Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner
 

How many QBs in this Leauge

Dankbeerman : 4/15/2019 10:34 am
would you be willing to trade both #1 picks this year for? Knowing you would have to pay them top dollar on top of the trade cost and they would be added to the current roster with no help for the deffense coming until rd 2.

Started thinking about it when someone told me the Giants should trade both picks for Russel Wilson and sign him to the contract he wants.

My list is short.

Mahomes and Luck. Thats it.

Rodgers just misses out he is just past his prime and injuries have lowered his ability to elevate his team. If it was just picks or just money there would be more guys on my list.

Whos on your list?
Pages: 1 2 <<Prev | Show All |
RE: RE: RE: RE: None  
Pep22 : 4/15/2019 11:41 am : link
In comment 14387030 dep026 said:
Quote:
In comment 14386989 Pep22 said:


Quote:



Competitive teams have high end QBs. its the most important position in all of sports.



Really? So when Jacksonville went to the AFC Championship game in 2017, you considered Bortles a high end QB? Same with Case Keenum in the NFC? or when Mariota won a playoff game in 2017? Or Tyrod Taylor getting to the playoffs? Or Lamar jackson and his inability to throw the ball too? I wouldnt even consider Trubisky or Goff high end QBs as they were often why their teams lost or struggled in the playoffs. Hell, even Dak won a playoff game!

I mean you look at guys like Stafford - who rarely makes the playoffs. Rodgers didnt make it this year. Cam is every other yaer it seems. These guys can be viewed as high end QBs and their teams are mediocre more so than they are competiutive.

You know why teams are competitive? Cause they are well rounded and can beat you in more ways than 1.


I don't think its wise to follow a model a few exceptions of subpar QBs being on a few playoff teams. not a good idea to have a well past his prime QB who needs everything to be perfect to make a play... and one who makes $$ that one would associate with a great QB (in a salary cap environment).
I'm going to try and follow your restrictions as best I can  
USAF NYG Fan : 4/15/2019 11:44 am : link
First, I don't think you followed your own restrictions as Mahomes wouldn't need to be signed to a big contract right away. He's under contract through 2020 with a 5th year option through 2021 (albeit a costly 5th year tag). He will remain cheap for the next 2 years. Lucky Chiefs!

Regardless I don't think I would pick Mahomes as it's against my rule of giving 2 seasons (play time seasons) of a player before evaluating. I'll admit, he sure looks like a stud right now though. For that reason and the previous reason, all QBs draft last year are out as well.

I'll mentioned the QBs I considered and the results:

Rogers, Brees, Roethlisberger, Rivers, Brady, (No): I agree that Rogers is just barely outside the age that it would make me comfortable. Plus I just don't like what I've been hearing.

Luck (No): The injuries concern me so I don't trust his durability.

Matt Ryan (No): I'd like to give a good reason why but I'm just not a fan of his. He doesn't really stand out to me.

Cam Newton (No): I think he's still the definition of mobile QB. He's not an accurate passer and despite his size, has been dinged up a couple times.

Dak Prescott (No): So overrated by Cowboy's fans and football analysts. He's a game manager and nothing more.

Deshaun Watson (No): Mobile QB.

Note: My definition of Mobile QB means more mobile than a pure passer vs a QB with mobility who will only run if they have to but it's usually to create time for a receiver to get open and protect themselves when they run with the ball.

Jared Goff (No): I'm just not a fan. I don't think he's anything special.

Carson Wentz (No): I think he's very good but can't stay healthy.

Derek Carr (No): He might have already peaked because he doesn't appear to be getting any better. Over-rated.

Russel Wilson (Tentatively Yes): He is the only QB I take this shot with. He is an elite level QB. Young enough to still be in his prime through the contract they would sign him for. Durable as he's never missed a game. Playoff and SB experience. A QB who is mobile (not a mobile QB). The tentatively yes is because of your last restrictions of having a terrible defense.

Fast forward to 2020 and assuming the Giants defense moves to at least average, I would go all out for Wilson if he's still available. Fast forward to 2021, the Chiefs shop Mahomes, he's just as good as he was in 2018, and the Giants' defense is average then and I would go all out for him as well.
Mahomes  
Jay on the Island : 4/15/2019 11:44 am : link
Wentz
Darnold
Mayfield
Watson
Perhaps Goff too
I would trade  
Jay on the Island : 4/15/2019 11:45 am : link
3 firsts for Mahomes. KC wouldn't accept that.
RE: RE: why do we have trade picks for Wilson?  
USAF NYG Fan : 4/15/2019 11:47 am : link
In comment 14387040 dep026 said:
Quote:
In comment 14387038 Vegas Steve said:


Quote:


If he is not signed by tonight he will be FA next year

Luck and Pat Mahomes are the real deal



Seattle can franchise Wilson for 2 years at a reasonable cost after this year.

