Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Watson Mock!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by mozzerpete View Post
    "I salivate at a d-line of Harris, Purcell, Casey, and Jones...*Dumping Purcell and Jewell's contract..."

    Are these the same Purcell?

    Also, I hope Denver doesn't offer S Justin Simmons 75M / 5 yrs
    when his replacement can be found in rounds 3-5+ with players like
    S Tariq Thompson, DB Robert Rochell, or DB Camryn Bynum.

    That aside, I appreciate your post, but it's a no for me.


    Denver has an opportunity to draft OT Penei Sewell to secure either tackle position for the next ten years.
    I like LB Bradley Chubb, but I think he wasn't worth the hype over LG Quenton Nelson.

    I salivate at an OL of Sewell, Nelson, Risner, Mauti, Bolles.

    Instead, an OL of Bolles, Risner, Cushenberry, Glasgow, Sewell will suffice.
    Sewell may very well be available at nine given past OT draft history.

    A better option than Watson would be to trade up for QB Trevor Lawrence.
    His rookie contract allows Denver to be aggressive in FA for the next five-years.

    I doubt JAX values Watson over Lawrence.
    Does Denver?
    a team trading the pick for Lawrence with needing a qB wont happen. why would you past on the best QB prospect sense Luck when you need a QB. expecially with a rookie contract. now if Wilson or Fields drop or we could move up to 3 and grab one of them i would consider that over Watson. expecially sense i feel it will be cheaper.
    sigpic
    oakland raders gm
    latavis murray trade bait

    Comment


    • #17
      "a team trading the pick for Lawrence with needing a qB wont happen."

      Unless that team believes Watson is the best QB available.

      I say no to Wilson or Fields.

      Thankfully, Lock and Sutton play on rookie deals as decisions must be made sooner rather than later.

      Comment


      • #18
        So Houston just wants two borderline players as part of the deal? Purcell and Jewell are two players who would net a 5th to 7th conditional picks. And the reason they'd be conditional, because they're not locks to make an NFL roster from year to year.

        If Denver were to trade for Watson (an unlikely proposition) they'd need to include Bradley Chubb in the deal. A player who's shown they can play at a relatively high level in the NFL and still has two cheap years left before their extension is needed.

        And for a very specific reason why I think the Broncos should deal him away this offseason, whether it's part of a Watson trade or something else, I'm not sure the Texans would be high on him. That reason is simple, he's been shown screaming at his teammates on the sidelines, and it's been reported he's done the same in the locker room. Yet in those same games, or the next game (in case of the locker room one) he then goes out and takes multiple selfish 15 yard penalties. If you're going to be a "leader" and hold teammates accountable you can't then go out and be selfish. Deal him away. If it leads to Watson, perfect.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by mozzerpete View Post
          "a team trading the pick for Lawrence with needing a qB wont happen."

          Unless that team believes Watson is the best QB available.

          I say no to Wilson or Fields.

          Thankfully, Lock and Sutton play on rookie deals as decisions must be made sooner rather than later.
          Lawrence and keeping your picks or trading 2-3 firsts for Watson. any smart GM because what it costs to get Watson should go Lawrence.
          sigpic
          oakland raders gm
          latavis murray trade bait

          Comment


          • #20
            I am not saying you're necessarily wrong.

            I'd draft Lawrence over trading for Watson too.

            JAX understands who is the best QB available
            and will most likely take him first overall.

            If we're going to dream big, let's dream bigger than Watson.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Butler By'Note View Post
              So Houston just wants two borderline players as part of the deal? Purcell and Jewell are two players who would net a 5th to 7th conditional picks. And the reason they'd be conditional, because they're not locks to make an NFL roster from year to year.

              If Denver were to trade for Watson (an unlikely proposition) they'd need to include Bradley Chubb in the deal. A player who's shown they can play at a relatively high level in the NFL and still has two cheap years left before their extension is needed.

