The same nfl that had a high grade on lance. Including it sounds like Brad.
Lance was drafted as a developmental guy with high end skills , getting injured wasn’t the plan not being outplayed by Brock
I’d have an incomplete grade on n Trey where I’d only sell low if
1 a locker room revolt about to happen
2 he’s really not good
Otherwise he’s a cheap back up developmental guy for SF too
Given Brock injury too …
or unless they’re blown away by Darnold
Hate to be that guy, but tell that to the Chiefs, Packers, and Chargers who all did that exact thing semi-recently for likely hall of fame replacements.
Every circumstance is different. Speaking about this in absolutes doesn’t work.
My only issue with Hooker as a backup is if Goff got hurt this year, sure hope he doesn’t, Hooker probably isn’t going to be ready to play this year, maybe he would be ready mid-late in the season. I highly doubt he’s going to be ready for training camp and preseason. He’s more a 2024 plan. He tore his ACL in late November, I know the reports are positive but I bet he starts on PUP.
Even if he’s ready I’d expect the team that drafts him to take it slow, kinda like we did with Jamo. You wouldn’t invest a 1st or 2nd round pick in a guy and rush him back from a knee injury, at least I sure wouldn’t.
I don’t think this can be understated. If Kyle Shanahan is giving up on a QB, I’d recommend passing.
This is a faulty argument. The capital is the same either way.
Let’s say the pick is worth what the Chiefs paid to move up for Mahomes. A current-year first, current-year third, and next year’s first.
By using the pick instead of trading it, we’re giving up potentially having those picks by trading down. The opportunity cost is the same.
Imagine trading 3 first round picks and a 3rd rounder and giving up on the guy after 3 games. That would be pretty wild.
I wouldn’t touch him if Shanny is giving up.
Hint to Brad on Sudfeld.
This logic doesnt work for me. Why wouldnt we be in this position again? Because we are too good? Well if we are so good, that seems like a good problem to have and likely due in large part to the play of the QB, the most important player on the field. So why would we move on from a player that makes us too good?
The capital we’d be giving up is the 6th overall pick–the opportunity to add an elite prospect who could help us compete for the NFC THIS YEAR. Instead of using this (hopefully) rare opportunity to draft a guy who won’t see the field. The lesson from SF is that, even if things go well–if our capable starting QB proves to be capable, and we decide to move on from the 6th overall QB we just drafted–we’ll never get close to that value back for him.
I don’t think there is going to be any elite talent at #6 this year. It’s a week class. This isn’t the 2021 draft class. You have to factor the opportunity cost.
The only comparable situation is KC, and even that’s debatable.
The Packers had Favre in the final years of his career, and even so, only drafted Rodgers when he fell to the end of the first round. San Diego was replacing a 75-year-old Philip Rivers and needed their QB of the future. KC is most comparable in the sense that Alex Smith had performed well for them the year before. But here again, Smith was 34 when they drafted Mahomes, and obviously nearing tail end of his playing days.
None of these teams burned a top-10 pick on a rookie when they had a young QB in his prime, coming off a career year. Really, the only close situation I can think of is SF. And I think it’s an especially apt comparison if you’re talking about drafting a project like AR. Though I’ll admit, I would feel differently if Bryce Young was sitting there.
I think Richardson is going to be a huge bust, like most first-round QBs, but especially those who never won or figured out how to throw accurately in college, who are now supposed to suddenly figure it out against NFL defenses. I guess if you want to bet the house on Levis, have at. But for me, drafting any of those guys instead of a DL or DB who can step in and contribute immediately would be a wasted opportunity.
I’m higher on these QB prospects this draft than others rate them .
Is that this board or is that the consensus around the league as well?
Idk ask the Vikings or Cowboys that question…
LOL.
I’ve used the Shanny connection as a plus for Sudfeld in the past. I think I can still make the logic work in my head, but now I’m wondering…
Does a Tre Lance count as a Trident?
The original assertion was that there was a competent starter in place, and while I’d agree Rogers and Rivers(less so) are HOF level QBs, Alex Smith in no way is.
It seems clear also that all 3 guys were ageing out at 36, 35 and 35 when their replacements were drafted, so its a sound strategy, but it’s not where the Lions are with a 28yr old. Which is thr main thrust here,that the Lions are not in need of a QB due to age or poor play, and as such burning up what should be our last top 10 pick for some time smells more like a Lance move than a Mahomes/Herbert move
Purdy much. I prefer Garrapoloing hooks myself if we are getting into polearm length weapons.
I knew you were Poseidon
Ha! I was thinking Rivers drafted over Brees.
I’m not a monster fan of taking a QB in this draft at 6. However, I’m also willing to acknowledge that hitting even an above average QB will have 5x the impact of any DL or CB in that same spot.
And that’s where it’s about opportunity cost. Missing on a QB at 6, and we still have Goff. The team will know after 1-2 off seasons if there is hope. Thus minimizing the downside risk. We are in a unique position.