Hypothetical for Cleveland Fans: Tom Brady or Baker Mayfield

[childofpudding]

Baker

[AkronsWitness]

5 hours ago, PatriotsWin! said:

If you think Baker is the guy that will bring Cleveland a championship in the next 10 years, go with him. Else, go with Brady, even if it's only for a season or two. At least you'd get a legitimate shot a SB. 

Browns are in a good spot with Baker. I believe hes good enough to win a Super Bowl with, but he wont demand some crazy franchise crippling long term extension.

That will hopefully allow them to address the defense with some more pieces.

 

Edited February 15, 2021 by AkronsWitness

[Broncofan]

The other part about this Q - Cleveland's history of QB futility post-Kosar.   Baker's not elite, but he's literally 10x-100x better than what the Browns have had to put up with since #19 hung up his cleats.    That alone tends to make both the FO and fanbase accept the fact he's not complete - but Baker represents a form of QB stability that they haven't had literally in decades.    Giving that up for a guy that likely isn't playing for more than 2-3 more seasons, it's not hard to see why the Browns FO wouldn't just play it safe with Baker.

Edited February 15, 2021 by Broncofan

[Apparition]

8 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

The other part about this Q - Cleveland's history of QB futility post-Kosar.   Baker's not elite, but he's literally 10x-100x better than what the Browns have had to put up with since #19 hung up his cleats.    That alone tends to make both the FO and fanbase accept the fact he's not complete - but Baker represents a form of QB stability that they haven't had literally in decades.    Giving that up for a guy that likely isn't playing for more than 2-3 more seasons, it's not hard to see why the Browns FO wouldn't just play it safe with Baker.

The Lions experienced the same thing. 

They broke the bank for Stafford.

Then just kept on losing because they couldn't keep a good team around him.

 

Not say that's bound to happen to the Browns, since Stefanski looks like the real deal and coaching was always the missing ingredient in Detroit. But it's definitely something that should and will figure into their considerations.

[Broncofan]

41 minutes ago, Starless said:

The Lions experienced the same thing. 

They broke the bank for Stafford.

Then just kept on losing because they couldn't keep a good team around him.

 

Not say that's bound to happen to the Browns, since Stefanski looks like the real deal and coaching was always the missing ingredient in Detroit. But it's definitely something that should and will figure into their considerations.

To be clear, I'm not talking about what they should do - I'm talking about what's likely to happen even if a Brady-like opp came to pass, that's all.

[AkronsWitness]

1 hour ago, Starless said:

The Lions experienced the same thing. 

They broke the bank for Stafford.

Then just kept on losing because they couldn't keep a good team around him.

 

Not say that's bound to happen to the Browns, since Stefanski looks like the real deal and coaching was always the missing ingredient in Detroit. But it's definitely something that should and will figure into their considerations.

Well the Browns do have the Moneyball/Analytic driven front office with a bunch of Ivy League grads. I highly doubt they would do anything stupid that would kill their cap space that would hinder them from adding in other areas

[Apparition]

2 minutes ago, AkronsWitness said:

Well the Browns do have the Moneyball/Analytic driven front office with a bunch of Ivy League grads. I highly doubt they would do anything stupid that would kill their cap space that would hinder them from adding in other areas

Oh, sure. When have a bunch of Ivy League grads with a reputation for being good with numbers ever screwed anything up to a catastrophic degree?

[Tk3]

personally? I'm not ready to give Baker a new contract if he expects to be in the 30+ range. I just haven't seen that from him. Maybe its there, but I need to see it in 2021 before I'm ready to commit.

If he doesn't live up to a contract he would be asking for, then I let him walk, and if Tom Brady continues to be elite in 2021, then you try to bring him while you groom a new QB

But this is a moon and stars aligning scenario, and it isn't even actionable for another season. But unless Baker proves to be more than I've seen, I'll take Brady in the short term even if it means passing up on Baker

[AkronsWitness]

57 minutes ago, Starless said:

Oh, sure. When have a bunch of Ivy League grads with a reputation for being good with numbers ever screwed anything up to a catastrophic degree?

On a NFL level, not sure. In American business--tons. Point being I think they are understanding of other horribly massive contracts that were given to QBs like Goff and will avoid that type mistake.

If Baker does get his contract, I would expect it to be in the 25-28m range. Not the Kirk Cousins, Jared Goff, Carson Wentz 33m range.

[VigilantZombie]

Brady and its not close 

[Hunter2_1]

Baker easily.

As a massive Brady fan, you'd get 1 year and you probably don't win the superbowl (defense isn't good enough). Then after that you have no Brady and no Baker, and you're back to the 00s/10s baby. 

[Uncle Buck]

The Browns are a young ascending team so it wouldn't make a lot of sense for them to sign Brady for only a year or two.  They made the playoffs last year, so it makes sense to keep building on that success into the future with Mayfield.

[Broncofan]

17 hours ago, Tk3 said:

personally? I'm not ready to give Baker a new contract if he expects to be in the 30+ range. I just haven't seen that from him. Maybe its there, but I need to see it in 2021 before I'm ready to commit.

