Spankin New Turtle 🐢 Mock Draft Magic hittin ya in the face

[Skinsin2013]

9 hours ago, turtle28 said:

Can’t build your team scared to take chances. We’ve been mediocre since 2013 in large part bc Dan & Brice were scared to take chances on FAs or in trading up to get a guy they loved in the draft.

And we've been BAAAAAAAAAAAD for 20 years because of moves... just like this.

This is a Dan Snyder move.

[aceinthehouse]

We always like the shiny new toy, don't we?

After busting on Haskins, you guys want to trade the future away for a QB none of us have any inclination will be worth a damn in the NFL.

Let me guess, Because Burrow & Herbert worked out?

1st if all, our team smashed Burrow. So we have no idea if he will be the same player after injury.

And 2nd, Herbert will be going into his 2nd year where teams will have a better game plan for him.

And 3rd, neither team made the playoffs. Chargers won 7 games, to Bengals 4.

We matched Chargers and then some. WITH NO QB

So why set this team back years, with a rookie QB & watch our Defense deteriate from waiting to find out if Fields or whomever will be good?

When we can get a proven commodity with not only success as an NFL QB, but possibly one with playoff experience as well & one we KNOW who can pick up Scott Turner's playbook.

Now, I have no problem drafting a QB in the 2nd round, if like a Trey Lance drops all that way or another highly touted QB.

But that 1st Rd pick needs to go to a position who not only we can insert immediately with his high upside and into a position of great need for us, other than QB.

But possibly one that can make Heinicke or a different veteran we have, increase their chances of success with the Offense, or make our Defense even more elite than it already is.

Maybe Kyle Pitts falls to 19…?

Maybe Jemar Chase is sitting their at 19.

What if CB Patrick Sertain Jr. Is their at 19…?

And don't tell me I'm crazy or get out of dream world...

Cause No way on Earth should Montez Sweat have fallen in the 20's like he did to us...

But he did...

And he was a top 5 pick!

Forget QB in the draft in the 1st.

Let's address other needs.

We can get a QB later in the draft.

[turtle28]

14 hours ago, Skinsin2013 said:

And we've been BAAAAAAAAAAAD for 20 years because of moves... just like this.

This is a Dan Snyder move.

Like which ones? We had one major trade up in the Snyder era, for RG3. I guess you can continue to be scared & conservative though, that’s seemed to work the last 7 years... right? Oh wait 

[Skinsin2013]

11 hours ago, turtle28 said:

Like which ones? We had one major trade up in the Snyder era, for RG3. I guess you can continue to be scared & conservative though, that’s seemed to work the last 7 years... right? Oh wait 

Why are you settling on 7 years? Strategic... 

[turtle28]

On 2/19/2021 at 7:52 AM, Skinsin2013 said:

And we've been BAAAAAAAAAAAD for 20 years because of moves... just like this.

This is a Dan Snyder move.

 

3 hours ago, Skinsin2013 said:

Why are you settling on 7 years? Strategic... 

During the end of Turner’s run as HC he and Casserly made some big moves to get Dan Wilkinson, Brad Johnson then after we traded down with the Saints in 99 we took Bailey, in 2000 we packaged those other picks we got to move up and take our 2nd or 3rd best LT in tram history - Chris Samuels. That resulted in a division win, a playoff win and a FG away from getting to the NFC Championship game in 1999.
 

Marty’s & Gibbs’s years as HCs we didn’t do a lot of huge moves. I guess it netted us 2 playoff appearances and 1 playoffs win.

The McNabb trade didn’t work and the RG3 trade up long term didn’t but we don’t win the division in 2012 w/o RG3.

Then, as I said since 2014 we really haven’t made a lot of big moves & let several good home grown talents go while getting worse the last 3 years.

Almost all teams that have good young QBs right now traded up at least a few spots for their guy except for the teams that had the #1 pick. If we want one of the top 4 QBs I think we need to move up and get one.

[Skinsin2013]

Just now, turtle28 said:

 

During the end of Turner’s run as HC he and Casserly made some big moves to get Dan Wilkinson, Brad Johnson then after we traded down with the Saints in 99 we took Bailey, in 2000 we packaged those other picks we got to move up and take our 2nd or 3rd best LT in tram history - Chris Samuels. That resulted in a division win, a playoff win and a FG away from getting to the NFC Championship game in 1999.
 

