Jump to content

What to do at QB?


What is your preference for the QB spot?  

50 members have voted

  1. 1. What is your preference for the QB spot?

    • Keep Drew Lock as the starter for 2021
      19
    • Draft a rookie in the 1st round and make him the starter
      12
    • Trade for/sign an established vet (Stafford, Wentz, Ryan)
      13
    • Trade for/sign a journeyman vet (Fitz, Tyrod) to compete with Lock
      6


Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, broncosfan_101 said:

The rumoured offer was 1.3, Garoppolo, and “other picks and players.” In this situation, it’s pretty clear that “other picks and players” means “filler.” Remember the Bears offer for Russy Wilson that was three 1sts and two starters and everyone went nuts, only to find out the two starters were Hicks and Fuller (a 32 year old overpaid DL and a corner who was about to get cut)?? When part of the offer is specific and part of it isn’t, that generally means either the offering team wants to make their offer sound serious, or the receiving team wants to start up a bidding war. 
 

1.3 + Garoppolo + filler was the offer. 

See, I can believe that ! But Jimmy G was more of a balance filler than a positive asset IMO, the Niners were said to be asking for a 1st round pick for him and obviously didn't come close, more likely because of his salary/injury history. I could see valuing him as a 3-4th rd IMO. And filler could be STers for all we know. Fatt stated 3 more high pick which I'll is what I called BS on, I'm ok if he can prove that offer.  

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

Didn’t the Niners offer the #3, and 2 future 1sts and a 2nd...

that’s higher than the 9

Think it will take Surtain, Sutton, and 2 1sts... with maybe a 4th coming back...may they would throw in King...

.

 

 

1 hour ago, Cutler06 said:

Please show me where that was offered ?? Niners paid 3 number1's to get to number 3, to add 2 MORE 1's a a 2nd is just a bold LIE IMO. No way ant NFL team would pay 5 #1's, a #2 and a #3 for a 38yo QB....pipe-dreamin'

I did hear they offered the #3 pick but I need proof they offered the rest. Given that you brought that BS, obvious you just trolling here.

 

 

1 hour ago, BroncoBruin said:

That hasn't been reported anywhere and for good reason. The 49ers don't have another first round pick until 2024. Not sure where you got that info from, but it's laughably wrong. 

The report cited a pre-draft offer.   Here's the thing - no team can trade more than 3 years of draft picks - which is what SF already emptied the clip to get 1.3.   

So right away, the 1.3 pick would have been only offered with non-Rd1 picks.   It's literally impossible to offer more pre-draft as far as 1st round picks.

It's a cute story, but any story that says there were more 1sts added to 1.3 is just pure fan fiction.  I wonder from what team.....

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, AnAngryAmerican said:

The Barnwell story is behind a paywall so I can’t access it. But I have heard the possibility of a Stokes/Surtain swap being part of a potential deal from several sources. 

FWIW, I’m personal friends with one of the Broncos top beat writers and he thinks 3 1sts, one of which could be a 1st round picked player (Jeudy and Surtain both mentioned), plus one of our QBs and maybe something extra would be what it likely will take.

He also thinks, personally, it’s 95% Rodgers is dealt and the Broncos are where he lands. This isn’t an internet scrub “reporter” either, but a very, very plugged-in beat reporter from a major outlet. 

That's pretty close to what I'd expect it would take to even get the Packers in the door.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Cutler06 said:

Can't see your "wish list" happening, that's more than 3 FRP you're asking for...but you want the Sky, we're offering a patch of grass. All very moot until we get get closer to June 2 IMO, that's when things will get interesting. In the mean time we'll just have to see how much contempt will rise between GB and Rodgers  and how Barnwell's offer looks then. 

If we're going to "wish list", then we're talking about Jeudy, Fant, Surtain, and 3 FRPs.  That obviously isn't happening.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, grizmo78 said:

If PS2 / Stokes swap is part of the deal you have to consider that the equivalent of 2 first round picks... That's what the difference was between Pick 9 and Pick 29. No chance I'm also including more than 2 more FRP.

What TVC are you using?  The difference between the 9th and 29th pick is worth the 26th pick, so that's ONE FRP.  And I would agree that would count as ONE of the FRPs needed in a trade.

9 hours ago, grizmo78 said:

I'd say Rogers is probably worth around the equivalent of 3 1st rounders. If the Packers want the picks + Lock/Bridgewater + Patrick? That's fine and probably ideal for us. If they wan't players involved, then be prepared to take less "value". Again, PS2 is the equivalent of the #9 pick. Jeudy is the equivalent of a 1st rounder. Fant has lived up to his 1st round pick and I'd say is equivalent of a 1st rounder as well. Sutton is no question our #1 WR and a Pro Bowler, idc if he's coming off an injury, and is equivalent of a 1st rounder (would be more if not for his contract coming up). Those are the valuations, so if they want 3 firsts, take your pick how you want them.

That's roughly the cost that I'd expect the Packers to demand to even get them to keep from hanging up the phone.  They're going to want 3 FRPs+ worth of value out of Rodgers.  But the problem is that future FRPs are largely devalued because you don't get to use them.  It's no different then time the time value of money.  A pick now is always going to be worth more than a pick a year from now.  Depending on how you devalue future picks, you're talking about significant value.  Personally, I devalue future picks as a middle of the round pick a round later then.  So a '22 FRP is worth ~48th pick in the 2021 NFL Draft.  Let's use a hypothetical trade of '22 FRP, '23 FRP, '24 SRP, and Jerry Jeudy for Aaron Rodgers.  If you devalue the picks as I do, that means you're trading Jerry Jeudy, #48, #80, and #160 for Aaron Rodgers.  Do you consider that a fair trade or no?  That would put the difference in trade value between Jeudy and Rodgers as a late FRP.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, grizmo78 said:

I will say, of the players I mentioned above, I would much rather deal Chubb than them despite having less depth behind him. IMO he's an above average player who is going to get paid like a perennial 1st team pro bowler.  