Reasonable cost? Under the franchise tag he will likely be the highest paid QB in the league (or very close to it) for that franchised season.
RE: RE: RE: why do we have trade picks for Wilson?  
dep026 : 4/15/2019 11:49 am : link
In comment 14387063 USAF NYG Fan said:
Quote:
In comment 14387040 dep026 said:


Quote:


In comment 14387038 Vegas Steve said:


Quote:


If he is not signed by tonight he will be FA next year

Luck and Pat Mahomes are the real deal



Seattle can franchise Wilson for 2 years at a reasonable cost after this year.


Reasonable cost? Under the franchise tag he will likely be the highest paid QB in the league (or very close to it) for that franchised season.


I read 30 million first year, 36 the 2nd.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: None  
Johnny5 : 4/15/2019 11:53 am : link
In comment 14387049 Pep22 said:
Quote:

I don't think its wise to follow a model a few exceptions of subpar QBs being on a few playoff teams. not a good idea to have a well past his prime QB who needs everything to be perfect to make a play... and one who makes $$ that one would associate with a great QB (in a salary cap environment).

I can't even debate you when you throw in the "QB that needs everything to be perfect" rhetoric. If you consider a boost to even just mediocre blocking "perfect" I don't know what to say. The empirical evidence was there last year that:

A) Our OL stunk (Even if you say the QB should have played better, how do you explain average 1st contact on the RB at 6 inches as needing everything to be perfect?? Baffling)
B) The offense and staff had been changed TWICE now in the last 3 years. Believe it or not, all 11 players on offense need time to be comfortable with the system (as well as the staff becoming comfortable with the players). I'd like to see somebody dispute this fact.

I will argue to my death that if we kept Coughlin in 2016 and gave him that defense, we are easily, EASILY averaging more than MacAdoo's sub 20 points per game... and we went 11-5 with that crap. Just imagine if we had the 2015 offense coupled with the 2016 defense?
RE: RE: RE: why do we have trade picks for Wilson?  
Pep22 : 4/15/2019 11:55 am : link
In comment 14387063 USAF NYG Fan said:
Quote:
In comment 14387040 dep026 said:


Quote:


In comment 14387038 Vegas Steve said:


Quote:


If he is not signed by tonight he will be FA next year

Luck and Pat Mahomes are the real deal



Seattle can franchise Wilson for 2 years at a reasonable cost after this year.


Reasonable cost? Under the franchise tag he will likely be the highest paid QB in the league (or very close to it) for that franchised season.


It is reasonable in the sense that unlike NYGs situation, you're getting a difference maker for that elevated cost.
I worry about Luck  
Go Terps : 4/15/2019 11:56 am : link
He doesn't look like the same thrower to me. The shoulder injury understandably looks like it's taken a toll. He can obviously still perform at an extremely high level, but I'd be worried about him breaking down early.
Mahomes and Mayfield  
Ira : 4/15/2019 11:58 am : link
.
RE: None  
djm : 4/15/2019 12:42 pm : link
In comment 14386965 dep026 said:
Quote:
...

If we are going to get this team competitive again, we need good players in each side of the ball.

Mahomes is a sexy choice, but I am not sure I would do that either. Keep your picks and get as many good players as possible.


I hear where youíre coming from believe me I do, but remember 2004? That team had next to nothing, traded A lot for Eli and turned out just fine.

I canít stress enough the value in greatness. Yes, the giants need quantity of quality but they also need greatness. Every team does. If someone told you one of those QBs was guaranteed to play an elite level for 7 seasons here in ny you would be an absolute fool not to trade for him.
RE: RE: None  
dep026 : 4/15/2019 12:46 pm : link
In comment 14387177 djm said:
Quote:

I canít stress enough the value in greatness. Yes, the giants need quantity of quality but they also need greatness. Every team does. If someone told you one of those QBs was guaranteed to play an elite level for 7 seasons here in ny you would be an absolute fool not to trade for him.