              And for a very specific reason why I think the Broncos should deal him away this offseason, whether it's part of a Watson trade or something else, I'm not sure the Texans would be high on him. That reason is simple, he's been shown screaming at his teammates on the sidelines, and it's been reported he's done the same in the locker room. Yet in those same games, or the next game (in case of the locker room one) he then goes out and takes multiple selfish 15 yard penalties. If you're going to be a "leader" and hold teammates accountable you can't then go out and be selfish. Deal him away. If it leads to Watson, perfect.
              Thank you! I have been saying this from the start. If Watson is going to be traded to Denver, Bradley Chubb or unfortunately Von Miller, will be attached to the deal...but I think the team would trade Bradley Chubb first obviously since he still has 1+1option years left on deal.
              New England Patriots GM

              Comment


              • #22
                I would take a hard pass on trading for Watson, He is worth 4 first round picks and 2 second round picks so anything short of that would be good though. Texas already gave the opening bid. it was 2 firsts 2 second and 2 young starting defenders. Which would probably mean Simmons and Chubb. Purcell isn't going anywhere but the same can not be said for Von Miller and Jurrel Casey. Best scenario for the Broncos would wait to see if the Jets draft a qb other than Fields and possibly try and move up to get him. If it can't be worked then if they are not going to take a qb at 9 then they should trade down with a qb needing team. And at some point i would be making a call to the Saints about acquiring CB Lattimore and see if he has a price before the draft. Sam Darnald will be cheaper if the Jets draft a qb. Send a 2nd to the Jets for Darnald. Broncos upgrade their QB and Get a starting CB and probably keep all their picks for next year.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Panteras View Post
                  I would take a hard pass on trading for Watson, He is worth 4 first round picks and 2 second round picks so anything short of that would be good though. Texas already gave the opening bid. it was 2 firsts 2 second and 2 young starting defenders. Which would probably mean Simmons and Chubb. Purcell isn't going anywhere but the same can not be said for Von Miller and Jurrel Casey. Best scenario for the Broncos would wait to see if the Jets draft a qb other than Fields and possibly try and move up to get him. If it can't be worked then if they are not going to take a qb at 9 then they should trade down with a qb needing team. And at some point i would be making a call to the Saints about acquiring CB Lattimore and see if he has a price before the draft. Sam Darnald will be cheaper if the Jets draft a qb. Send a 2nd to the Jets for Darnald. Broncos upgrade their QB and Get a starting CB and probably keep all their picks for next year.
                  Interesting idea trading for Darnold... If he will truly be an incremental upgrade on Lock.

                  Breaking the bank for Watson is both exciting and concerning. Don't think Denver can trade 4 first rounders, unless we have multiple firsts, since I understood teams can only trade up to 3 years picks. I may be wrong on this.

                  I'd rather give up picks than notable players.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by BiscuitBronco View Post

                    Interesting idea trading for Darnold... If he will truly be an incremental upgrade on Lock.

                    Breaking the bank for Watson is both exciting and concerning. Don't think Denver can trade 4 first rounders, unless we have multiple firsts, since I understood teams can only trade up to 3 years picks. I may be wrong on this.

                    I'd rather give up picks than notable players.
                    Darnald was playing with the worst roster and the worst head coach in the league. He didn't even get his receivers till week 13 and look at the teams he beat. They would have beaten the Raiders if the defensive coordinator didn't call 0 coverage on the last play of the game. The Jets have been destroying players careers for years not even sure if Detroit has been a bigger joke. Darnald may not have the numbers of a starting QB but he has all the things that make one.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Panteras View Post
                      I would take a hard pass on trading for Watson, He is worth 4 first round picks and 2 second round picks so anything short of that would be good though. Texas already gave the opening bid. it was 2 firsts 2 second and 2 young starting defenders. Which would probably mean Simmons and Chubb. Purcell isn't going anywhere but the same can not be said for Von Miller and Jurrel Casey. Best scenario for the Broncos would wait to see if the Jets draft a qb other than Fields and possibly try and move up to get him. If it can't be worked then if they are not going to take a qb at 9 then they should trade down with a qb needing team. And at some point i would be making a call to the Saints about acquiring CB Lattimore and see if he has a price before the draft. Sam Darnold will be cheaper if the Jets draft a qb. Send a 2nd to the Jets for Darnold. Broncos upgrade their QB and Get a starting CB and probably keep all their picks for next year.
                      This all comes down to which road you want to follow.....taking less risk and acquiring a draftee or a QB that has not lived up (Darnold), and hoping OR acquiring one of the best young QBs in the game for a price. A price that might be high, but might be accommodated without selling the farm. Is Darnold or Fields a guarantee....I don't think so. Outside of injury, Watson has already proven at a young age that he is an MVP type, whose already helped lead his team to the AFC Final. So to my way of thinking, instead of taking relatively low risks or hoping for an unproven young draftee to be our long term solution (not named Lawrence), and in that regard, keep on "experimenting" with really good draft capital year after year, the odds are not really very positive. Low risk deals and more draft capital thrown at "uncertainty" can beg the ole saying..."doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results"...I don't think I need to finish the saying.

