Bert Breer’s update on Sam Darnold

[Chrebetfan80]

4 minutes ago, dcJet said:

We're still in the Watson hunt even if we trade Sam and pick a QB. 

If the Texans are interested in our rookie QB, bingo... rookie plus two firsts does it.  

If not, we can trade our rookie for a future one and still get that deal done.

not saying you're wrong, but I think its more unlikely that we select a rookie qb only to trade him away.  They would have probably preferred to trade down, have the additional draft capital and then trade Sam away with picks and have a better foundation of talent around Watson.  

Its really a matter of team building and asset acquisition.  Sam netting a first (if that comes to fruition) makes it appetizing to deal him and draft a rookie, especially if you have them graded similar. It gives you an extra 1st this year (a potential foundation player) and the ability to reset the QB salary clock.  

However, Keeping sam and trading down can add not only another first next year, but multiple 2nd day picks and possibly even an additional first in 2023.  That route allows for the greatest number of players to be added to the foundation of this team, significantly building the talent base.  The risk is if Sam flops, youre back to the well for a QB next year.  

But this is where the flexibility with Watson comes in.  You could now have up to 3 firsts next year and possibly 2 in 2023 to deal for Watson, plus tall the talent you already added from the trade down.  This makes a deal for Watson, who will command a high price, much more palatable when looking at still trying to build your franchise.  

 

Again I do not think Watson comes here, I just don't see it happening at all, but if you want to hang to any glimmer of hope, I think the best chance to do so and still build the team successfully is to keep Darnold and trade back from 2OA.  That's just my opinion though. 

[Dcat]

18 hours ago, Beerfish said:

If the jets love one of these two guys go for it.  If not do not force up value due to need.  Mahommes trade up by KC was anything but cost prohibitive. 

The league is littered with darnolds, goffs, mariottas, winstons, gabberts, bortles, trubiskys etc

If I can turn #2 overall into pitts or Devonta smith or Jamarr chase plus two future first routers or something along those lines you think about it.

 

^fx'd

[T0mShane]

14 hours ago, derp said:

The same basic premise exists if they can’t trade for Watson, I just don’t know how you draft the quarterback and bring in the receiver because who’s going to want to play with a rookie QB and what pass catcher not named Smith, Chase, or Pitts is ready to step in day one and be the passing game focal point in a Shanahan offense? Then you’re kind of sticking with Mims as they guy and as much as I like Mims I think setting the quarterback up to fail...unless they bench him for a year which I’d be in favor of.

Ultimately if they go the rookie QB route - I do think Darnold is gone, the market seems to be bananas and I don’t think they can extend him based on next year - I really think the need to just focus on the quarterback’s development. The Sanchez approach didn’t work but I don’t think surrounding him with talent was the issue, it was being a win now team and having talent. If you’re going to have a rookie QB on this team and he’s playing, he needs to have a primary passing game target, they need to throw the ball a ton, and offensive concepts need to be simple, to his strengths, and expand gradually. Saleh can work with scraps on defense in the meantime. Like I said, don’t care unless you can rush the passer. Put the guy in a position to succeed, develop him, then try to win.

It will definitely be interesting to see what the move is if the Watson thing falls through for whatever reason. You’d think Douglas would have to empty his pistols in the chase for Watson in any case, but the Plan B and Plan C is fairly deflating by comparison (draft Wilson?; keep Darnold, trade down?). I suppose the non-Watson option that would intrigue me the most is the one where you maximize future picks by trading down AND trading Darnold, signing a vet (Alex Smith, Jameis Winston, Nick Mullens) and drafting either Fields or Lance in the 5-8 range and then sitting them. It’d take a lot of finesse to get enough talent in place before the rookie is ready to take the reins, unless Mims blows up, but that’s the path, I’d guess. 

[dcJet]

After the draft we lose our status as favorites for Watson.  There will be more competition as other teams may try to load up for Watson too by trading for future ones and clearing cap like Detroit did recently.

JD's gonna need a good read on the situation to remain the favorite in the hunt. 

This all needs to be considered when deciding Sammy's fate.

This offseason is the most excitement we've had since the Fitzmagic year.

 

[derp]

23 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

It will definitely be interesting to see what the move is if the Watson thing falls through for whatever reason. You’d think Douglas would have to empty his pistols in the chase for Watson in any case, but the Plan B and Plan C is fairly deflating by comparison (draft Wilson?; keep Darnold, trade down?). I suppose the non-Watson option that would intrigue me the most is the one where you maximize future picks by trading down AND trading Darnold, signing a vet (Alex Smith, Jameis Winston, Nick Mullens) and drafting either Fields or Lance in the 5-8 range and then sitting them. It’d take a lot of finesse to get enough talent in place before the rookie is ready to take the reins, unless Mims blows up, but that’s the path, I’d guess. 

I could not agree with you more. Brissett would be fine in the vet group too.

I’ve railed on the NFL’s recent quarterback drafting track record a few times and I know Douglas cut his teeth in Baltimore where their two first round quarterbacks (Flacco, Jackson) were taken in the back half of the first round.

Just can’t imagine him putting his job on the line to draft a guy to play in a half formulated offense at 2 - especially when guys 2-4 in this draft are all both talented and flawed. If you know there’s a degree of randomness and situation that factor into how well a guy plays when he’s drafted, wouldn’t you just take the fourth guy and the additional assets you get from that? Better situation for the QB, less risk. Obviously they’ll have a favorite of that group but a) it’s probably just splitting hairs between those guys and b) who’s to say their favorite isn’t Fields or Lance and they can get him at 8 or even 10 or 12?