I think one thing ive learned that nothing is guaranteed in the NFL...lol
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: None  
djm : 4/15/2019 12:46 pm : link
In comment 14387073 Johnny5 said:
Quote:
In comment 14387049 Pep22 said:


Quote:



I don't think its wise to follow a model a few exceptions of subpar QBs being on a few playoff teams. not a good idea to have a well past his prime QB who needs everything to be perfect to make a play... and one who makes $$ that one would associate with a great QB (in a salary cap environment).


I can't even debate you when you throw in the "QB that needs everything to be perfect" rhetoric. If you consider a boost to even just mediocre blocking "perfect" I don't know what to say. The empirical evidence was there last year that:

A) Our OL stunk (Even if you say the QB should have played better, how do you explain average 1st contact on the RB at 6 inches as needing everything to be perfect?? Baffling)
B) The offense and staff had been changed TWICE now in the last 3 years. Believe it or not, all 11 players on offense need time to be comfortable with the system (as well as the staff becoming comfortable with the players). I'd like to see somebody dispute this fact.

I will argue to my death that if we kept Coughlin in 2016 and gave him that defense, we are easily, EASILY averaging more than MacAdoo's sub 20 points per game... and we went 11-5 with that crap. Just imagine if we had the 2015 offense coupled with the 2016 defense?


I want this read as my eulogy. Fucking print it on my tombstone. Mara fucked Eli and this franchise by sacking coughlin for a fucking windbag in mcadoo that couldnít spell coaching if you spotted him coachin. Thatís right I said it then Iíll say it again and again. We shouldnít have fired coughlin. Deal with it. BBI hates hearing the sad scary truth.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: None  
FranchiseQB : 4/15/2019 12:48 pm : link
In comment 14387073 Johnny5 said:
Quote:
In comment 14387049 Pep22 said:


Quote:



I don't think its wise to follow a model a few exceptions of subpar QBs being on a few playoff teams. not a good idea to have a well past his prime QB who needs everything to be perfect to make a play... and one who makes $$ that one would associate with a great QB (in a salary cap environment).


I can't even debate you when you throw in the "QB that needs everything to be perfect" rhetoric. If you consider a boost to even just mediocre blocking "perfect" I don't know what to say. The empirical evidence was there last year that:

A) Our OL stunk (Even if you say the QB should have played better, how do you explain average 1st contact on the RB at 6 inches as needing everything to be perfect?? Baffling)
B) The offense and staff had been changed TWICE now in the last 3 years. Believe it or not, all 11 players on offense need time to be comfortable with the system (as well as the staff becoming comfortable with the players). I'd like to see somebody dispute this fact.

I will argue to my death that if we kept Coughlin in 2016 and gave him that defense, we are easily, EASILY averaging more than MacAdoo's sub 20 points per game... and we went 11-5 with that crap. Just imagine if we had the 2015 offense coupled with the 2016 defense?


dude, Eli is finished. A great QB makes his team better and helps the OL improve. Brady had two seasons where his OL was atrocious for the first five games. By the end of the year he won a super bowl. Likewise Wilson has overcome a terrible OL. Eli never improves the OL. It starts off bad and usually it is even worse by the end of the season. Eli is done. Stick a fork in him. Should we keep him one more season to bridge to the next qb, maybe. but you're not winning shit with him.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: None  
FranchiseQB : 4/15/2019 12:49 pm : link
In comment 14387189 djm said:
Quote:
In comment 14387073 Johnny5 said:


Quote:


In comment 14387049 Pep22 said:


Quote:



I don't think its wise to follow a model a few exceptions of subpar QBs being on a few playoff teams. not a good idea to have a well past his prime QB who needs everything to be perfect to make a play... and one who makes $$ that one would associate with a great QB (in a salary cap environment).


I can't even debate you when you throw in the "QB that needs everything to be perfect" rhetoric. If you consider a boost to even just mediocre blocking "perfect" I don't know what to say. The empirical evidence was there last year that:

A) Our OL stunk (Even if you say the QB should have played better, how do you explain average 1st contact on the RB at 6 inches as needing everything to be perfect?? Baffling)
B) The offense and staff had been changed TWICE now in the last 3 years. Believe it or not, all 11 players on offense need time to be comfortable with the system (as well as the staff becoming comfortable with the players). I'd like to see somebody dispute this fact.

