What to do at QB?

[AKRNA]

10 hours ago, paul-mac said:

James is on the roster 100%. It would cost us $15m in dead money to cut him. I think he’s gone after 2021, but he will 100% be here for another season. 

They'll find a trade partner.

[jsthomp2007]

2 hours ago, thebestever6 said:

https://amp.tmz.com/2021/02/04/kareem-jackson-deshaun-watson-nfl-houston-denver-broncos-texans-trade/?__twitter_impression=true

 

Dang Kareem gunning hard 

Go get him Kareem!! 

[paul-mac]

5 minutes ago, AKRNA said:

They'll find a trade partner.

No one is taking on that contract after he barely played for two years.

[paul-mac]

I think I've decided I don't want Deshaun Watson. Let someone else mortgage their future.

 

I'd be more comfortable trading up to the top 3 for BYU QB Zach Wilson. It would cost something like #9, #40 and next year's 1st rounder, which is less than half of the cost to obtain Watson, plus we'd have him on a cheap contract to be able to surround him with talent.

[BroncoBruin]

10 hours ago, paul-mac said:

James is on the roster 100%. It would cost us $15m in dead money to cut him. I think he’s gone after 2021, but he will 100% be here for another season. 

A trade saves 4 million. A post June 1 cut = same cap hit if he were on the roster. It’s not the dead money in itself that matters, it’s dead money in excess of the original cap hit. Consider the way teammates have talked about him and the frustration of coaches and execs, I would not say it’s 100% at all. They won’t need the cap space, I think they will have no problem dumping him if that’s what they want to do.

Edited February 4, 2021 by BroncoBruin

[BroncoBruin]

The James contract wouldn’t be a problem for a team that trades for him. They’d be paying 4 million for him in 2021 (dirt cheap) and after 2021, there’s very little guaranteed money left. He’d likely be in a position where it makes most sense to restructure to a more team-friendly deal with his new team, assuming he plays and they want to keep him.

[broncos67]

58 minutes ago, AKRNA said:

They'll find a trade partner.

Eh, I think that's easier said than done. He's got a lot of red flags. Not sure anyone will willingly take on that contract.

[broncos67]

51 minutes ago, paul-mac said:

I think I've decided I don't want Deshaun Watson. Let someone else mortgage their future.

 

I'd be more comfortable trading up to the top 3 for BYU QB Zach Wilson. It would cost something like #9, #40 and next year's 1st rounder, which is less than half of the cost to obtain Watson, plus we'd have him on a cheap contract to be able to surround him with talent.

The difference is one of these is a proven, legitimate NFL talent, and the other isn't. With Watson, there's no growing pains, and you know exactly what you're going to get. With Zach Wilson, you absolutely don't know, and while the cost to get him is likely less, I would argue it's as much of a risk of mortgaging your future to give up 9, 40, and next year's 1 to go after an unproven guy in Wilson.

A rising tide lifts all boats. Watson instantly brings this team to relevancy. Free agent dollars and subsequent draft picks can be used to fortify other positions. 

Put another way, if you're going after Watson, he is your future for the next 10-12 years. 

[Broncofan]

43 minutes ago, broncos67 said:

The difference is one of these is a proven, legitimate NFL talent, and the other isn't. With Watson, there's no growing pains, and you know exactly what you're going to get. With Zach Wilson, you absolutely don't know, and while the cost to get him is likely less, I would argue it's as much of a risk of mortgaging your future to give up 9, 40, and next year's 1 to go after an unproven guy in Wilson.

A rising tide lifts all boats. Watson instantly brings this team to relevancy. Free agent dollars and subsequent draft picks can be used to fortify other positions. 

Put another way, if you're going after Watson, he is your future for the next 10-12 years. 

The other part is that the other parts in question may not be as valuable as we think.    Chubb isn’t a guy you throw away - but in his 2nd contract, his inherent value drops dramatically.   Lock & Chubb in their non-rookie contract years would be a much lower cost than it appears on the surface.    
 