                      And we don't know if it's 4 firsts and 2 seconds. But sure, it will be a load. That's the market price for a star QB. In the process however, if you can strategize via a long term personnel plan which players we could give up, along with x amount of picks, and it makes sense....then go for it! For starters, our #1 pick this year is a given. That's the price of an unproven NFL draftee. So what do you pay for the fact that a player is not only proven but highly successful at the most important position in sports? That's the gap in value and in capital. The 2022 first is a given as well. Not a question. And if we have a decent year, it may be mid round or later. So then I wonder, which players can we let go that they want? The better the players, the less draft pick quality left to offer. IMO, if we give them 2 good starters, that clearly reduces the draft component remaining. I'd be inclined to given them a good player and an average starter of their need. Not even really sure if it's 2 Os or 2 Ds at this point. Maybe we can blend it...Chubb and Patrick for example. Not sure.

                      So depending what we give up in terms of current team value as players on our team, we are left with....how much draft capital do we still require to offer? So far it's 2 firsts, and 2 players of reasonable value. This is negotiation time. I would not offer a 3rd first. Perhaps 2 thirds and a 2023 2nd, to give us some draft talent each year. But it depends on what caliber of players we let them have from our existing roster. And for me, if we can package Lock into the deal, it actually hurts us less of course, unless he turns out to be a good starter. Who knows? But a 3 player offer of Lock, Chubb and Patrick would give us the opportunity to reduce the draft capital to 2 firsts and 1 or 2 thirds.

                      The other factor in this that I alluded to is how can we replace the players we lost in the trade. Lock if included and Patrick for example, would not be hard to replace. (Again, Patrick is just an example...maybe it's Hamler). But regardless, unless we throw in another really good player along with Chubb, and therefore soften the draft load, I don't see too much loss. From there I would sign one quality Edge/OLB, and then go D in The Draft. CBs, LBs, another Edge.

                      Of course the variables change with every change in the personnel exchange. Hard to say unless we know for sure what The Texans are looking for. Chubb seems like a gimme but maybe not. The formula for me comes down to:

                      - 2 firsts are the first step
                      - 2 players from our roster, which will effect the total draft cap package we offer. The higher the value of these 2 players, the less capital we add, but the harder the personnel strategy to replace. If we can add Lock to the package, even give them 3 players, we are better off in my opinion, because we save draft picks
                      - Pending the player exchange, we focus on what other picks we offer...I prefer we do not go 3 straight firsts, ideally 2 thirds or a future second, so as to give us a good pick in each of the next 3 seasons.

                      I know, lots of speculation...about what The Texans want, and how difficult they may be. But if we can make a win win deal, I would accept whatever pitfalls, because if Paton is truly a personnel expert, he will have ample opportunity to replace and to upgrade during the offseason events...FA, Draft, Trades.

                      And to repeat a theme...high draft picks (including 2nd rounders) if unwisely used, will burn you over time. And QBs tend to be overvalued in the draft, because it is the #1 position on the team. So you are essentially paying really good money for a typically overvalued draftee. And continued poor aim at QB draftees can lead to further weakening of a team, as they bi pass star players at other positions, year after year after year.
                      Last edited by CanDB; 02-15-2021, 09:53 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by CanDB View Post

                        This all comes down to which road you want to follow.....taking less risk and acquiring a draftee or a QB that has not lived up (Darnold), and hoping OR acquiring one of the best young QBs in the game for a price. A price that might be high, but might be accommodated without selling the farm. Is Darnold or Fields a guarantee....I don't think so. Outside of injury, Watson has already proven at a young age that he is an MVP type, whose already helped lead his team to the AFC Final. So to my way of thinking, instead of taking relatively low risks or hoping for an unproven young draftee to be our long term solution (not named Lawrence), and in that regard, keep on "experimenting" with really good draft capital year after year, the odds are not really very positive. Low risk deals and more draft capital thrown at "uncertainty" can beg the ole saying..."doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results"...I don't think I need to finish the saying.