I will argue to my death that if we kept Coughlin in 2016 and gave him that defense, we are easily, EASILY averaging more than MacAdoo's sub 20 points per game... and we went 11-5 with that crap. Just imagine if we had the 2015 offense coupled with the 2016 defense?



I want this read as my eulogy. Fucking print it on my tombstone. Mara fucked Eli and this franchise by sacking coughlin for a fucking windbag in mcadoo that couldnít spell coaching if you spotted him coachin. Thatís right I said it then Iíll say it again and again. We shouldnít have fired coughlin. Deal with it. BBI hates hearing the sad scary truth.


if management listed to mcadoo and gotten mahomes you would be bowing before him.
Seattles OLine  
dep026 : 4/15/2019 12:49 pm : link
is one of the best if not the best run blocking OLs in the league. 4 times they were ranked first in rushing. You do not become that with a bad OL.
RE: Seattles OLine  
FranchiseQB : 4/15/2019 12:50 pm : link
In comment 14387201 dep026 said:
Quote:
is one of the best if not the best run blocking OLs in the league. 4 times they were ranked first in rushing. You do not become that with a bad OL.


it is not a question that Seattle had a garbage o-line for many of the past 6 years.
You need a high end QB  
RollBlue : 4/15/2019 12:51 pm : link
to be competitive year after year. Plenty on 1 year teams with mediocre QBs. Should have moved on from Eli last year at this time, looks like it will happen next year at this time - hopefully it works out! The Giants were a one year hit in 2016, with a crappy coach. Yet somehow that team had no talent according to many here.......
RE: RE: Seattles OLine  
dep026 : 4/15/2019 12:53 pm : link
In comment 14387206 FranchiseQB said:
Quote:
In comment 14387201 dep026 said:


Quote:


is one of the best if not the best run blocking OLs in the league. 4 times they were ranked first in rushing. You do not become that with a bad OL.



it is not a question that Seattle had a garbage o-line for many of the past 6 years.


Seattles run game:

2018 - 1st
2017 - 23rd - so yes you are correct here.
2016 - 25th - your hot!
2015 - 3rd - oof, road bump
2014 - 1st - major roadblock
2013 - 4th - ouch

so 4 of the 6 years, they were top 4 in rushing, with 2 years as being the best. Thats not garbage. Thats excellence.
RE: RE: RE: Seattles OLine  
FranchiseQB : 4/15/2019 1:06 pm : link
In comment 14387216 dep026 said:
Quote:
In comment 14387206 FranchiseQB said:


Quote:


In comment 14387201 dep026 said:


Quote:


is one of the best if not the best run blocking OLs in the league. 4 times they were ranked first in rushing. You do not become that with a bad OL.



it is not a question that Seattle had a garbage o-line for many of the past 6 years.



Seattles run game:

2018 - 1st
2017 - 23rd - so yes you are correct here.
2016 - 25th - your hot!
2015 - 3rd - oof, road bump
2014 - 1st - major roadblock
2013 - 4th - ouch

so 4 of the 6 years, they were top 4 in rushing, with 2 years as being the best. Thats not garbage. Thats excellence.

dude you're just wrong and nfl insiders know it. PFF had Seattle as the worst line in the league over at least the last three years. They had them 30th, 27th and 32nd in successive years. This year they bumped them to 18th end of year. They described their LT situation as a prolonged nightmare until this season.
I'm wrong cause PFF said so?  
dep026 : 4/15/2019 1:08 pm : link
Despite their excellence on the field? Makes a lot of sense, huh?

They have been a dominating run blocking unit over the course of Wilson's career. This cannot be argued.
Seattle runs it well  
Pep22 : 4/15/2019 1:18 pm : link
because:

a) Pete Carroll offenses commit to the run game
b) RWs 500-600 yards per year
c) there are certain runs in Seattle's repertoire that lock up safeties and LBs attention which limits their pursuit of the ball carrier


None of this include the back breaking plays RW repeatedly makes in extending plays to get key first downs or touch downs when he improvises.
RE: Seattle runs it well  
dep026 : 4/15/2019 1:21 pm : link
In comment 14387270 Pep22 said:
Quote:
because:

a) Pete Carroll offenses commit to the run game
b) RWs 500-600 yards per year
c) there are certain runs in Seattle's repertoire that lock up safeties and LBs attention which limits their pursuit of the ball carrier


None of this include the back breaking plays RW repeatedly makes in extending plays to get key first downs or touch downs when he improvises.


a) because it works?
b) He ran for less than 400 yards 2 of the last 3 years, and the one year he broke for over 500 yards, they stunk. Hes better when they can run it. And plus running doesnt get better with age.
c) They still get blocked which is the whole point of a good run blocking OL. They dont whiff ala, Chad Wheeler and Patrick Omameh, and Ereck Flowers did.