Door 3 is build the roster with a reclamation project at QB and if he hits you’re good and if not you draft one in the future with assets you continue to compile. Interestingly enough, the most interesting QB reclamation project in the league is on the roster already. The big issues there are a) his contract situation is not ideal and you might have to do some weird Sanchez Wentz deal that blows up in your face if he plays well and b) if he is bad you’re probably causing whatever asset is on your roster from the early first round this year to regress since it’s basically all pass catchers and  quarterbacks early and c) you’re banking on someone emerging in next year’s quarterback class and having enough assets to go get them and d) the quarterback market and equity market seem to be comparably out of control - if you’re offered a mid-first round pick for Darnold and the flip side of that is if Darnold wasn’t on your roster would you give a mid-first round pick to get him to be that reclamation project I think that answer is a pretty emphatic no.

Douglas also seems like a bit of a boring wild man though, not someone who’s going to back himself into a corner but someone who will take a chance if it’s the right decision (Mims trade down jumps out). If no Watson trade I expect an interior lineman, a pass rusher, and a tier 2 receiver to be the jewels of the free agent haul, a Darnold trade with the market as crazy as it is, a stopgap veteran option, and him to do something like that trade with Carolina where he can kick back to 8 and have a ton of options. Take a QB if he likes, pass catcher or lineman if he doesn’t, and have four more picks in the top 40 (23, 34, Carolina’s 2, something from the Darnold trade) and three first round picks next year. It’s boring but probably prudent.

[Chrebetfan80]

18 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

It will definitely be interesting to see what the move is if the Watson thing falls through for whatever reason. You’d think Douglas would have to empty his pistols in the chase for Watson in any case, but the Plan B and Plan C is fairly deflating by comparison (draft Wilson?; keep Darnold, trade down?). I suppose the non-Watson option that would intrigue me the most is the one where you maximize future picks by trading down AND trading Darnold, signing a vet (Alex Smith, Jameis Winston, Nick Mullens) and drafting either Fields or Lance in the 5-8 range and then sitting them. It’d take a lot of finesse to get enough talent in place before the rookie is ready to take the reins, unless Mims blows up, but that’s the path, I’d guess. 

I am in the minority here, but I think currently the best option for this franchise to build a sustained winner is to keep Darnold and add a tremendous amount of capital draft assets.  I just think the team has too many holes to fill over the next couple of years that that plan offers the best way to build a talented team.  I also still hold out hope that Sam at the bare minimum will not be as bad as he was the last two years under Gase.  Now does that mean he will be a top 15 or top 10 qb? no I have no evidence to suggest that he will make that turn around, but I am fairly confident in saying there is no way he can be worse.  

Now i understand all the fans here that say well he's terrible we need to move on.  And admittedly I do like Wilson quite a bit in this draft, so If you told me I can get a mid to late 1st for Sam, then I think I would have to pull the trigger and do that as it is kind of a "best of both worlds" scenario.  Anything lower than a 1st I start to waver however as I just think we need premium capital in order to add as much talent to a destitute roster as possible.  

Your scenario would be also very enticing but I think is too risky of a plan in the long term.  If you told me that they would trade down, take fields or lance in the 6-8 range, then trade Darnold for a 2nd or higher and still have the haul of the trade down?  Well then JD may be the best GM of all time.  That would be a move among moves to be able to maneuver with that ability to get a big haul for 2OA and still get guys with premium upside in Fields or Lance to sit behind a veteran.  I just see that as too risky a venture for JD though to go in with this plan. 

However I could see that scenario unfolding if we traded down to target Pitts and we're sitting with Lance or Fields staring us in the face.  I could see JD calling teams about Darnold and then making the move then. 

[Charlie Brown]

9 minutes ago, Chrebetfan80 said:

If you told me that they would trade down, take fields or lance in the 6-8 range, then trade Darnold for a 2nd or higher and still have the haul of the trade down?  Well then JD may be the best GM of all time.  That would be a move among moves to be able to maneuver with that ability to get a big haul for 2OA and still get guys with premium upside in Fields or Lance to sit behind a veteran.  I just see that as too risky a venture for JD though to go in with this plan. 

However I could see that scenario unfolding if we traded down to target Pitts and we're sitting with Lance or Fields staring us in the face.  I could see JD calling teams about Darnold and then making the move then. 

This is what I think will happen..   

[Chrebetfan80]

2 minutes ago, Charlie Brown said:

This is what I think will happen..   

I am less inclined to think that will be the scenario that ends up becoming reality. 

I am pretty sure if Darnold is on the roster come the draft, we will be trading down and targeting one of Pitts or Chase with that pick.  If both are gone, I actually envision JD trading back a second time.

[J_Smith]

At this point I’d rather see anyone other than Darnold under center. I’d actually be happy to trade down from 2, trade Darnold, and sign jameis to a 1 year prove-it deal. Not far removed from 5k yard season, and maybe a year with Payton and brees helped fix the decision making

[Greensleeves]

2 hours ago, T0mShane said:

It will definitely be interesting to see what the move is if the Watson thing falls through for whatever reason. You’d think Douglas would have to empty his pistols in the chase for Watson in any case, but the Plan B and Plan C is fairly deflating by comparison (draft Wilson?; keep Darnold, trade down?). I suppose the non-Watson option that would intrigue me the most is the one where you maximize future picks by trading down AND trading Darnold, signing a vet (Alex Smith, Jameis Winston, Nick Mullens) and drafting either Fields or Lance in the 5-8 range and then sitting them. It’d take a lot of finesse to get enough talent in place before the rookie is ready to take the reins, unless Mims blows up, but that’s the path, I’d guess. 

Worst case scenario for me if we don't get Watson is not coming away with Wilson. We can't waste another year with a stop gap QB. No Watson, draft Wilson - he's going to be a stud and build around him with all the picks. Get him experience next year, even if it's half the year. He'll be an upgrade immediately for us and we'll have plenty of picks and FA money to give him some solid weapons.