If he doesn't live up to a contract he would be asking for, then I let him walk, and if Tom Brady continues to be elite in 2021, then you try to bring him while you groom a new QB

But this is a moon and stars aligning scenario, and it isn't even actionable for another season. But unless Baker proves to be more than I've seen, I'll take Brady in the short term even if it means passing up on Baker

 

16 hours ago, AkronsWitness said:

On a NFL level, not sure. In American business--tons. Point being I think they are understanding of other horribly massive contracts that were given to QBs like Goff and will avoid that type mistake.

If Baker does get his contract, I would expect it to be in the 25-28m range. Not the Kirk Cousins, Jared Goff, Carson Wentz 33m range.

I think fans are going to be surprised by how much QB's get in the next cycle of contracts.

The reason?   The TV money by all accounts is going to give a huge increase - and the players get as high as 48.5 percent (with a baseline of 48 percent) of any increase, added to the salary cap.   And as we all have seen, when the cap goes up, it's the premium positions that benefit the most.

I'd predict that the league top 12 QB contract's will *average* well over 30M per year by 2023.    The idea of 25-28M is going to be ridiculously underpriced.   I also think teams have been told what to expect - and that's what is driving both the Ravens and Browns to look to extend their QB's a year or two ahead of schedule (this is the first year they can extend rookie contract players, but with the 5th year option and the franchise tag x 2, there's actually a 4-year window before teams lose leverage - to do it on year 1 speaks to either a certainty that the player is elite <Mahomes>, or the desire to lock them up before the going rate goes up <what I think is happening with Baker & Lamar>).  

Since Stafford was brought up - he became the highest paid QB when he signed his 5/135M deal.   At 27M AAV (not how it works post trade, with the signing bonus taken out for LAR), 4 years later - it's the 15th highest contract for QB's (and the actual salary is 20th & 23rd for 2021-2).   I think both Baker & Lamar will get well north of 30M+ AAV, the key being it's going to be a long extension, so as to leverage the cap increase and subsequent increase in QB salaries that's coming later.   The same principle is being applied here with them as it's played out with Stafford IMO.  We'll see.

Edited February 16, 2021 by Broncofan

[Tk3]

42 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

 

I think fans are going to be surprised by how much QB's get in the next cycle of contracts.

The reason?   The TV money by all accounts is going to give a huge increase - and the players get as high as 48.5 percent (with a baseline of 48 percent) of any increase, added to the salary cap.   And as we all have seen, when the cap goes up, it's the premium positions that benefit the most.

I'd predict that the league top 12 QB contract's will *average* well over 30M per year by 2023.    The idea of 25-28M is going to be ridiculously underpriced.   I also think teams have been told what to expect - and that's what is driving both the Ravens and Browns to look to extend their QB's a year or two ahead of schedule (this is the first year they can extend rookie contract players, but with the 5th year option and the franchise tag x 2, there's actually a 4-year window before teams lose leverage - to do it on year 1 speaks to either a certainty that the player is elite <Mahomes>, or the desire to lock them up before the going rate goes up <what I think is happening with Baker & Lamar>).  

Since Stafford was brought up - he became the highest paid QB when he signed his 5/135M deal.   At 27M AAV (not how it works post trade, with the signing bonus taken out for LAR), 4 years later - it's the 15th highest contract for QB's (and the actual salary is 20th & 23rd for 2021-2).   I think both Baker & Lamar will get well north of 30M+ AAV, the key being it's going to be a long extension, so as to leverage the cap increase and subsequent increase in QB salaries that's coming later.   The same principle is being applied here with them as it's played out with Stafford IMO.  We'll see.

I agree 100% with all of this

I'm saying that I'm not willing to pay that much to my QB, even if that's where the market is going, unless he proves more to me.

Based on what I'm seeing right now, I'd rather spend that $30+ mil on 3 very good players and re-roll a new rookie contract QB than pay Baker 14% of cap (unless he proves it in 2021)

[Broncofan]

5 minutes ago, Tk3 said:

I agree 100% with all of this

I'm saying that I'm not willing to pay that much to my QB, even if that's where the market is going, unless he proves more to me.

Based on what I'm seeing right now, I'd rather spend that $30+ mil on 3 very good players and re-roll a new rookie contract QB than pay Baker 14% of cap (unless he proves it in 2021)

I hear you - but the flip side, is if you let him prove it in 2021 - that contract might be 3-4M more expensive per year, solely because of the extra TV deal money that's now known for 2022+, and now it's 34-35M AAV (I know it sounds crazy, but the math is very much there if there's a big TV deal $ increase).   That's the calculus the Browns FO is figuring out.    Without the new TV deal, I don't think we'd be getting talk of an extension until next year.

FTR, Baker is a very serviceable guy - I'd put him in the 9-12 range, but I also don't see him making it to the Watson-level, or Brady's - a guy who thrives with a great OL, and a run game, to keep him clean (as most QB's thrive) - but also a guy who doesn't carry the O on his own, either.   The crazy thing is, that level of play is a 24-25M guy right now contract-wise.    That bar is going to increase a lot in the next 2+ years, though - which is why this extension is being considered now IMO.

Edited February 16, 2021 by Broncofan