And your last statement has nothing to do with run blocking. If you dont think having a good run game helps a QB, I am nto sure what to tell you.
And whats funny about Wilson  
dep026 : 4/15/2019 1:27 pm : link
that in 2016 his OL sucked, I flat out agree. Go look at his stats compared to Eli's 2018.

Things that make you go hmmmm.....
RE: I'm wrong cause PFF said so?  
FranchiseQB : 4/15/2019 1:30 pm : link
In comment 14387247 dep026 said:
Quote:
Despite their excellence on the field? Makes a lot of sense, huh?

They have been a dominating run blocking unit over the course of Wilson's career. This cannot be argued.


Here is Football Outsiders OL pass protection ratings 2012-2018 Seattle:

2018: 30
2017: 25
2016: 25
2015: 30
2014: 24
2013: 30
2012: 20

But please tell me Eli would have done much better with Russel Wilson's line. Seattle fans have been tearing the hair out of their heads but you know better. Next time check relevant stats rather than rolling out wanky data.
Football Outsiders OL stats - ( New Window )
You post formula rated sites that make up  
dep026 : 4/15/2019 1:32 pm : link
their stuff without having to watch the play and have fun with it.

Ill use actual game stats to back mine up. 1st, 1st, 3rd, and 4th. Seems damn good to me.
"Wanky data"  
dep026 : 4/15/2019 1:32 pm : link
is the term for game production stats. Who the hell would want to use that?
And who the hell is using pass data  
dep026 : 4/15/2019 1:33 pm : link
when I have been talking about the run game.... you know the thing that has carried the Seahawks to the majority of their success on offense?
we're  
FranchiseQB : 4/15/2019 1:36 pm : link
talking about Seattle's line vs Giants line and which QB had it worse. What's a better measure run stats or pass protect?
RE: we're  
dep026 : 4/15/2019 1:37 pm : link
In comment 14387300 FranchiseQB said:
Quote:
talking about Seattle's line vs Giants line and which QB had it worse. What's a better measure run stats or pass protect?


Im ok with using both. Havent we heard a run game is a QBs best friend?

And Ill agree that Seattles OL pass blocking isnt the greatest and has hurt Wilson. But ill also say Wilso was aided by a great run game which you continually dismiss.
RE: RE: Seattle runs it well  
Pep22 : 4/15/2019 1:38 pm : link
In comment 14387275 dep026 said:
Quote:
In comment 14387270 Pep22 said:


Quote:


because:

a) Pete Carroll offenses commit to the run game
b) RWs 500-600 yards per year
c) there are certain runs in Seattle's repertoire that lock up safeties and LBs attention which limits their pursuit of the ball carrier


None of this include the back breaking plays RW repeatedly makes in extending plays to get key first downs or touch downs when he improvises.



a) because it works?
b) He ran for less than 400 yards 2 of the last 3 years, and the one year he broke for over 500 yards, they stunk. Hes better when they can run it. And plus running doesnt get better with age.
c) They still get blocked which is the whole point of a good run blocking OL. They dont whiff ala, Chad Wheeler and Patrick Omameh, and Ereck Flowers did.

And your last statement has nothing to do with run blocking. If you dont think having a good run game helps a QB, I am nto sure what to tell you.


He's averaged 512 per year in his career and if you don't think that production and threat helps all aspects of the run game, then its yet another example of irrational Eli love gone awry. He's a dynamic, game changing player.
RE: I'm wrong cause PFF said so?  
Gatorade Dunk : 4/15/2019 1:38 pm : link
In comment 14387247 dep026 said:
Quote:
Despite their excellence on the field? Makes a lot of sense, huh?

They have been a dominating run blocking unit over the course of Wilson's career. This cannot be argued.

Cannot be argued? Au contraire.

Did you honestly look at Seattle's rushing totals over the past six seasons and at no point stop to think, "wait, maybe those numbers are inflated by having a mobile QB who can generate rushing yardage in spite of a mediocre OL?"