Marty’s & Gibbs’s years as HCs we didn’t do a lot of huge moves. I guess it netted us 2 playoff appearances and 1 playoffs win.

The McNabb trade didn’t work and the RG3 trade up long term didn’t but we don’t win the division in 2012 w/o RG3.

Then, as I said since 2014 we really haven’t made a lot of big moves & let several good home grown talents go while getting worse the last 3 years.

Almost all teams that have good young QBs right now traded up at least a few spots for their guy except for the teams that had the #1 pick. If we want one of the top 4 QBs I think we need to move up and get one.

You're right. We would need to move up.

But we don't need one of those QBs, especially Fields... yet another OSU QB... those haven't panned out so well for us or anyone. We just disagree with how a team should be built. Note why the Redskins sniffed some success this past year... the slow builds via the draft have finally caught up. 

Panic moves are bad moves. 

We should be discussing whether or not we trade Allen or Payne instead. You know, things GOOD teams do.

[turtle28]

45 minutes ago, Skinsin2013 said:

You're right. We would need to move up.

But we don't need one of those QBs, especially Fields... yet another OSU QB... those haven't panned out so well for us or anyone. We just disagree with how a team should be built. Note why the Redskins sniffed some success this past year... the slow builds via the draft have finally caught up. 

Panic moves are bad moves. 

We should be discussing whether or not we trade Allen or Payne instead. You know, things GOOD teams do.

I’m worried this past year a little bit of a mirage for this fanbase. We wouldn’t have won the division if Dak didn’t break his ankle. We won the division bc Alex Smith took over as QB in November and we finished the season 5-3 (5-1 in games Alex started).

Is that sustainable or csn it be duplicated?

I don’t know that. Most assume a FA we’d sign or trade for will win more than Alex but there’s no guarantee of that, it certainly hasn’t been the case since 2018. We’re 11-5 w/ Alex as our starting QB from 2018 & 2020. With a handful of other QBs we are 6-27 without Alex the last 3 years (including Heinicke’s playoff loss).
 

You can’t compare prospects just because they went to the same school. Not every QB is the same that comes from a school. That’d be like those who didn’t believe in DeShaun Watson bc he was coming from Clemson so he fell to 12th & those who didn’t believe in Mahomes bc he came from Texas Tech’s air raid offense and until him the previous QBs in that had been just NFL back ups or didn’t make the league. So the Bears for example took Trubisky instead of one of those two QBs who had more talent and potential.
 

Also, you say trade up don’t work and we should just pray somehow that a QB falls well, the Chiefs up for Mahomes, the Bills traded up for Allen, Texans traded up for Watson. 
 

As for your last point we have discussed that a lot in this forum, I can’t help that you’re not around a lot and don’t know. In almost every offseason mock thread or the NFL draft thread we’ve discussed trading Allen or Payne. Some want to trade Allen now, some like me want re-sign Allen and then trade Payne next offseason and we can re-sign Ioannidis in 2023. 
 

We also might consider trading Settle next offseason too for a mid round pick. Then, you draft a mid round NT to play behind Allen & Ioannidis. 

Edited February 20, 2021 by turtle28

[Woz]

On 2/17/2021 at 12:46 PM, turtle28 said:

Trade! Washington trades up to #7!

RD 1: Justin Fields (gives up 19, 51 & 2022 1st)

*raises his hand*

Why does Detroit agree to this trade? If Justin Fields is there, why wouldn't they just take him especially since they already have the Rams 2022 and 2023 1st round picks? Having Goff isn't going to stop them from taking a QB.

[e16bball]

On 2/20/2021 at 1:08 PM, Skinsin2013 said:

You're right. We would need to move up.

But we don't need one of those QBs, especially Fields... yet another OSU QB... those haven't panned out so well for us or anyone. We just disagree with how a team should be built. Note why the Redskins sniffed some success this past year... the slow builds via the draft have finally caught up. 

Panic moves are bad moves. 

We should be discussing whether or not we trade Allen or Payne instead. You know, things GOOD teams do.

I generally agree with the concept of a slow build, but I also believe the QB position operates outside the regular roster-building protocol. There is a ceiling on a roster with no QB — and just as important, there’s a limited window for success when your model is built around the concept of trying to keep 15 good starters together, healthy, and young.

