Sam Darnold

[turtle28]

4 minutes ago, Vladimir L said:

I'd keep Haskin but bring in a Sam Darnold and use that top pick for a quality LT aand maybe get a guard in the 2nd.

 

WR id go after one in free agency or roll the dice with Kelvin Harmon and bring in another wr in the 3rd.

Yeah, I can see that. I actually did a mini mock offseason in the new draft thread if you want to check it out. 

[Thaiphoon]

11 hours ago, turtle28 said:

Stay with me here.

Sam Darnold has Brett Favre type skills and mentality, both good and bad, he’s a gun slinger who will have some ints but only bc he’s trying to get it downfield and make a huge play.

The Jets are likely to have the #1 pick and then be trading Sam Darnold next year as they draft Trevor Lawrence.

We can trade a 2nd round pick and a mid round pick for Darnold and get him I believe.

Sam has had to deal w/ bad offensive coaching, a bad OL since he was drafted and average to mostly bad WRs & TEs since he was drafted 3 years ago.

Sam really just needs a change of scenery and he needs a #1 QB to throw to like Terry. Trading for Sam next year allows us to be able to draft Sewell, Ja’Marr Chase, Micah Parsons, Jaylen Waddle or Dylan Moses in the top 10 instead of a QB.

What say you?

NOPE NOPE NOPE NOPE NOPE NOPE NOPE NOPE NOPE!!!

Also...

NOPE

I don't want him,

But if...and I want to stress IF... this team decides to trade for him because the Jets are drafting #1, I'm not giving up a 2nd rounder.

 

Oh, I forgot to say...

NOPE

[Thaiphoon]

2 hours ago, Woz said:

*sees this thread*

 

*remembers he's retired and this is all Thai and naptown's problems now*

[Vladimir L]

ture how do you feel about Stafford? they might win thr lawrence sweapsteaks

[turtle28]

55 minutes ago, Vladimir L said:

ture how do you feel about Stafford? they might win thr lawrence sweapsteaks

I'd be fine with Staffor, but that's not a long term fix. If we traded for Stafford, I'd still Keep Haskins as his back up, of draft a QB after round 1 to develop.

[ripsean21]

9 hours ago, turtle28 said:

If you have the #1 pick would you trade Sam Darnold for Haskins?

And nope is the answer. Your staring at Trevor in the face and your next best option is a LT that took the season off it’s either the Haul if picks or Trevor. If we were that bad the answer is no. The cards didn’t keep Rosen over Kyler we’d be dumb not to take the best QB to come out since we fleeced ourselves for a guy who wasn’t going to develop properly at QB with the plan our staff had for him. So just take the blessing Of the QB and you run and give him every opportunity to succeed

[turtle28]

4 hours ago, ripsean21 said:

And nope is the answer. Your staring at Trevor in the face and your next best option is a LT that took the season off it’s either the Haul if picks or Trevor. If we were that bad the answer is no. The cards didn’t keep Rosen over Kyler we’d be dumb not to take the best QB to come out since we fleeced ourselves for a guy who wasn’t going to develop properly at QB with the plan our staff had for him. So just take the blessing Of the QB and you run and give him every opportunity to succeed

As I said in the draft thread:

 

I’ve seen Fields almost outdual Lawrence in the CFBP game on basically one leg bc he had a sprained MCL. Lawrence was more RB than QB that game, Fields couldn’t run, had to be a pocket passer.

65%, 320 yds, 1 TD & 2 ints in CFBP vs Clemson last year - should’ve been 2 TDs instead of 2 ints, the WR Chris Olave quit his route on the last play of the game and that cost them the game as well as a bad targeting call & a fumble recovery - called on the field - that was overturned.

Lawrence vs Ohio State in CFBP:

56%, 259 yds, 2 TDs 

Lawrence vs. LSU in National Champ game:

49%, 234 yards 

Seems to me against tougher competition and tighter windows to throw into in the CFBP Justin Fields out performed Trevor Lawrence.
 

So, is Trevor Lawrence really light years ahead of Justin Fields?

And when Darnold came out, I thought he had the tools of Brett Favre. People compare Baker to Favre - which is also a good comparison- but Darnold is right there and he’s only 23, 24 next June. Even if he just turns into good not great for us, we could build around that for the next 15 years and had only spent a 2nd round pick on him while we take the next Trent Williams in Sewell with our 1st round pick.

Edited October 9, 2020 by turtle28

[ripsean21]

2 hours ago, turtle28 said:

As I said in the draft thread:

 

I’ve seen Fields almost outdual Lawrence in the CFBP game on basically one leg bc he had a sprained MCL. Lawrence was more RB than QB that game, Fields couldn’t run, had to be a pocket passer.

