in as bad a shape as New Orleans. Like other over the cap team in the the NFL can restructure  and kick the financial can down the road .

They have  a top four quarterback at 25 years of age. The questions is why would they trade a superstar QB, Watson away and make a poor cap situation  worse?  Because he wants away from toxic management and asked for a trade? 

It's my guess,  but until Watson shows up in camp and starts misbehaving like Darrelle Revis or starts attacking personally attacking like Jamal Adams the Texans are not yet under much pressure to capitulate.

Yeah the point is not just that they’re in far better shape than New Orleans (or maybe the more apt phrasing is “far less bad shape” lol). That’s clearly true.

It’s that whether they move some of their hits this year to next year, they still have to hit but it’s easier to deal with in 2022 when they’d be getting some $50MM more cap relief anyway from guys they’ll then cut loose (far more than that if they trade Watson). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

Only via trade. No cap relief from a holdout and there's no way they could have both Watson and Wentz on their cap long term

I think the only thing makes sense for the Texans is to assess market value for Wentz so they can have an understanding of their market for Watson. Doesn't seem like there is any realistic scenario to me that they have an interest in swapping.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dunnie said:

I think Darnolds value is low right now ... and is capable of improving his return. I also give like a 5 percent chance that he can still be THE man.

So by holding onto him .. I'd hope to improve on his trade return and couch that bet with Wilson/Fields.

Either way someone is getting traded for more than Darnold can command right now, and we make the wise decision on who to keep based on performance

Always sell high.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using JetNation.com mobile app

 

It’s not lost on me that Darnold’s value is low now, in comparison to prior to his flop 3rd year, but I don’t think it’s as low as you think. Plus if anything, what happened with Mahomes in the Super Bowl raised his value.

His trade value is going to be higher before the draft than after it. After the draft everyone else has already made their 2021 QB arrangements, and all you’re praying for is a major injury to a team without a backup plan. 

The “always sell high” in this equation presumes his value will rise - or even remain about the same - if/when he loses a camp competition to a rookie who’ll get every benefit of the doubt Darnold won’t (and shouldn’t). His value will be far lower then than it is now.

For you to think that won’t happen, you’d have to really believe in Darnold, in which case why are you using the #2 pick on Fields in the first place?

You’re further running the risk of Darnold looking unimpressive whether he wins or loses a head-to-head. It’s hardly impossible he still looks meh but that’s enough to hold off a rookie. Merely beating out a rookie doesn’t therefore mean his trade value has gone way up. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 


Premium picks that have a 50+ percent fail rate.

Watson is 100 % an elite franchise QB.

The clock is ticking. lol. He’s 25. I’ll take that ticking clock any day. Knee surgeries aren’t as bad as they used to be and he hasn’t had a significant injury in 4 years.

All football players come with risk. Most notably those shiny rookies you want to draft so badly. Nevermind that there would still be plenty of picks left to draft shiny rookies.

This is getting silly.

 

If its so silly, why bother with my argument?

The reality is the QB position is changing right before our eyes. Im not saying its RB yet, but it seems to be trending more in that direction. The definition of franchise QB of 10 years ago may not really apply anymore. The young QB's are all mobile. Very few mobile QB's historically have had longevity without transitioning to a pocket passer. 

Build a strong team around the QB, get a mobile QB with some semblance of accuracy and decision making, and you win. That is the modern NFL. That is largely what Watson is, great, but your giving up a sh*t load to get him, paying him a sh*t load, and he has two bum knees.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Beerfish said:

Dude, it is shocking how you have defended every single pick Douglas made last year as if they were all gold and now all of a sudden picks don't mean squat and many of them will utterly fail now that they don't fit your new agenda.

regardless hes right. 50% of 1st rd draft picks are busts

i cant believe a fan base that hasnt had a FQB or a SB in over 50 years , half of this board doesnt want a 25 yr old FQB.

they cry over those draft picks. some of you have become so used to losing you value draft picks over a young star. cause god forbid we didnt have any 1st rd picks on draft day. thats like a holiday for us. the happiest day of the year. and thats a sign of a losing franchise, a losing fan base. 