I’ve used SF as an example of this before, but you can also look at the 2017 MIN team. You really could not have a better roster than they had around Keenum, both sides of the ball. And where are they now? Right back in the land of 7-9. Their defense was ranked #1 in the NFL that special 2017 year, and now they’re all the way down to #29 last year. 3 seasons later. Guys aging, declining, getting hurt, being shipped out. That unit is a shell of itself. You just can’t keep them together for very long. 

To me, the slow and methodical approach is absolutely the best way to build a roster with star power and depth. But I believe you should still disrupt the slow-build plan every single time if you perceive the opportunity to change your franchise’s stars with a genuine franchise QB. Especially one you have on the cheap for 4 seasons. There is almost no amount of non-QB talent that will outweigh the impact of that franchise QB if he becomes what you believe him to be. 

Which sorta dovetails with your next point, about panic moves. I think the line between “panic move because we have to get a young QB” and “aggressive move to secure a guy we think is a future star” is a fine one. It comes down to your individual evaluation of the player. If you’re making a move up to put yourself in position for a QB generally (kinda like NYJ did in 2018), where you’re basically saying “gosh, we need a QB and now we’re in position to get one, so we’ll just ride with the best one left when it gets to us,” that’s a big problem waiting to happen. You can’t just take a generic QB because you need one, you have to take a specific guy because you love HIM and believe HE is the next NFL star in the making.

Because the truth is, moving up for a specific QB prospect has been one of the most successful moves of the last 5 years. Philly did it and then won the Super Bowl, and while Wentz didn’t actually play in the playoffs, he was a big reason why they were 13-3 and had a bye and homefield throughout. The Rams did it and then went to the Super Bowl behind the McVay/Goff combo. Buffalo did it, and they’ve already made the AFCCG and have an incredibly bright looking future with a bona fide star QB for the first time in 30 years. And of course, who could forget that the Chiefs did it and now have a ring, 3 straight AFCCG appearances, and the face of the sport for the next decade. 

So for me, if they’re moving up for Fields because they love him, on and off the field, and have that strong/positive an evaluation on him — then I’m okay with it. I have absolutely no problem with a big trade-up if they genuinely believe Fields is the next Deshaun Watson (or Wilson is the Mormon Mahomes or Lance is the slightly more easterly Josh Allen) and want to trade up specifically to land the player. Take your shot if you believe you have a chance to get your guy. But if they’re just moving up to 7 or 9 with the intention of “getting into position to get a QB because we need one” and then just taking the top guy left on their board, that’s problematic. Sure, you can luck into it, but it’s bad business. THAT would be the panic move you’re talking about.

[turtle28]

11 hours ago, Woz said:

*raises his hand*

Why does Detroit agree to this trade? If Justin Fields is there, why wouldn't they just take him especially since they already have the Rams 2022 and 2023 1st round picks? Having Goff isn't going to stop them from taking a QB.

That’s a matter of opinion. The reason is bc they have Goff, now many they’re not sold on Goff, but I can’t say if that’s true or not. We can’t forget that Goff is just 3 years removed from taking his team to the Super Bowl and last year he won a playoff game with a broken thumb.

[turtle28]

@e16bball Only place I’d counter is the Jets drafted a Qb they were convinced could be the answer for them and that regime (GM/HC) they loved in 2018. The issue is the Jets owners fired that HC & GM w/in a year of drafting that QB & replaced the previous HC w/ a worse HC and a GM that struggled to put a lot of weapons around the QB.

Edited February 23, 2021 by turtle28

[e16bball]

10 minutes ago, turtle28 said:

@e16bball Only place I’d counter is the Jets drafted a Qb they were convinced could be the answer for them and that regime (GM/HC) they loved in 2018. The issue is the Jets owners fired that HC & GM w/in a year of drafting that QB & replaced the previous HC w/ a worse HC and a GM that struggled to put a lot of weapons around the QB.

Yeah, but I don’t think they moved up with the intention of getting Darnold.

They did that trade — going from #6 to #3 — on March 17, still well over a month before the draft. We had no idea who was going #1 or #2 at that point, but honestly I think Darnold was considered the front-runner to be at the top. On March 8, per Bovada, Barkley and Darnold were the top two contenders to go first. And even by the time April 25 rolled around, Darnold was still the heavy favorite to be #1, per BetOnline.