65%, 320 yds, 1 TD & 2 ints in CFBP vs Clemson last year - should’ve been 2 TDs instead of 2 ints, the WR Chris Olave quit his route on the last play of the game and that cost them the game as well as a bad targeting call & a fumble recovery - called on the field - that was overturned.

Lawrence vs Ohio State in CFBP:

56%, 259 yds, 2 TDs 

Lawrence vs. LSU in National Champ game:

49%, 234 yards 

Seems to me against tougher competition and tighter windows to throw into in the CFBP Justin Fields out performed Trevor Lawrence.
 

So, is Trevor Lawrence really light years ahead of Justin Fields?

And when Darnold came out, I thought he had the tools of Brett Favre. People compare Baker to Favre - which is also a good comparison- but Darnold is right there and he’s only 23, 24 next June. Even if he just turns into good not great for us, we could build around that for the next 15 years and had only spent a 2nd round pick on him while we take the next Trent Williams in Sewell with our 1st round pick.

No I mean I get your thought process I’m just not a big Darnold fan he has been what he was in college I get no coaching or organizational help but honestly he’s not my guy. As far as the Fields Lawrence thing dude I get it but I actually like Clemson and you like OSU. I think we both support and also are the toughest critic of these guys trust me I love watching fields I just think he’s athletically gifted I just don’t think he can do the pocket game and win where I feel like Lawrence can. Neither are locks at being able to play completely inside a pocket throughout a game but that’s not what most teams even do anymore. I don’t think the gap is far it’s completely preference ive been supporting runners for the longest I love them. But I just haven’t bought into him I felt as a passer that Haskins made the pass catchers look better then fields does and I get their two different guys. But honestly Fields could be the man I just prefer Trevor and even Lance to him. 

[e16bball]

I do think we need to be thinking about veteran QBs. 

I think the odds of us being in position to get Lawrence are slim. Having already won a game, and having two against the awful Giants coming up, you’d have to think we’re likely to have at least two wins by the midway point. Given how the Jets look at the moment, two wins might have us already out of contention for the top spot. That would leave us to choose from what appears to me to be a clear second tier of QB prospects, and I’m not sure we’d even be in position to get Fields (if we wanted him) if we ended up with 4 wins.

I also don’t have a great read on how Rivera thinks yet — I’m not certain that he’s quite sure how he thinks at this point — but my sense is that the idea of a veteran bridge QB to buy time for the rest of the roster to get built up a bit might be appealing to him. Something like what the Eagles did with Bradford or the Rams did with Foles the year before they both traded up to get Goff/Wentz. Your team is respectable and you have the opportunity to focus on adding more talent prior to the young QB coming in, instead of trying to do it all at the same time or after you get your QB. 

I don’t love the plan, because it likely means you’ll have to do a significant trade up in order to get the blue-chip QB talent you want. Which is always less than ideal. But what we’ve learned from watching this same movie over and over again is that you simply can’t throw a young QB into a mess and expect him to clean it all up for you. Your chances are so much better if you’ve already got something built and just ask him to take the controls. 

So I could certainly see them targeting a proven veteran on a shorter term deal. Although at this point I think it’s just a matter of time until Alex Smith takes over, so maybe they’ll just roll with him as the bridge QB for the next 1.5 seasons. 

[MKnight82]

2 minutes ago, e16bball said:

I do think we need to be thinking about veteran QBs. 

I think the odds of us being in position to get Lawrence are slim. Having already won a game, and having two against the awful Giants coming up, you’d have to think we’re likely to have at least two wins by the midway point. Given how the Jets look at the moment, two wins might have us already out of contention for the top spot. That would leave us to choose from what appears to me to be a clear second tier of QB prospects, and I’m not sure we’d even be in position to get Fields (if we wanted him) if we ended up with 4 wins.

I also don’t have a great read on how Rivera thinks yet — I’m not certain that he’s quite sure how he thinks at this point — but my sense is that the idea of a veteran bridge QB to buy time for the rest of the roster to get built up a bit might be appealing to him. Something like what the Eagles did with Bradford or the Rams did with Foles the year before they both traded up to get Goff/Wentz. Your team is respectable and you have the opportunity to focus on adding more talent prior to the young QB coming in, instead of trying to do it all at the same time or after you get your QB. 

I don’t love the plan, because it likely means you’ll have to do a significant trade up in order to get the blue-chip QB talent you want. Which is always less than ideal. But what we’ve learned from watching this same movie over and over again is that you simply can’t throw a young QB into a mess and expect him to clean it all up for you. Your chances are so much better if you’ve already got something built and just ask him to take the controls. 

So I could certainly see them targeting a proven veteran on a shorter term deal. Although at this point I think it’s just a matter of time until Alex Smith takes over, so maybe they’ll just roll with him as the bridge QB for the next 1.5 seasons. 