And it's the same reason why the Packers probably would largely prefer Jerry Jeudy or Noah Fant over him or Courtland Sutton.

 

9 hours ago, grizmo78 said:

Also, while I think Tim Patrick is a nice player, he's both over valued by Broncos fans, and undervalued by @CWood21/others by calling a player who received a 2nd round tender a fringe roster spot. He's a great #3 WR (not slot) and is probably valued around a 4th/5th rounder. 

That was probably overstating it, but there's really no reason to believe he's anything more than WR4 at best for the Packers in 2021.  He's not surpassing Davante Adams.  And given the fact that MVS and Lazard have been in LaFleur's offensive system for 2 years now, they're likely ahead of Patrick on the DC.  And they drafted Amari Rodgers in the 3rd round.  He's on the roster, but he doesn't get nearly the same amount of snaps in Green Bay as he does in Denver.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, AnAngryAmerican said:

I’d rather deal a defensive starter (Chubb) than an offensive starter unless the offensive player is an interior OL. I’ve heard Glasgow mentioned, why I’m not sure, but okay, but between Risner/Muti/Cush/Meinerz I think we can find 3 viable starters and have a rotational backup if Glasgow was included. 

With Vic we can get away with losing a defensive stud rather than deprive Aaron of you a young weapon. I’d also deal Patrick or Hamler well before Sutton, Jeudy or Fant. 

Given the sheer amount of IOL the Packers have drafted over the last 2 drafts, I'd say there's a slightly above zero percent chance the Packers have any interest in adding an IOL via trade.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Broncofan said:

Surtain vs. Stokes definitely counts as a 1st, so if Paton is offering 2022 1st/2nd, Surtain/Stokes & Bridgewater (with or without Patrick), I don't see anyone beating it, nor the need to surpass the offer.   It also meets the criteria of keeping us competitive to win now.    I'd be on board with it. 

If we needed to deal 3 1sts and Bridgewater/Patrick, I'd be fine with that too.  But 2 firsts + Surtain/Stokes & Bridge is about as high as I go (Patrick doesn't bother me enough to let him get in the way of the deal).

And that's fine.  If it's Surtain and a FRP, Green Bay walks away and forces the issue with Rodgers.  Remember, Green Bay doesn't have to deal Rodgers.  That 2 FRPs plus Surtain/Stokes swap is probably one of the alternatives.  I don't think Denver is going to be receptive to that one, and I think they'd be more willing to deal Jeudy then Surtain.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Broncofan said:

If Sutton is going, then there's no Surtain/Stokes swap.   Jeudy IMO is off the table given the $ implications, and the fact Sutton is going to be pricey - and again, the point about Patrick/Sutton providing the same role, makes zero sense to keep those 2 and deal Jeudy.  It doesn't help us win games to have 2 similar style guys who should play the same position.  Realistically keeping Sutton, Chubb & A-Rod is not how we stay competitive for A-Rod's next years - and Paton isn't doing this just for 2021, he's got 2021, 2022 & 2023 in mind (as a minimum).    It doesn't have to be Sutton, but if any WR is going, it should be either Sutton or Patrick - Patrick's worth to GB is obviously a lot lower in a deal.

Sutton has virtually zero value to GB given the fact that he's 1) coming off a torn ACL and 2) going to need a new contract extension soon.  And given that the Packers are about to handing Davante Adams arguably the most money for a WR ever, there's little reason for them to have any interest in Sutton.  If you want to take Jeudy off the table, that's fine.  But you have to make up for that value lost.  And it's not Sutton and it's sure as hell not Patrick.

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

Getting Aaron is going to cost us something valuable, be that a young offensive weapon, Chubb/Surtain or just 3 firsts, but it’s worth the price. 

That's what I'm trying to get at.  It's not just what you feel is "extra" in terms of value.  It's going to hurt to give up that many assets.  The more (or better) young players you include in the deal, the less it hurts in terms of draft picks.  If you're not willing to put in the young players, it's going to cost more in terms of draft picks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, germ-x said:

At the end of the day it really comes down to if Rodgers is willing to go to multiple teams that can start a bit of a bidding war.

As much as Packers fans don’t want to admit it.  Aaron Rodgers holds all the cards.  They’ll get what Rodgers allows and by that, if he hasn’t zeroed in on 1 team.  

He really doesn't hold any cards.  Right now, he's got 2 options.  He can either retire and go host Jeopardy or he can show up for the Packers offseason.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, fattlipp said:

Didn’t the Niners offer the #3, and 2 future 1sts and a 2nd...

that’s higher than the 9

Think it will take Surtain, Sutton, and 2 1sts... with maybe a 4th coming back...may they would throw in King...

I don't think there was ever a concrete offer.  The rumored offer was #3, Jimmy G, and some other players included.

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

But I do enjoy talking with Broncos' fans fwiw.

What is interesting speaking with Packer fans is, while DEN has a specific prize that is being spoken of, the Pack fans are spouting pure WISH list trades or what your fans would like to see, nothing but speculation at this point. And tell me, would ANY Packer fan do anything but ask for the sky ??  But that's what any fan would do, right ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Cutler06 said:

What is interesting speaking with Packer fans is, while DEN has a specific prize that is being spoken of, the Pack fans are spouting pure WISH list trades or what your fans would like to see, nothing but speculation at this point. And tell me, would ANY Packer fan do anything but ask for the sky ??  But that's what any fan would do, right ?

So...it's speculation if it comes to Packers' fans, but specific costs from Denver?  That makes no sense.

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...