Jump to content
mistakey

Carson Wentz... or this haul?

Carson Wentz... or this haul?  

119 members have voted

  1. 1. What would you rather have

    • Carson Wentz
      62
    • This haul
      57


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

I think you're misunderstanding what I'm trying to say.  If you draft a player 15th overall, and another team drafts a player at a similar position 115th overall and they both have HoF careers is the fact that you picked the players at 15th instead of 115th diminish the impact that player had?  No.

He didn't say the impact would be less, he said the trade would be bad. The "loser" in this scenario may not feel like they lost, since they attained a high quality player, but they gave up a lot more than they needed to in order to have a similar caliber player that could've been had in the later rounds. That makes it a bad deal. 

If I spent ten million dollars on a Lamborghini, I'll still love the car, but people would still tell me how bad of a deal that was. 

And to make it clear, I'm not hating on the Eagles. They made a move to go get a guy who they thought would be the face of their franchise, and he's shown promise thus far. You have to trust your evaluations, and if they thought he'd be a franchise guy, then it's a good move to get him - you'd rather overpay for that kind of player than not acquire him at all. But in the whole "two guys with similar careers at similar positions" idea, the one who spent less capital on a similar resource clearly made out better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

He didn't say the impact would be less, he said the trade would be bad. The "loser" in this scenario may not feel like they lost, since they attained a high quality player, but they gave up a lot more than they needed to in order to have a similar caliber player that could've been had in the later rounds. That makes it a bad deal. 

If I spent ten million dollars on a Lamborghini, I'll still love the car, but people would still tell me how bad of a deal that was. 

And to make it clear, I'm not hating on the Eagles. They made a move to go get a guy who they thought would be the face of their franchise, and he's shown promise thus far. You have to trust your evaluations, and if they thought he'd be a franchise guy, then it's a good move to get him - you'd rather overpay for that kind of player than not acquire him at all. But in the whole "two guys with similar careers at similar positions" idea, the one who spent less capital on a similar resource clearly made out better.

Why?  Because another team managed to evaluate and develop a franchise QB later on in the draft?  There's no guarantees that if the Eagles had drafted Dak Prescott that he would have had that same individual (and team) success with the Eagles as he did with the Cowboys.  That's the issue I have.  It's a faulty assumption you're making.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Why?  Because another team managed to evaluate and develop a franchise QB later on in the draft?  There's no guarantees that if the Eagles had drafted Dak Prescott that he would have had that same individual (and team) success with the Eagles as he did with the Cowboys.  That's the issue I have.  It's a faulty assumption you're making.

In both your original and recent posts, you're comparing the "caliber" of players. As in, we're assuming that Wentz and Dak are similar caliber players - not that they would have more/less/the same amount of success or development if they switched places. No one made the latter assumption, I'm not sure where you believe anybody implied this.

In the example you made, you trade up for a player and spend a lot of draft capital on him, but a guy taken in the 6th at the same position has similar levels of success/they are similar caliber players - that means you overpaid. And again, you might be fine with overpaying since it was more of a "sure thing" or perhaps your evaluation was wrong on the other player, but at the end of the day, you still overpaid. 

Edited by Yin-Yang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Iamcanadian said:

This is a fair statement, but then you have to include the fact that Kizer hasn't even won a game yet and many Cleveland fans are assuming he will be a franchise QB based on absolutely nothing as of yet??? It is going to be decided on the field of play and not by my opinion or any wishful thinking on the part of many Cleveland fans. Just have to give it time and have some real facts to go by.

Im not assuming anything with Kizer. At all. Quite the opposite actually and just saying in this thread people are trying to evaluate the trade by talking like Wentz is Derrick Carr. Hes the same type of unproven prospect/project that Kizer is at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Danger said:

With Lane Johnson (7 Games)
157/241 (65.14%) - 1711 Yards - 7.1 YPA - 12 TD - 3 INT - 97.4 Passer Rating

WITHOUT Lane Johnson (10 Games)
248/405 (61.2%) - 2378 Yards - 5.9 YPA - 6 TD - 12 INT - 70.2 Passer Rating

It was night and day. And against the Skins week 1 Carson has shown he can fair much better under pressure than he could last year. I saw the stats somewhere on ESPN for the breakdown. But last year Carson as a Rookie struggled when he was put up with a fairly poor and injured offensive line at times. 

Not saying that. But in order to be considered a top 10 franchise QB when rating this whole trade thing you have to be able to perform from the pocket and under pressure more times than not. From what Ive seen of Wentz he mades a lot of good special arm talent type throws but misses a whole lot of gimme throws too. In that respect, he is actually very similar to Kizer. Its about if both of them can continue to make the wow throws but be more consistent in the intermediate and short game and not just rely on huge downfield passes on broken plays that show off raw arm talent.

Its about the mental ability to read defenses, make the right throw, cut down bad throw turnovers trying to force things knowing he has a talented arm. Just like Kizer, if he is going to rely strictly on making the big throw instead of being able to take and make the easy passes the defense gives then both of them will be looking like Blake Bortles in 2 years.

Edited by AkronsWitness

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, AkronsWitness said:

In that respect, he is actually very similar to Kizer. Its about if both of them can continue to make the wow throws but be more consistent in the intermediate and short game and not just rely on huge downfield passes on broken plays that show off raw arm talent.