Sutton is a baller when fully healthy but that’s another year away.  And on this squad and Watson as QB you can roll with Tim Patrick as a much cheaper replacement - nowhere near as good, but nowhere near as expensive.  And with other pieces who can take the volume siphoned off if Sutton is gone.   Even Fant / Albert O you can see the potential similar argument (but if there’s a corps you leverage in a perfect world ideally it’s our WR corps, so plan A would be Sutton given he’s about to be really expensive soon).  
 

If it’s 2 1sts & a 2nd for Wilson (the price to move up to 1.2 to ensure you get him), you’re far better off to package the 3 extra guys on Watson.   Even with the rookie savings the whiff rate is high enough - and the elite - Josh Allen level whiff rate is even higher.  

 

Edited February 4, 2021 by Broncofan

[broncofan48]

On Watson:

 

In 2019 they made the divisional round and were up 24-0 before KC scored 7! Consecutive touchdowns.  31 points put up should be enough to win most games.  And that’s with Carlos Hyde, Will Fuller and Hopkins as weapons.  And 2 rookies starting on the OL.  I think our skill level players overall hold up well in comparison, no Hopkins level guy but overall talent is comparable, and OL should be better than Houston’s was.

Vic can get this defense to play above their skill level if you can get the offense improved this team will win a lot of games as currently constructed.  
 

FTR, Kansas City has scored 31+ against Denver just once since Mahomes has been on the roster (this December).   
 

I think if there’s a way to get Watson you have to do it.  Especially since the Raiders are after him too.  

[broncofan48]

Also the coach was BoB....

[AKRNA]

27 minutes ago, broncos67 said:

Eh, I think that's easier said than done. He's got a lot of red flags. Not sure anyone will willingly take on that contract.

Well, I doubt we'd get much if anything. I do think, tough as it may be, trading him may be far easier than getting he and Bolles to coexist on the same line. 

[Broncofan]

6 minutes ago, broncofan48 said:

Also the coach was BoB....

It really can’t be understated how much Watson carried that team.   His playoff win it was all him again overcoming some very suspect BOB game management.   
 

I know it’s going to be argued Houston went 5-11.   Without Watson they are probably 1-15, 2-14 at best.   He’s already a 4+ W QB in the Josh Allen, 4-6 overall elite tier (Mahomes is #1 by himself LOL).   

[grizmo78]

28 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

The other part is that the other parts in question may not be as valuable as we think.    Chubb isn’t a guy you throw away - but in his 2nd contract, his inherent value drops dramatically.   Lock & Chubb in their non-rookie years would be a much lower cost than on the surface.    
 

Sutton is a baller when fully healthy but that’s another year away.  And on this squad and Watson as QB you can roll with Tim Patrick as a much cheaper replacement - nowhere near as good, but nowhere near as expensive.  And with other pieces who can take the volume siphoned off if Sutton is gone.   Even Fant / Albert O you can see the potential similar argument (but if there’s a corps you leverage in a perfect world ideally it’s our WR corps, so plan A would be Sutton given he’s about to be really expensive soon).  
 

If it’s 2 1sts & a 2nd for Wilson (the price to move up to 1.2 to ensure you get him), you’re far better off to package the 3 extra guys on Watson.   Even with the rookie savings the whiff rate is high enough - and the elite - Josh Allen level whiff rate is even higher.  

 

100% Agree with this sentiment. 

[Broncofan]

On 2/2/2021 at 8:49 PM, broncofan48 said:

I’d struggle with giving up that much for 1 player even if it’s someone as good as Watson.   But it’s probably the right call honestly, assuming all the guys on offense take a step forward naturally and then Watson elevating everyone the offense should be potent  

I’m tired of getting whipped by the Chiefs so I think I’d pull the trigger but damn would it sting.   

