Quote:
Originally Posted by QuikSand
After a lengthy back-and-forth with friends offline about the ATL Penix pick, I think I have come around to a new place on it.
|
I came here tonight to post something similar after marinating on the question for a few days.
But first of all, there are definitely some things about this situation that the Falcons mishandled. Mina Kimes' point on draft night about the value of rookie contracts remains a good one especially if they plan to have him sit as long as they said they might (which I don't actually believe, see below).
Secondly, the way they handled it with Cousins was not great, arguably even worse than what the Packers did with both Favre and Rodgers. The whole "we're fine letting him sit for 3-4 years" definitely smacks of trying to walk something back after realizing they had pissed off Cousins.
If Cousins sucks or gets injured (something they clearly anticipated given that all the guaranteed money is in the first two years of his deal) then they have a Plan B that, in theory at least, can step in and not have them scraping the bottom of the barrel again (questioning whether they can adequately judge QB talent is a whole separate discussion). If Cousins declines after two years, same as above but they're still getting value from the contract. And if Cousins is good for four years, well then maybe they can flip Penix for some picks or at least he didn't cost them that much money or honestly no one will care by that point (the last point is very, very important to the GM's job security).
Now, where they failed was in not finding a better way to message it with Cousins. I don't know Cousins, so I don't know how he'd take being told that Penix is Cousins insurance. But there has to be a better way to message the choice than the way that they did it. Keeping your QB happy is literally part of their job.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhlloy
If you are getting an elite QB prospect in the top 3, I can see the logic (even though good luck holding that QB room together for 2 years). Or if it's a late first round pick where the chances of getting a very good starter at another position are somewhere less than 50/50, that also probably makes a bit of sense (the Jordan Love scenario). The 8th overall pick on a guy who really had a 2nd/3rd round grade on him for various reasons and will also be in his mid 20's before he sees the field and you actually see if he can play NFL football, yeah I'm just not seeing it. If they'd done it with Drake Maye at the #3 overall, I still would think it was stupid but I think you'd have more chance of convincing myself there was something in that logic.
|
To echo some of the stuff that QS wrote, the fact of the matter is that, as we have discussed upthread and in previous threads, it is a) very difficult to obtain a good-to-elite QB and b) having a good-to-elite QB has become pretty much a requirement to getting to the postseason and potentially doing well in the postseason.
The number of QBs who can lift an average team or below-average offensive unit (with a competent defensive unit) into the playoffs is probably in the single digits. The number of QBs who can do the same when paired with a stellar OC or HC operating as an OC (e.g. McVay or McDaniel) is also in the single digits.
When I did my tiering exercise, you basically get through, generously, 16 QBs before you get to the "fuck it, start tanking" tier.
So I think that if you're a team that's drafting and has a need for a QB either now or potentially in the next few years (see the Favre & Rodgers situations), and you come across a candidate that
you think has the chance to be competent-to-good (with caveats of course around teams' ability to judge talent) you should just take him, regardless of draft position. The position is simply that important.
Anyway, I'm probably super wrong, but I've spent far too much time thinking about this on my commute and so you all get to be the beneficiaries of that lol.