Just for fun, here are those same league rushing offense ranks from 2013-18, but taking Wilson's rushing yards away from Seattle and replacing them with Eli's rushing yards from that same season. It's a bit oversimplified, but I think it still illustrates the point:

2018: 1st (would have been 3rd)
2017: 23rd (would have been 32nd)
2016: 25th (would have been 30th)
2015: 3rd (would have been 13th)
2014: 1st (would have been 9th)
2013: 4th (would have been 21st)

Now, because we know the Giants OL has been pretty bad over that same stretch, let's see what their rushing offense would look like if you took Wilson's rushing total and added it to the Giants' offense (and subtracted Eli's rushing yards for each season):

2018: 24th (would have been 9th)
2017: 26th (would have been 7th)
2016: 29th (would have been 22nd)
2015: 18th (would have been 5th)
2014: 23rd (would have been 2nd)
2013: 29th (would have been 16th)

I guess the only thing stopping the Giants from having a very good run-blocking OL these past six years was not having Russell Wilson instead of Eli Manning, right?
Dep  
Thegratefulhead : 4/15/2019 1:41 pm : link
Fuck man, it's a passing league. Fluker couldn't crack our starting line up for a while. He started in Seattle. Let that sink in. You watched him, he can't pass block for shit. I live in the Seattle market. Every single Seahawk fan knows the OL is shit and complains about them non stop. When you argue that Seattle has a good OL you are making a fool of yourself. It seems as though EVERYONE but you knows Seattle has had a terrible OL.
Thats is an asinine way of looking at something  
dep026 : 4/15/2019 1:43 pm : link
and you know it. You're assuming both situations are the same and the same outcome would have happened if you switched player A for player B. Thats not how sports work.

If thats where you are going with this, you know you are just creating an argument with me that the simple minds would eat up. But neither you or I would believe.

Why not bring up the stat of Saquan being hit the qucikest of any QB in the history of the game? Barkley was being hit within a yard of the LOS for the majority of the year. Mike Davis, Chris Carson, and Rashad penny all averaged more than 4.6 yards per carry. Lets not act they struggled as runners.
RE: Dep  
dep026 : 4/15/2019 1:44 pm : link
In comment 14387315 Thegratefulhead said:
Quote:
Fuck man, it's a passing league. Fluker couldn't crack our starting line up for a while. He started in Seattle. Let that sink in. You watched him, he can't pass block for shit. I live in the Seattle market. Every single Seahawk fan knows the OL is shit and complains about them non stop. When you argue that Seattle has a good OL you are making a fool of yourself. It seems as though EVERYONE but you knows Seattle has had a terrible OL.


You're looking at it the wrong way. I admit Seattles wasnt good at pass blocking, but Fluker was a helluva run blocker for us and why he fit in well there. They EXCELLED in run blocking. EXCELLED.

If the average Seattle fan doesnt see that, thats their problem.
And lets take it a step further GD  
dep026 : 4/15/2019 1:49 pm : link
are you going on recrod saying that if the Giants had Carson, Penny, and Davis over barkley or run game would be as good if not better?

See to me, I think the success of Seattles' run game was because their OL could block and I woul say Barkley succeeded because he was able to do thigns other RBs couldnt do and not because of our OL.
RE: Thats is an asinine way of looking at something  
Gatorade Dunk : 4/15/2019 1:52 pm : link
In comment 14387325 dep026 said:
Quote:
and you know it. You're assuming both situations are the same and the same outcome would have happened if you switched player A for player B. Thats not how sports work.

If thats where you are going with this, you know you are just creating an argument with me that the simple minds would eat up. But neither you or I would believe.

Why not bring up the stat of Saquan being hit the qucikest of any QB in the history of the game? Barkley was being hit within a yard of the LOS for the majority of the year. Mike Davis, Chris Carson, and Rashad penny all averaged more than 4.6 yards per carry. Lets not act they struggled as runners.

My point is just that Wilson makes the Seattle OL look better in the stats column than they are in real life. And you were just as guilty of what I did when you only listed the league rankings for Seattle's rushing offense without noting that Wilson makes up a sizable chunk of that from year to year (anywhere from 15-35% of their rushing totals in any given season).
RE: None  
ron mexico : 4/15/2019 1:53 pm : link
In comment 14386965 dep026 said:
Quote:
...

If we are going to get this team competitive again, we need good players in each side of the ball.

Mahomes is a sexy choice, but I am not sure I would do that either. Keep your picks and get as many good players as possible.


If you are only trading two picks, you are only losing out in on player.

