Is the Qb situation good enough?

[thebestever6]

2 hours ago, BroncosFan2010 said:

I don't deny that he is a very, very good QB. Transcendent talent? Meh. I have always found that he was repeatedly handed the torch from the older elite WB;s by the media, but could never quite carry it. I don't deny that Luck, at his best, is better than Cousins. But the gap isn't the 5th overall pick, even when healthy I would argue. Taking his injury into account, an injury that is tremendously scary upon research, and its just nuts to me that anyone would prefer him to Kirk.

There is going to be a 4-6M difference in what Kirk makes and what Luck is paid in 2018. That's a downside to going w/ Cousins, but he is healthy and we can add a franchise level talent at 1.05 if we chose Kirk rather than chase Luck. And that's a lowball on Luck, IMO they would demand 1.05 and a future first rounder.

You can keep living in a world where Cousins will cost draft picks and Luck is healthy but I just cant make the jump to that planet. To each his own though.

I'm not living in any world I'm playing devils advocate. And Luck is a transcendent talent. He led the Colts to the playoffs 3 straight years, took him too the  Afc title game, they're  an 8 and 8 football team with him in the linup this year healthy. He's been one of the most underrated qbs since entering the league.

Kirk Cousins has done zero too warrant building a team around. He hasn't won a playoff game, he's come up small to win a game to get into the playoffs. He puts up solid stats that's it. Now if you can get cousins for 18 to 20 mill a year thats a different story.

 

[thebestever6]

1 hour ago, AnAngryAmerican said:

Both are humongous gambles. If they bust, and both have at least a fair chance of busting, it sets the franchise back three-plus years. 

With Baker I agree its risky at this point alot can change. With Darnold I love the risk. The guy is a prodigy and only 21 years old. While he's had a down year he still has put up some numbers after losing weapons last year. 

I think at worst you get a Carson Palmer. 5 years with a cheap carson palmer sounds beautiful.

[AKRNA]

21 minutes ago, thebestever6 said:

With Baker I agree its risky at this point alot can change. With Darnold I love the risk. The guy is a prodigy and only 21 years old. While he's had a down year he still has put up some numbers after losing weapons last year. 

I think at worst you get a Carson Palmer. 5 years with a cheap carson palmer sounds beautiful.

At #5, how can you love the risk? With the wealth of talent at other positions if you're taking a risk or gamble at #5 you're following the Browns business philosophy.

Barring a freak injury the #5 pick should play at a very high level for a long time and step in as a starter on day 1.

[thebestever6]

21 minutes ago, AKRNA said:

At #5, how can you love the risk? With the wealth of talent at other positions if you're taking a risk or gamble at #5 you're following the Browns business philosophy.

Barring a freak injury the #5 pick should play at a very high level for a long time and step in as a starter on day 1.

I'm  not in love with giving up the 5th pick I'd prefer a incentive  based trade like the jets did for favte but more reasonable. But gun to my head I prefer giving up the 5th rather than land cousins. I think we can assemble a better team with luck. And he's  more of a game changing qb.

[AKRNA]

Just to be clear. Based solely on draft value charts, our 1st pick in the draft, #5 overall has more points value than the entire draft of the team picking 17th. IMO that kind of draft capitol cannot be squandered if a franchise is to remain or become successful.

When I hear terms like "risk" associated with a pick that high I get nauseous. You can trade down and accumulate more picks, stay put and acquire a franchise player.................

Lots of things you can do, but if you reach or take a gamble you deserve to be on a Browns level as a franchise.

[jsthomp2007]

1 hour ago, AKRNA said:

Just to be clear. Based solely on draft value charts, our 1st pick in the draft, #5 overall has more points value than the entire draft of the team picking 17th. IMO that kind of draft capitol cannot be squandered if a franchise is to remain or become successful.

When I hear terms like "risk" associated with a pick that high I get nauseous. You can trade down and accumulate more picks, stay put and acquire a franchise player.................

