Thread: Don't trade PS2. Don't suggest trading him. Your hot take is bad.

Originally Posted by chazoe60

I'm cool with doing the old Redskins thing too and take a QB in round 1 and one in round 4 or 5. More bites at the apple.

As long as that 4 or 5 isn’t Kirk Cousins.

Originally Posted by Simple Jaded

As long as that 4 or 5 isn’t Kirk Cousins.

Matt Flynn, Matt Schaub, Ryan Mallett (RIP), AJ McCarron, and Jimmy G have been examples of how backup QBs can turn a few appearances into value (or potential value) for their franchise. Taking two QBs is not the worst idea. Can always trade the "Kirk" away

Originally Posted by Simple Jaded

As long as that 4 or 5 isn’t Kirk Cousins.

It is.

Originally Posted by UnderArmour

Matt Flynn, Matt Schaub, Ryan Mallett (RIP), AJ McCarron, and Jimmy G have been examples of how backup QBs can turn a few appearances into value (or potential value) for their franchise. Taking two QBs is not the worst idea. Can always trade the "Kirk" away

Hard pass on all, scrubs . . . Waste of a draft pick.

Now, JJ McCarthy at 12 and Joe Milton in 4 or 5? Sign me up.

Originally Posted by Simple Jaded

Hard pass on all, scrubs . . . Waste of a draft pick.

Big time. Drafting a QB in the second or third round is a complete exercise in futility. I went back a dozen years, there have been a grand total of three capable QBs found in those two rounds. Russ, Jalen Hurts, and Derrek Carr. That's it, that's the list. And Carr will retire with a total of one playoff win, so he barely counts. Meanwhile, the other QBs taken there are Malik Willis, Kyle Trask, Kellen Mond, Davis Mills, Drew Lock, Will Grier, Mason Rudolph, Deshone Kizer, Christian Hackenburg, Jacoby Brissett, Cody Kessler, Garrett Grayson, Sean Mannion, Jimmy G, Geno Smith, Brock Osweiler, and Nick Foles. What a stinking heap of trash. Taking a mid-round QB is the draft equivalent of pulling all the money out of your wallet and setting it on fire. Just a complete waste of a pick that you expect to yield a quality starter at almost any other position except maybe left tackle. The only thing mid-round QBs are good for is convincing teams to give up on their highly-drafted starter because some "fits the system" scrub is marginally more prepared to play because he had more college experience. Aside from a guy like Milton, no way in hell would I draft two QBs. You can't develop more than one at a time, reps are too critical. Pick ONE quarterback and commit to him, that's the right way to do it.

Originally Posted by Simple Jaded

Hard pass on all, scrubs . . . Waste of a draft pick.

The trick is to trade them before letting them see any meaningful stretch of play, and never hand them the keys to the kingdom if they aren't that guy. Most of the guys I listed pulled either a draft pick back later or netted their team a compensatory pick when they left in FA.

Originally Posted by dogfish

Big time. Drafting a QB in the second or third round is a complete exercise in futility. I went back a dozen years, there have been a grand total of three capable QBs found in those two rounds. Russ, Jalen Hurts, and Derrek Carr. That's it, that's the list. And Carr will retire with a total of one playoff win, so he barely counts. Meanwhile, the other QBs taken there are Malik Willis, Kyle Trask, Kellen Mond, Davis Mills, Drew Lock, Will Grier, Mason Rudolph, Deshone Kizer, Christian Hackenburg, Jacoby Brissett, Cody Kessler, Garrett Grayson, Sean Mannion, Jimmy G, Geno Smith, Brock Osweiler, and Nick Foles. What a stinking heap of trash. Taking a mid-round QB is the draft equivalent of pulling all the money out of your wallet and setting it on fire. Just a complete waste of a pick that you expect to yield a quality starter at almost any other position except maybe left tackle. The only thing mid-round QBs are good for is convincing teams to give up on their highly-drafted starter because some "fits the system" scrub is marginally more prepared to play because he had more college experience. Aside from a guy like Milton, no way in hell would I draft two QBs. You can't develop more than one at a time, reps are too critical. Pick ONE quarterback and commit to him, that's the right way to do it.

Teams can absolutely develop multiple QBs and the market is starting to value QB2s as much as an above average starter at another position. Taking your backup QB mid round is going to be a market necessity soon if every QB2 is getting $5-$10 million a year. Definitely agree that the focus should be on the starter, but teams can develop multiple guys.

Originally Posted by UnderArmour

Teams can absolutely develop multiple QBs and the market is starting to value QB2s as much as an above average starter at another position. Taking your backup QB mid round is going to be a market necessity soon if every QB2 is getting $5-$10 million a year. Definitely agree that the focus should be on the starter, but teams can develop multiple guys.

You keep talking yourself into Minshew and Purdy . . . it’s almost as if you haven’t watched the last 25 years of Broncos history.

Here's an interesting hypothetical. If it were up to you would you go back and have the Broncos take Justin Fields instead of PS2? Sounds like a stupid question but it is not. Drafting Fields in rd 1 would have meant we didn't make the Russell Wilson trade. We would have all those players and picks back and have Fields going into year 4. We wouldn't have an $85M dead cap hit. Wouldn't have wasted 2 seasons not developing a QB.

It's a really interesting thought experiment. I wonder where we be drafting. Who would be QB 1? Lock or Fields. Would that have affected who our HC is even. I remember at the time there was a ton of people calling for Fields.

I can’t think of a single reason to draft Brock Purdy before he was actually drafted, and being as jaded as I am I would never bother to draft him at all.

Originally Posted by chazoe60

Here's an interesting hypothetical. If it were up to you would you go back and have the Broncos take Justin Fields instead of PS2? Sounds like a stupid question but it is not. Drafting Fields in rd 1 would have meant we didn't make the Russell Wilson trade. We would have all those players and picks back and have Fields going into year 4.

It's a really interesting thought experiment. I wonder where we be drafting. Who would be QB 1? Lock or Fields. Would that have affected who our HC is even. I remember at the time there was a ton of people calling for Fields.

In hindsight I would not draft Fields over PS2, no one would.

But that’s not how the draft works.

In real time I draft Fields every single time.

Originally Posted by chazoe60

Here's an interesting hypothetical. If it were up to you would you go back and have the Broncos take Justin Fields instead of PS2? Sounds like a stupid question but it is not. Drafting Fields in rd 1 would have meant we didn't make the Russell Wilson trade. We would have all those players and picks back and have Fields going into year 4. We wouldn't have an $85M dead cap hit. Wouldn't have wasted 2 seasons not developing a QB.

It's a really interesting thought experiment. I wonder where we be drafting. Who would be QB 1? Lock or Fields. Would that have affected who our HC is even. I remember at the time there was a ton of people calling for Fields.

Hell, we might have been so effing bad that we ended up with CJ Stroud.

Originally Posted by chazoe60

Hell, we might have been so effing bad that we ended up with CJ Stroud.

And on that scenario you still take Stroud.

Originally Posted by Simple Jaded

In hindsight I would not draft Fields over PS2, no one would.

But that’s not how the draft works.

In real time I draft Fields every single time.

Even in hindsight knowing that that one decision would have knocked over all those dominoes I just mentioned? You'd take PS2 over all those other possibilities I lines out? That's fine, I respect your opinion but I'd take all those other possibilities if only for the CJ Stroud chance alone.