Ya I'm with you on this.  I would like to use our first to continue building up the roster for whoever ends up the future QB down the line. I agree that I think Rivera will eventually settle on Alex Smith for next year.  Maybe pull the trigger on a 3rd round QB or something, you never know maybe you hit a homerun.  

Regarding the OP, I wouldn't give up anything valuable for Sam Darnold.  Similar to Haskins he hasn't done anything to make me think he's a capable NFL starter.  

[Ghostnote]

I am interested in a QB with this criteria. Did Haskins have this? No. He was overdrafted and we reached for him. 

1. Be a three-year starter

2. Be a senior in college

3. Graduate from college

4. Start 30 games

5. Win 23 games

6. Post a 2:1 touchdown-to-interception ratio

7. Compete at least 60-percent of passes thrown

I would have signed Cam to a 1 year deal and waited than to draft Haskins. There was hope that he turned a corner this season, but he seems to be more of a sit and wait case than someone who picked it up and was ready day 1. 

[MKnight82]

24 minutes ago, mike23md said:

I am interested in a QB with this criteria. Did Haskins have this? No. He was overdrafted and we reached for him. 

1. Be a three-year starter

2. Be a senior in college

3. Graduate from college

4. Start 30 games

5. Win 23 games

6. Post a 2:1 touchdown-to-interception ratio

7. Compete at least 60-percent of passes thrown

I would have signed Cam to a 1 year deal and waited than to draft Haskins. There was hope that he turned a corner this season, but he seems to be more of a sit and wait case than someone who picked it up and was ready day 1. 

Sounds like the old Bill Parcells list.  

[Ghostnote]

3 minutes ago, MKnight82 said:

Sounds like the old Bill Parcells list.  

That is exactly what it is. 

Its near fool proof. 

[e16bball]

27 minutes ago, mike23md said:

I am interested in a QB with this criteria. Did Haskins have this? No. He was overdrafted and we reached for him. 

1. Be a three-year starter

2. Be a senior in college

3. Graduate from college

4. Start 30 games

5. Win 23 games

6. Post a 2:1 touchdown-to-interception ratio

7. Compete at least 60-percent of passes thrown

I would have signed Cam to a 1 year deal and waited than to draft Haskins. There was hope that he turned a corner this season, but he seems to be more of a sit and wait case than someone who picked it up and was ready day 1. 

I know these are very famous criteria, but the landscape has changed a little since Parcells created it.

Just have to point out that adherence to these criteria would have led us to pass on the following players:

Patrick Mahomes

Lamar Jackson

Joe Burrow

Josh Allen

Jared Goff

Deshaun Watson

Kyler Murray

Carson Wentz

Matthew Stafford

Matt Ryan

Cam Newton

Ryan Tannehill

Aaron Rodgers

Ben Roethlisberger

For the record, it also would have led us to pass on Tua, and it would have us passing on each of Lawrence, Fields, Lance, and Trask if/when they enter the upcoming draft. 

It was a great concept in the 90s and even the early 2000s, but it just doesn’t fit the modern landscape. It’s still good at eliminating busts — but mostly just because it eliminates almost all the top prospects. There are concepts there that you can still draw from as ideal traits: experience, accuracy, proven winner, ball security, etc. But you can’t just hold up this checklist and say “nope, you don’t fit” and discard the player. 

One area where it probably does prove useful is in unearthing mid-late round steals. Tom Brady, of course, is the absolute archetype of this list. But other guys like Russell Wilson, Dak Prescott, Kirk Cousins — the great QB draft steals of the last decade — do all fit this checklist as well. If you’re looking to find an underappreciated asset at QB, this appears to be where to look.

[turtle28]

1 hour ago, ripsean21 said:

No I mean I get your thought process I’m just not a big Darnold fan he has been what he was in college I get no coaching or organizational help but honestly he’s not my guy. As far as the Fields Lawrence thing dude I get it but I actually like Clemson and you like OSU. I think we both support and also are the toughest critic of these guys trust me I love watching fields I just think he’s athletically gifted I just don’t think he can do the pocket game and win where I feel like Lawrence can. Neither are locks at being able to play completely inside a pocket throughout a game but that’s not what most teams even do anymore. I don’t think the gap is far it’s completely preference ive been supporting runners for the longest I love them. But I just haven’t bought into him I felt as a passer that Haskins made the pass catchers look better then fields does and I get their two different guys. But honestly Fields could be the man I just prefer Trevor and even Lance to him. 

I’m a big believer in Haskins but I don’t think Haskins was or is even today as accurate as Fields and Fields is a better athlete with better pocket presence to extend plays & run some zone read with. Haskins can throw a better ball than Fields, but Fields has better feet, better mechanics and better form that make him more accurate.