winning franchises would get Watson and not worry about the cost. why? cause there winners and they know they have to find players in rds 2-7. all wining teams do. KC, NE, GB...... arent made up of all #1 picks. and TB who had 8 this year was horrible for the last 3 years. didnt make the playoffs since 2007. and they still wouldnt have until they signed a former 6th rd pick to be there QB.

finding a FQB is hard, if not we all would have one. thats why if one becomes available you get him, worry about the rest of the roster another day. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dunnie said:

Darnold / Wilson ... or Darnold / Fields would not be a bad camp lineup.

Darnold gets a chance to dominate ... if not play him in preseason and trade him.

Lots of good options that dont include Watson ... plus I dont think JD wants a guy that wants not only to be QB ... but also , as has been recently been reported... wants control over the roster.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using JetNation.com mobile app

 

If you put Darnold in a QB comp and he losses he will be cut.  His trade value before the draft is the highest it will likely be.  The only reason to keep him is you believe he will be our QB in which case you don't waste a premium pick on a QB.  You trade down and take a haul and hope Darnold is an NFL QB.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Dude, it is shocking how you have defended every single pick Douglas made last year as if they were all gold and now all of a sudden picks don't mean squat and many of them will utterly fail now that they don't fit your new agenda.



I didn’t defend Perine, lol.

And yes. JD can make great picks and they’ll still fail at a 50+ percent rate. If Becton, Mims, Hall and either Davis, Zuniga or Clark hit, this was a great draft. Thems the breaks when it comes to making picks.

Meanwhile, Watson is 100 % a stud. I would trust him way more than Joe Douglas.

The fact that I’m admitting this, as a JD supporter, should give you pause. Meanwhile you’ve been a huge critic of his but still LOVE all them picks!!!
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Beerfish said:

Dude, it is shocking how you have defended every single pick Douglas made last year as if they were all gold and now all of a sudden picks don't mean squat and many of them will utterly fail now that they don't fit your new agenda.

Lol

Well I don’t feel that way. ;) 

  1. I think he’s gotten way too much credit for Becton (thrilled as I am with the pick, it’s not like it came down to Becton & 3 bust tackles and he shrewdly picked the right one; far from it).
  2. Mims is still just all potential and light on production, and don’t know if his star is brighter now or the day he was drafted.
  3. His safety pick sucks, and I’m hoping the new HC/DC can get out of Davis what he was supposed to be. Luckily the offer for Adams came in before we could see Davis on the field or it might not have happened.
  4. Zuniga barely saw time even as a situational rusher as a rookie, even with the season in garbage time, on a team with no edge rusher. 
  5. Perrine isn’t demonstrably better than a 6th round prospect. He can gain 5 yards when there’s a 5-yard hole, and gets stuffed when there is none. Every UDFA/backup RB in the league can do that as well.
  6. Morgan was 4th string like Hackenberg as a rookie. He’s not good enough to rely upon as the QB2 until the team gets to see him on the field again, well after this spring’s FA and draft. 
  7. Clark, like Morgan, wasn’t even active for a single game as a backup. The hope, I’m sure, is he’d start to give a reason we could dump Van Roten by midseason. Instead a guy cut for the roster spot in like November effortlessly leapfrogged him, and the team is again heavily iOL shopping.
  8. Hall looked good for a rookie more than good compared to other starters. Don’t get me wrong - I love the pick here - but Hall’s got a lot more to prove before this is a wow selection and not just a worthwhile try.
  9. Mann was just about the league’s worst punter. Bottom 5 anyway. 

And what’s crazier is his FA pickups have been worse.

So yes, if Watson is available I’m not worrying about what might be with JD’s picks. If these guys don’t improve dramatically, and JD picks more of the same, then we’re going to suck anyway & a few extra picks won’t save us any more than they saved us with Maccagnan.

Douglas is well-regarded around the league, so there’s that. I’m hopeful he’ll grow into an excellent GM. But he’s got to do a lot better than he’s done.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...