In this unrealistic hypothetical scenario, the list should be pretty long.
RE: RE: Thats is an asinine way of looking at something  
dep026 : 4/15/2019 1:53 pm : link
In comment 14387343 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 14387325 dep026 said:


Quote:


and you know it. You're assuming both situations are the same and the same outcome would have happened if you switched player A for player B. Thats not how sports work.

If thats where you are going with this, you know you are just creating an argument with me that the simple minds would eat up. But neither you or I would believe.

Why not bring up the stat of Saquan being hit the qucikest of any QB in the history of the game? Barkley was being hit within a yard of the LOS for the majority of the year. Mike Davis, Chris Carson, and Rashad penny all averaged more than 4.6 yards per carry. Lets not act they struggled as runners.


My point is just that Wilson makes the Seattle OL look better in the stats column than they are in real life. And you were just as guilty of what I did when you only listed the league rankings for Seattle's rushing offense without noting that Wilson makes up a sizable chunk of that from year to year (anywhere from 15-35% of their rushing totals in any given season).


I didnt say he didnt play a role. but lets not act like the RBs didnt have success on their own.

And I acknowledged they arent a good pass blocking team. But they have been a good run blocking team. What I said is not untrue, is it?
RE: And lets take it a step further GD  
Gatorade Dunk : 4/15/2019 1:55 pm : link
In comment 14387336 dep026 said:
Quote:
are you going on recrod saying that if the Giants had Carson, Penny, and Davis over barkley or run game would be as good if not better?

See to me, I think the success of Seattles' run game was because their OL could block and I woul say Barkley succeeded because he was able to do thigns other RBs couldnt do and not because of our OL.

I would say that having a QB that defenses still fear does a hell of a lot to keep your offense in a favorable position including letting a trio of junior varsity tailbacks pile up a respectable total.

It's all interconnected. The Giants OL sucks, yes. But if defenses were still afraid of Eli, I don't think Barkley would face so many stacked boxes.
RE: RE: And lets take it a step further GD  
dep026 : 4/15/2019 1:58 pm : link
In comment 14387350 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 14387336 dep026 said:


Quote:


are you going on recrod saying that if the Giants had Carson, Penny, and Davis over barkley or run game would be as good if not better?

See to me, I think the success of Seattles' run game was because their OL could block and I woul say Barkley succeeded because he was able to do thigns other RBs couldnt do and not because of our OL.


I would say that having a QB that defenses still fear does a hell of a lot to keep your offense in a favorable position including letting a trio of junior varsity tailbacks pile up a respectable total.

It's all interconnected. The Giants OL sucks, yes. But if defenses were still afraid of Eli, I don't think Barkley would face so many stacked boxes.


Most teams played cover 2 when Odell was there. So they didnt need to stack the box and this has been backed up by coverage statistics.

And Wilson's rushing total this past season was the lowest of his career. The designed runs for him are going down. Why? Because the OL can run block.
RE: RE: Dep  
Thegratefulhead : 4/15/2019 2:04 pm : link
In comment 14387327 dep026 said:
Quote:
In comment 14387315 Thegratefulhead said:


Quote:


Fuck man, it's a passing league. Fluker couldn't crack our starting line up for a while. He started in Seattle. Let that sink in. You watched him, he can't pass block for shit. I live in the Seattle market. Every single Seahawk fan knows the OL is shit and complains about them non stop. When you argue that Seattle has a good OL you are making a fool of yourself. It seems as though EVERYONE but you knows Seattle has had a terrible OL.



You're looking at it the wrong way. I admit Seattles wasnt good at pass blocking, but Fluker was a helluva run blocker for us and why he fit in well there. They EXCELLED in run blocking. EXCELLED.

If the average Seattle fan doesnt see that, thats their problem.
They have a transcendent player at QB not RB. When he drops back to pass he gets killed. I watch these games with my friends every week. Seattle does not have a good OL. They have Seattle about 12th best for ADJ line yards for RB. That's about where I would rate them. Look at that pass protection. Wow
Ousiders OL ratings. - ( New Window )
RE: RE: RE: Dep  
dep026 : 4/15/2019 2:08 pm : link
In comment 14387363 Thegratefulhead said:
Quote:
They have a transcendent player at QB not RB. When he drops back to pass he gets killed. I watch these games with my friends every week. Seattle does not have a good OL. They have Seattle about 12th best for ADJ line yards for RB. That's about where I would rate them. Look at that pass protection. Wow Ousiders OL ratings. - ( New Window )


Again, we need to separate Pass blocking from run blockign cause I agree that their pass blocking hasnt been good.