Its about the mental ability to read defenses, make the right throw, cut down bad throw turnovers trying to force things knowing he has a talented arm. Just like Kizer, if he is going to rely strictly on making the big throw instead of being able to take and make the easy passes the defense gives then both of them will be looking like Blake Bortles in 2 years.

It is entirely premature to make that take when it's based off 1 start vs 17 starts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BrownLeader said:

It is entirely premature to make that take when it's based off 1 start vs 17 starts.

You can base strengths and weaknesses in a comparison with 0 starts. Kizers college flaws that are extremely well documented and the reason he fell in the draft and through 5 games including preseason you can tell what he excels at and what he needs to work on. Through 17 games of Wentz career I can confidently say they are both similar in terms of strengthens and weaknesses. Not saying Kizer is better but in terms of play style they are similar QBs.

 

Share this post


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

You can base strengths and weaknesses in a comparison with 0 starts. Kizers college flaws that are extremely well documented and the reason he fell in the draft and through 5 games including preseason you can tell what he excels at and what he needs to work on. Through 17 games of Wentz career I can confidently say they are both similar in terms of strengthens and weaknesses. Not saying Kizer is better but in terms of play style they are similar QBs.

 

Yeah, they are so similar that Wentz went #2 overall and Kizer went in round 2. Kizer isn't close to the prospect Wentz was when he was drafted, and so far it is still a huge long shot that he becomes anything more than a solid career backup. He has a chance to be a franchise QB, every QB has a shot, but we will have to wait a minimum of 2 to 3 years to see if he has what it takes.

Pro football has nothing to do with college football, if it did every college All American QB's and every college QB who won the Heisman would be guaranteed stardom in the NFL. College HC's hide  the weaknesses of their QB's, but you cannot hide a weakness in pro football. Every facet of playing QB will be tested by pro defenses to see if you have weaknesses and if they find any, they will consistently attack that weakness till you prove you can correct it. The great QB's pass with flying colours, the weak QB's get shown up their whole careers.

I'm a Cleveland fan and I am praying with all my heart that Kizer will surprise me and beat the immense, odds to become a solid franchise QB. However, right now he hasn't shown me he will be special, I want to see wins even if it takes 2 or 3 years, Wentz has wins and has the potential to be special, Kizer will need real time to prove his worth and I just wish my Cleveland fans would look at Kizer realistically and stop anointing him as our savior before he has accomplish anything. It is just pure wishful thinking at this stage of his career.

Share this post


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

every QB has a shot, but we will have to wait a minimum of 2 to 3 years to see if he has what it takes.

Did it take that long for you to believe in Russell Wilson? Dak Prescott? Derek Carr?

 

5 minutes ago, Iamcanadian said:

I'm a Cleveland fan

xD

 

6 minutes ago, Iamcanadian said:

I just wish my Cleveland fans would look at Kizer realistically and stop anointing him as our savior before he has accomplish anything.

Too soon to make predictions?

7 minutes ago, Iamcanadian said:

so far it is still a huge long shot that he becomes anything more than a solid career backup

Oh, guess not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is way too early to tell. I will say that I thought the Rams and Eagles both paid too much when those deals went down. I understand that if you think you have a franchise QB available, then you do what you can to take him. I just didn't see Wentz or Goff as players that were worth that much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Thomas5737 said:

Did it take that long for you to believe in Russell Wilson? Dak Prescott? Derek Carr?

Quote

Ever hear of RG111. Great rookie season, but that's about it??? Dak is perfect in Dallas where the run is king, but I seriously doubt he could carry a passing team. His receivers are never doubled and the defensive priority is stopping the run, which means the passing lanes are wide open for his receivers. He also benefits from the best  OL in the NFL, which gives him extra time to find his receivers and extra time for them to get free from their cover guys. Seems you are easily impressed by rookie QB's.

 

xD

 

Too soon to make predictions?

Oh, guess not.

So you are actually sold on Kizer, a second round pick as a franchise QB, since they succeed less than 6% of the time. Seems pretty odd to me???

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/13/2017 at 2:21 PM, Yin-Yang said:

In both your original and recent posts, you're comparing the "caliber" of players. As in, we're assuming that Wentz and Dak are similar caliber players - not that they would have more/less/the same amount of success or development if they switched places. No one made the latter assumption, I'm not sure where you believe anybody implied this.

In the example you made, you trade up for a player and spend a lot of draft capital on him, but a guy taken in the 6th at the same position has similar levels of success/they are similar caliber players - that means you overpaid. And again, you might be fine with overpaying since it was more of a "sure thing" or perhaps your evaluation was wrong on the other player, but at the end of the day, you still overpaid. 

You're making the mistake of comparing the name of the QB rather than the play of the QB.  If a 6th year QB put up Prescott's production last year, we wouldn't be having this discussion.  That's the issue I have with this whole argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who loved Wentz as a prospect I say let's wait longer then game one of season two to find out.

 

Wentz has shown nothing so far to say definitively that he is the long term solution. Not to mention the fact that Kizer has a lot of the same upside. For all we know they could both turn into mid-tier starters. Then the Browns would have won for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×