Lots of things you can do, but if you reach or take a gamble you deserve to be on a Browns level as a franchise.

I agree.  I mean, I'd rather have Chubb or Kirkpatrick if that is all that is available at #5.  i mean, sure, we probably don't need them...but, we probably do at some point in the next few years.  

[thebestever6]

2 hours ago, AKRNA said:

Just to be clear. Based solely on draft value charts, our 1st pick in the draft, #5 overall has more points value than the entire draft of the team picking 17th. IMO that kind of draft capitol cannot be squandered if a franchise is to remain or become successful.

When I hear terms like "risk" associated with a pick that high I get nauseous. You can trade down and accumulate more picks, stay put and acquire a franchise player.................

Lots of things you can do, but if you reach or take a gamble you deserve to be on a Browns level as a franchise.

A top 5 pick isn't gonna do a damn thing for this team without identity. You look at seattle their  mo used to be a punishing ground game, punishing defense, and a qb who is a closer and can wear you out. The playoff teams this year all had an identity. The trade value chart, the high picks, the money spent on free agent qbs means nothing without establishing an identity.

I think our best identity will come from the draft or trading for luck not signing cousins.

[broncofan48]

12 minutes ago, thebestever6 said:

A top 5 pick isn't gonna do a damn thing for this team without identity. You look at seattle their  mo used to be a punishing ground game, punishing defense, and a qb who is a closer and can wear you out. The playoff teams this year all had an identity. The trade value chart, the high picks, the money spent on free agent qbs means nothing without establishing an identity.

I think our best identity will come from the draft or trading for luck not signing cousins.

Cousins vs luck vs draft picks aside the bolded makes 0 sense.

 

A top 5 pick is isn't gonna do anything without an identity? 

We didn’t have an identit when we took Von 2nd  

Philly didn’t have an identity when they took wentz.  Chargers weren’t a hard nosed D before bosa

 

a top 5 pick is so valuable make the correct one and it sets the team on a good track.

 

by your own line of thinking if we don’t get luck or cousins drafting a QB at 5 is pointless cause he won’t mean a damn with the identity of this team

[thebestever6]

23 minutes ago, broncofan48 said:

Cousins vs luck vs draft picks aside the bolded makes 0 sense.

 

A top 5 pick is isn't gonna do anything without an identity? 

We didn’t have an identit when we took Von 2nd  

Philly didn’t have an identity when they took wentz.  Chargers weren’t a hard nosed D before bosa

 

a top 5 pick is so valuable make the correct one and it sets the team on a good track.

 

by your own line of thinking if we don’t get luck or cousins drafting a QB at 5 is pointless cause he won’t mean a damn with the identity of this team

Eagles didn't have an identity with a front 7 consisting of cox, graham, bennie logan, jordan hicks?

And that's not what Im saying a qb is a big step in getting an identity but getting Cousins limits it because of the roster you'd be able to assemble after signing him. Then you're virtually having middling picks for most of cousins tenure. Basically stuck in purgatory.  So if Elways end of the year presser is accurate we aren't a year away. So signing cousins like we are would be a mistake. 

Luck is the great white whale. He's the prize piece. My only question is if we did trade for him how much of an in depth physical can we have with him? Can a vigorous throwing session happen ? If he fails it nullifies any,trade too many unknowns. 

[Broncofan]

20 minutes ago, thebestever6 said:

Eagles didn't have an identity with a front 7 consisting of cox, graham, bennie logan, jordan hicks?

And that's not what Im saying a qb is a big step in getting an identity but getting Cousins limits it because of the roster you'd be able to assemble after signing him. Then you're virtually having middling picks for most of cousins tenure. Basically stuck in purgatory.  So if Elways end of the year presser is accurate we aren't a year away. So signing cousins like we are would be a mistake. 