They didn’t know they were going to get Darnold when they made that move; they couldn’t have. As of the morning of the draft, it was still a big longshot that he would make it to 3. If they waited until draft day and had seen him drop to 3, and then pounced...that would be one thing. But that’s not what happened. They moved up to 3 with no idea which of the top 4 QBs would still be there when they picked. 

That to me screams “we need a QB, and we’ll be guaranteed to get one of the top 4 guys if we do this move, so we’ll take whomever is left and hopefully it’ll work out.” Which I consider to be the kind of panic move I referenced in my response to @Skinsin2013. Moving up to get into position to take whomever happens to be the best available QB, instead of targeting a specific player that you really love and moving up to get him.

Maybe that distinction doesn’t make sense? But to me, it’s very important. It’s a way to tell if your evaluation of (and desire for) the player is so strong that you have to have him — rather than just hoping to get a generic QB and hope it works out.

[turtle28]

4 hours ago, e16bball said:

Yeah, but I don’t think they moved up with the intention of getting Darnold.

They did that trade — going from #6 to #3 — on March 17, still well over a month before the draft. We had no idea who was going #1 or #2 at that point, but honestly I think Darnold was considered the front-runner to be at the top. On March 8, per Bovada, Barkley and Darnold were the top two contenders to go first. And even by the time April 25 rolled around, Darnold was still the heavy favorite to be #1, per BetOnline.

They didn’t know they were going to get Darnold when they made that move; they couldn’t have. As of the morning of the draft, it was still a big longshot that he would make it to 3. If they waited until draft day and had seen him drop to 3, and then pounced...that would be one thing. But that’s not what happened. They moved up to 3 with no idea which of the top 4 QBs would still be there when they picked. 

That to me screams “we need a QB, and we’ll be guaranteed to get one of the top 4 guys if we do this move, so we’ll take whomever is left and hopefully it’ll work out.” Which I consider to be the kind of panic move I referenced in my response to @Skinsin2013. Moving up to get into position to take whomever happens to be the best available QB, instead of targeting a specific player that you really love and moving up to get him.

Maybe that distinction doesn’t make sense? But to me, it’s very important. It’s a way to tell if your evaluation of (and desire for) the player is so strong that you have to have him — rather than just hoping to get a generic QB and hope it works out.

That’s fair. I would say, I think the Jets had determined they were fine with taking Baker or Darnold at #3, no matter which QB dropped to them they were ok with that QB leading them into the future and building around that QB.

I think they loved both guys. Really, there isn’t much difference IMO between Baker & Darnold, I’ve never thought there was at least. The Browns traded for Landry & that immediately made Baker better plus, they added Nick Chubb & Hunt as RBs. They drafted Njoku and added Hooper in FA. I think it’s safe to say that those additions to the Browns weapons have greatly helped Baker’s development. In 2017 & 2018 my #1 was Darnold over Baker bc of Baker’s attitude and at times immaturity. I am proud of him because I thought Baker was going to be a disaster like Johnny Manziel.

[Woz]

On 2/23/2021 at 12:21 PM, turtle28 said:

That’s a matter of opinion. The reason is bc they have Goff, now many they’re not sold on Goff, but I can’t say if that’s true or not. We can’t forget that Goff is just 3 years removed from taking his team to the Super Bowl and last year he won a playoff game with a broken thumb.

They only took Goff back to get the draft picks that the Rams sent along to unload Goff's contract, as well as not have to draft a new QB. That said, I think they're still looking at improvement.

Again, they already have the Rams pick next year or two. Why would the want more picks? Even if they are happy with Goff, do we think they would give up a shot at a Surtain II or Parsons to help bolster their defense? Or maybe getting Goff a weapon like Waddle or Devonta Smith?

[Woz]

On 2/23/2021 at 11:54 AM, e16bball said:

But if they’re just moving up to 7 or 9 with the intention of “getting into position to get a QB because we need one” and then just taking the top guy left on their board, that’s problematic. Sure, you can luck into it, but it’s bad business. THAT would be the panic move you’re talking about.

Or ... you know ... they could maybe take Parsons instead ...