01-11-2021, 06:13 PM
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
Yes and no. In certain aspects Watson and his legs would add another layer to any defensive game plan. But its all about how you use it. To fully unlock Watson I don't think you would build what he does off the running game like MN's offense is currently designed to do. Watson at his best is orchestrating the offense himself out of the piston/gun not under center.@"Geoff Nichols" said:
Really,? I think a mobile QB in this system would kill. Those play action boots with a real threat to turn it up field if the edge bites or the olb commits to soon would open up so much more. It would force teams to commit a safety to the box more which would open the vertical passing game more. And I think teams wouldn't be as blitz happy if we had a QB that could escape and make them pay with his legs.@JimmyinSD said:
I guess my point wasn't to bag on Kirk at all. Personally I don't have much of an issue around what he is getting paid. But a team in need of a QB would at least have a conversation about giving up a 1st for him. But when it comes to Kirk there is more of a conversation around "do I give up a 1st for the player" or "do I use the first to trade up for my QB". Answer could go different directions depending on team.@Hawkvike25 said:
a to be 33 year old QB, with about zero mobility in the pocket, set to make about 60 million over the next 2 seasons with a "meh" track record in big games? to the right team he's probably still worth a late first round pick if all they need is an average QB to put them over the top and plenty of cap space.@JimmyinSD said:
Khalil Mack was a two time first team all pro when he was traded and he certainly can take over games, just like Aaron Donald can. He may not put points on the board but I have single handedly watch him destroy Minnesota for an entire game. Since the LB/DE position is different I added the 1-2 second round picks. Deshaun is good, not great, and not on Khalil Mack's level.@Hawkvike25 said:
you dont get them on a cheap contract, but you dont have the bust risk that comes with every drafted player. Mack is a LB, while a damned good one, his impact on a game is no where near what a top tier QB can have and the draft picks would show that. think of it this way, aside from QB, what other position has teams trading multiple first round picks to move up to take a player that they covet?@"Geoff Nichols" said:
If the trade is simply Watson and nothing else I would guess 2 first round picks and 1, maybe 2 second round picks would be plenty. Trading for players is much different than moving up in the draft because you arent getting cheap players. When you account for the additional swap of picks, Khalil Mack was essentially traded for two first round picks and he's way better of a player than Deshaun@Hawkvike25 said:
With that said, what do you perceive he would be traded for if they were to actually move him?@"Geoff Nichols" said:
There is absolutely no way in hell it would require that much to get Watson, no way.@Hawkvike25 said:
I'm nearly certain of it considering the team trading the picks would likely be offering mid to late 1st's. You are trading for a top 5 NFL QB on a discounted deal since the Texans paid and keep the entire signing bonus of $20M on their salary cap.@"Geoff Nichols" said:
The Texans aren't going to trade Watson. But more realistically an offer would have to be much larger than this. Think in the neighborhood of 3-4 1st round picks, a few 2nd/3rds, and likely a promising player. That just is a deal that won't happen because you'd add Watson but be at such a resource disadvantage you couldn't build anything sustainable around him. Wait, you think it would require three, maybe four 1st round picks, two 2nd-3rd round picks, and a player for Watson? Lolz please tell me you aren't serious because it would take much less than that.
In 2016 the Rams traded the two 1st round picks, two 2nd round picks, and two 3rd round picks to trade up to #1 and select Jared Goff. In 2012 the Redskins traded three 1st round picks and a 2nd round pick to trade up to #2 for RG3. In both of these scenarios the presumptions is that the team trading up would be getting a high-end starter.
So tack a premium on for knowing you are getting a top 5 QB who is 25 years old. Its insane but if you take the RG3 deal you for sure can argue for three 1sts plus at least one second. So take your choice of four 1sts and a 2nd or three 1sts and a combination of 2nd and 3rds. Its insane but what the market dictates. There would be multiple teams bidding for his services even at that exorbitant price.
As far as trading up for non QB's, easy one to bring up is Ricky Williams. It doesnt ever happen because you obviously want a great QB to build your team around and I get that. I'm just saying Deshaun is on the same level as Kirk so let me turn the table and say what would you trade Kirk for?
Where I think you can have more of an argument is bound in this offensive system how much better is Watson than Kirk? In a pass first oriented offense I think there is quite a large difference. But in this offense I think you'd only see a marginal difference since Watson wouldn't have the same ability to use his legs and take over the game himself.
The way that teams defended the Vikings late in the year also take away the naked boot since they just opted to blitz and fill gaps vs play run fits. So the second you turn you turn around upfield there would be guys in your face.