But you are using formulas to determine success. I am using game results. Seattle, outside 2016-2017 has been one of the best rushing teams in the NFL for awhile. And Wilson has contributed to that but Lynch was one of the best RBs in the leagues in his prime. As GD stated, the JV RBs had a shit ton of success this year. Thoma sRawls, when not injured, put up great numbers.

That is because their OL can run block very well. You dont run the ball well with a shitty blocking OL. We should know first hand...
Imagine the  
Pep22 : 4/15/2019 2:18 pm : link
next 5 years with Saquon and Wilson. Imagine that play-action threat.

Now snap back to reality and realize that we'll probably have Manning for yet another year followed by Daniel Jones. Ugh.
RE: Imagine the  
dep026 : 4/15/2019 2:22 pm : link
In comment 14387382 Pep22 said:
Quote:
next 5 years with Saquon and Wilson. Imagine that play-action threat.



No matter where Wilson plays, the concept of designed running plays for Wilson is going to decrease.
this discussion is why  
hitdog42 : 4/15/2019 2:26 pm : link
it would have been nice if the giants gave a shot to a more mobile QB to a few games to better evaluate how the team played with a mobile QB behind center. god forbid when eliminated from contention we try and do that to better evaluate the OL and the scheme.
I think the answer is painfully clear  
Pep22 : 4/15/2019 2:34 pm : link
Its a systematic over-reaction to the benching in favor of Geno. Its something that has and will continue to hold the team's fortunes hostage. Instead of being intelligent, objective and forward thinking, they've been sentimental about the guy's legacy and put that over the state of the franchise.
RE: I think the answer is painfully clear  
Johnny5 : 4/15/2019 8:24 pm : link
In comment 14387404 Pep22 said:
Quote:
Its a systematic over-reaction to the benching in favor of Geno. Its something that has and will continue to hold the team's fortunes hostage. Instead of being intelligent, objective and forward thinking, they've been sentimental about the guy's legacy and put that over the state of the franchise.

Bahahahaha. What a crock of shit. I'd love to see Murray here how's that for ya?

Eli is a favorite player of mine but I'd be happy to have Wilson here. There is now way that will happen. That said (again and again and again), with even mediocre pass protection Eli will be competitive.

And I'm not sure how people are arguing against the run blocking of Seattle. Yes their pass blocking was close to as bad as ours. But our RBs were also literally being hit 6 inches on average after receiving a handoff. If you don't think that makes it harder for an offense, I just don't know what to say.

RE: I'm going to try and follow your restrictions as best I can  
Dankbeerman : 4/16/2019 5:15 am : link
In comment 14387056 USAF NYG Fan said:
Quote:
First, I don't think you followed your own restrictions as Mahomes wouldn't need to be signed to a big contract right away. He's under contract through 2020 with a 5th year option through 2021 (albeit a costly 5th year tag). He will remain cheap for the next 2 years.


There is zero chance Mahomes plays under the 5th year option. If he dosent regress he will want a new contract next year and if Wilson got 35 per he will get 40+. Mahomes contract is going to be a crazy number.
RE: RE: RE: RE: why do we have trade picks for Wilson?  
USAF NYG Fan : 4/16/2019 5:50 am : link
In comment 14387065 dep026 said:
Quote:
In comment 14387063 USAF NYG Fan said:


Quote:


In comment 14387040 dep026 said:


Quote:


In comment 14387038 Vegas Steve said:


Quote:


If he is not signed by tonight he will be FA next year

Luck and Pat Mahomes are the real deal



Seattle can franchise Wilson for 2 years at a reasonable cost after this year.


Reasonable cost? Under the franchise tag he will likely be the highest paid QB in the league (or very close to it) for that franchised season.



I read 30 million first year, 36 the 2nd.

Sorry so late to respond. Forgot to follow-up.

$30M would be good for 2nd highest. Tied with Matt Ryan. Rogers averages $33.5M. Naturally, $36M would be the highest. Since it's suppose to be the average of the highest 3 paid or 120% of player's average yearly salary (whichever is higher and in this case the 3 highest salaries are higher), I believe he would actually get $30.5M bumping Ryan down to 3rd highest.
Pages: 1 2 <<Prev | Show All |
Back to the Corner