Luck is the great white whale. He's the prize piece. My only question is if we did trade for him how much of an in depth physical can we have with him? Can a vigorous throwing session happen ? If he fails it nullifies any,trade too many unknowns. 

If we traded 1.5 for Luck given the risk profile and the alternatives (Cousins with no picks, draft, other options), the white whale analogy would be very accurate - because our org likely suffers the same fate as Captain Ahab.   

[broncofan48]

12 minutes ago, thebestever6 said:

Eagles didn't have an identity with a front 7 consisting of cox, graham, bennie logan, jordan hicks?

And that's not what Im saying a qb is a big step in getting an identity but getting Cousins limits it because of the roster you'd be able to assemble after signing him. Then you're virtually having middling picks for most of cousins tenure. Basically stuck in purgatory.  So if Elways end of the year presser is accurate we aren't a year away. So signing cousins like we are would be a mistake. 

Luck is the great white whale. He's the prize piece. My only question is if we did trade for him how much of an in depth physical can we have with him? Can a vigorous throwing session happen ? If he fails it nullifies any,trade too many unknowns. 

To be honest I don’t know if Cousins is he answer.  I don’t watch enough college football to make a judgement on the players.  But going after cousins is something I see elway doing.   You know what you’re getting with him unlike a draft pick and that’s where I see elway leaning as another wasted QB in the draft puts all the pressure on elway.  “He can’t succeed without Peyton”  After the beatdown from Seattle he signed talib ward and ware to morph from a high powered O to s grueling D, and now everyone can see how piss poor the QB situation is in Denver.

 

So to me it doesn’t matter what the smartest or best course is according to the armchair GMs I’m trying to figure out what elway will do and this is it.

[germ-x]

9 hours ago, AKRNA said:

Just to be clear. Based solely on draft value charts, our 1st pick in the draft, #5 overall has more points value than the entire draft of the team picking 17th. IMO that kind of draft capitol cannot be squandered if a franchise is to remain or become successful.

When I hear terms like "risk" associated with a pick that high I get nauseous. You can trade down and accumulate more picks, stay put and acquire a franchise player.................

Lots of things you can do, but if you reach or take a gamble you deserve to be on a Browns level as a franchise.

I definitely get that picking top 5 you’re wanting to select a franchise player.  Obviously with that high a pick you need to hit on it with an elite player regardless of position.

I know you’re a big Nelson fan, as am I.  I also think he’s the safest pick in the top 10, but that’s because at worst I see him as an average OG. But an average he’ll even above average OG at #5 is a terrible selection.  It’s not a game changing position, so taking an OG top 5 he better be one of the top 2-3 at his position for the majority of his career.

I know, I know, he’s being touted as the best OG in a decade, but there have been plenty of highly thought of offensive lineman selected top 5 who haven’t panned our.  Robert Gallery, Luke Joeckel, Mike Williams, Levi Brown, Matt Kalil, Jason Smith, Greg Robinson, and hell even Eric Fisher.

Further, if you really look at it, I don’t think anyone would ever say, “man our OT or our OG was the biggest difference in our team being good or bad.”

You want a true difference maker with that type of pick.  OLs just don’t fit that bill.  If Denver stays at #5 I think it’s a long shot they take an OG.  Maybe an OT because they’re so much harder to find, but I even think that’s a stretch if a QB, Barkley, Chubb, or Fitzpatrick is on the board.  Those positions just impact the game so much more.  If they do end up going Nelson, and I’ve said this before, Elway will be sitting there thinking what a terrible year to have a top 5 pick with an OG being hands down the BPA.

I’ve also seen some posts about top 5 picks at QB that have been successful.  The last time a top 5 pick along the OL was on their original team and won a SB was 20 years ago and was Orlando Pace with the Rams.  There’s actually only been 2 since Elway was drafted in ‘83 and it was Jonathan Ogden and Pace.  Not exactly a strong track record.