 

 

 

On 2/3/2021 at 11:04 AM, Calamity_Cometh said:

They are just rumors but if the Raiders have entered the conversation, we gotta sell the farm. We cannot compete against Mahomes, Watson and Herbert. Can't be done. Even with 7 seeds.

 

On 2/3/2021 at 11:07 AM, broncos67 said:

Completely agree. Gotta take a stab at it....the Broncos would be in trouble for years to come unless we find a young, high-ceiling QB.

 

1 hour ago, broncos67 said:

The difference (between Watson & Wilson) is that one of these is a proven, legitimate NFL talent, and the other isn't. With Watson, there's no growing pains, and you know exactly what you're going to get. 

A rising tide lifts all boats. Watson instantly brings this team to relevancy. Free agent dollars and subsequent draft picks can be used to fortify other positions. 

Put another way, if you're going after Watson, he is your future for the next 10-12 years. 

 

1 hour ago, broncofan48 said:

On Watson:

 

In 2019 they made the divisional round and were up 24-0 before KC scored 7! Consecutive touchdowns.  31 points put up should be enough to win most games.  

.....
 

I think if there’s a way to get Watson you have to do it.  Especially since the Raiders are after him too.  

 

49 minutes ago, grizmo78 said:

100% Agree with this sentiment. 

 

I wanted to highlight a common theme on why ppl are willing to make a really strong offer for Watson, and not necessarily stand pat with Lock, or pay a similar package in picks for a rookie as plan B:

 

1.  With Mahomes and now Herbert in the AFCW, it isn't enough to just have an "OK" QB - you need either a 2015-level complete team, or you need a top 6-8 QB to compete on a good overall squad.    I know the counter is that the picks reduce our ability to have the good/complete team - but let's accept the 2 years of 1sts/2nds if we are including Lock/Chubb +/- 1 more guy.   With Mahomes & now Herbert in the division, you don't need Matt Ryan 2017-19, you need Matt Ryan 2016 to compete.   Stafford offered that ceiling (although only a 20 percent outcome), at far cheaper - great.   But you need a high-ceiling guy, not just a high-floor guy.   That's why the JimmyG's, Cousins, or even Carr's don't work here (especially at 2nd contract cap costs, but more on that in another post).

2.  Lock's ceiling, and frankly most QB's ceilings - don't match what Watson already provides.   Frankly, not even a Baker Mayfield outcome would be good enough (guy who can play well vs. bad D's, thrives off run game & grerat OL play, but isn't good enough to carry the O on his own arm talent, and who relies on the run game to keep team  ahead / within 1-score).   You need the Josh Allen / Deshaun Watson outcome to compete now.

3.  The Raiders willingness to deal Derek Carr speaks to this - Carr is a very serviceable QB, but he's not at that elite tier.   The Raiders aren't likely going to give him away - but the fact they are willing to deal Carr speaks volumes here.    They have the safe, high-floor guy - and they realize it's not enough.

4.   Rookie-wise, we judge a Baker-level  or even a Carr-level outcome as acceptable.   But for us to compete, a rookie can't "just" be Baker or Carr - that doesn't compete in the long-run with KC & LAC.    That really narrows the range of rookies you feel comfortable in going after - but it also devalues them heavily vs. the known young QB who's already hit that range - that's Watson.

5.  The kicker - Watson's 25.  As alluded to above - you're getting Watson for 5 more years - but in reality, with the likelihood you extend him again,he's yours for 10+ years.  And he's playing at that high level that can hang with the Mahomes, the Herberts, etc.

Those are the football reasons to value Watson over a rookie Rd1 - especially when we likely have to pay a very similar (or close) pick price to move up to 1.2 to get the rookie we want.   Maybe we don't get him, someone else outbids us - that's out of our control.  But going after Watson is an A+ move football-wise.    As for the cap argument - I'll touch on the contract & cap impact Watson's contract has in the next post.

 

Edited February 4, 2021 by Broncofan