[The Helicopter]

On 1/19/2018 at 7:16 AM, BroncosFan2010 said:

How anyone doesn't understand the Kirk situation despite Broncofan clearly and articulately laying it our is beyond me.

The Cousins v Luck debate comes down to this:

1. Trade 1.05, possible more, for 28 year old Andrew Luck who has a serious, mysterious shoulder injury, has not played for a season plus and is owed 24.4M in 2018/19

2. Keep our picks, sign 29 year old, healthy, Kirk Cousins to a 28-30M per season deal.

Its such an easy choice to me. Pay the healthy, slightly more expensive, slightly less talented QB and keep the draft picks.

Luck’s faking it to get out of Indy...wouldn’t you? Now McD is coming to town...GL

We sucked hard enough this year to get Luck

[The Helicopter]

 

8 hours ago, germ-x said:

I definitely get that picking top 5 you’re wanting to select a franchise player.  Obviously with that high a pick you need to hit on it with an elite player regardless of position.

I know you’re a big Nelson fan, as am I.  I also think he’s the safest pick in the top 10, but that’s because at worst I see him as an average OG. But an average he’ll even above average OG at #5 is a terrible selection.  It’s not a game changing position, so taking an OG top 5 he better be one of the top 2-3 at his position for the majority of his career.

I know, I know, he’s being touted as the best OG in a decade, but there have been plenty of highly thought of offensive lineman selected top 5 who haven’t panned our.  Robert Gallery, Luke Joeckel, Mike Williams, Levi Brown, Matt Kalil, Jason Smith, Greg Robinson, and hell even Eric Fisher.

Further, if you really look at it, I don’t think anyone would ever say, “man our OT or our OG was the biggest difference in our team being good or bad.”

You want a true difference maker with that type of pick.  OLs just don’t fit that bill.  If Denver stays at #5 I think it’s a long shot they take an OG.  Maybe an OT because they’re so much harder to find, but I even think that’s a stretch if a QB, Barkley, Chubb, or Fitzpatrick is on the board.  Those positions just impact the game so much more.  If they do end up going Nelson, and I’ve said this before, Elway will be sitting there thinking what a terrible year to have a top 5 pick with an OG being hands down the BPA.

I’ve also seen some posts about top 5 picks at QB that have been successful.  The last time a top 5 pick along the OL was on their original team and won a SB was 20 years ago and was Orlando Pace with the Rams.  There’s actually only been 2 since Elway was drafted in ‘83 and it was Jonathan Ogden and Pace.  Not exactly a strong track record.

I wouldn’t be disappointed in we picked Nelson @5 and actually drafted a GREAT player for a change...but that being said i’d rather put Smith on D w/Von

[Broncofan]

Re: Luck desperation for a QB solution is making ppl squint hard enough without seeing the whole picture of risk.   The IND local radio put up a timeline on hard facts everyone should read 2-3x if they think a 1st or more is worth the risk there.  

http://www.1070thefan.com/blogs/kevins-corner/colts-coverage/andrew-luck-one-year-removed-right-shoulder-surgery

The above doesn’t even account for the fact that Luck is way behind normal recovery - and the fact that they waited 2 years to fix the injury.  None of the good outcomes with QB (ironically if you don’t throw the outcomes are excellent but throwing makes all the difference here) waited that long or fell behind schedule like this.   Add in the fact that Luck’s last statement was on whether or not he’d need more surgery - and that he and the Colts have made 3 incorrect statements on timeline already.   Another surgery takes out 2018 minimum and it’s a career ender with throwing athletes. 

Peyton only cost $ no picks , his contract was structured it could go year to year, and he was on schedule from the operation - just no one had ever returned from that surgery.    This is a world of difference.  This risk would be a bad call with a top 20 pick.  1.5?  Easy no thx.

No doubt we need a franchise QB.  But desperation doesn’t justify the risk here.  It’s at a cataclysmic level (potential career-ender) here.   Easy pass given the risk profile here.