                        And we don't know if it's 4 firsts and 2 seconds. But sure, it will be a load. That's the market price for a star QB. In the process however, if you can strategize via a long term personnel plan which players we could give up, along with x amount of picks, and it makes sense....then go for it! For starters, our #1 pick this year is a given. That's the price of an unproven NFL draftee. So what do you pay for the fact that a player is not only proven but highly successful at the most important position in sports? That's the gap in value and in capital. The 2022 first is a given as well. Not a question. And if we have a decent year, it may be mid round or later. So then I wonder, which players can we let go that they want? The better the players, the less draft pick quality left to offer. IMO, if we give them 2 good starters, that clearly reduces the draft component remaining. I'd be inclined to given them a good player and an average starter of their need. Not even really sure if it's 2 Os or 2 Ds at this point. Maybe we can blend it...Chubb and Patrick for example. Not sure.

                        So depending what we give up in terms of current team value as players on our team, we are left with....how much draft capital do we still require to offer? So far it's 2 firsts, and 2 players of reasonable value. This is negotiation time. I would not offer a 3rd first. Perhaps 2 thirds and a 2023 2nd, to give us some draft talent each year. But it depends on what caliber of players we let them have from our existing roster. And for me, if we can package Lock into the deal, it actually hurts us less of course, unless he turns out to be a good starter. Who knows? But a 3 player offer of Lock, Chubb and Patrick would give us the opportunity to reduce the draft capital to 2 firsts and 1 or 2 thirds.

                        The other factor in this that I alluded to is how can we replace the players we lost in the trade. Lock if included and Patrick for example, would not be hard to replace. (Again, Patrick is just an example...maybe it's Hamler). But regardless, unless we throw in another really good player along with Chubb, and therefore soften the draft load, I don't see too much loss. From there I would sign one quality Edge/OLB, and then go D in The Draft. CBs, LBs, another Edge.

                        Of course the variables change with every change in the personnel exchange. Hard to say unless we know for sure what The Texans are looking for. Chubb seems like a gimme but maybe not. The formula for me comes down to:

                        - 2 firsts are the first step
                        - 2 players from our roster, which will effect the total draft cap package we offer. The higher the value of these 2 players, the less capital we add, but the harder the personnel strategy to replace. If we can add Lock to the package, even give them 3 players, we are better off in my opinion, because we save draft picks
                        - Pending the player exchange, we focus on what other picks we offer...I prefer we do not go 3 straight firsts, ideally 2 thirds or a future second, so as to give us a good pick in each of the next 3 seasons.

                        I know, lots of speculation...about what The Texans want, and how difficult they may be. But if we can make a win win deal, I would accept whatever pitfalls, because if Paton is truly a personnel expert, he will have ample opportunity to replace and to upgrade during the offseason events...FA, Draft, Trades.

                        And to repeat a theme...high draft picks (including 2nd rounders) if unwisely used, will burn you over time. And QBs tend to be overvalued in the draft, because it is the #1 position on the team. So you are essentially paying really good money for a typically overvalued draftee. And continued poor aim at QB draftees can lead to further weakening of a team, as they bi pass star players at other positions, year after year after year.
                        Patrick is a one year wonder and Lock has been a bust even for a second round pick. They have 0 trade value.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Appreciate the effort but I do not like the mock.
                          Do not agree with some of your moves. No reason to extend Jurell Casey for 3 years at that rate. The Titans knew they were overpaying and that is why they dumped him. If the Broncos want to keep Casey renegotiate his contract to a one year prove at something like $5 million with little guaranteed. Otherwise let him go, you do not want to giving longer contracts to aging players especially on a team that is not competing for the playoffs at the moment. Ditto for Vonn - I do not think the Broncos want to pay $18 million for Miller this year. Miller has no guaranteed money left on his contract. If you think Miller deserves something because of his service to the Broncos then renegotiate something with little guaranteed money. Paying money to old guys coming off injury is a risk. You are also proposing to overpay both Simmons and Harris.

                          Here is a scenario, dump Casey and sign Shaq Barrett in free agency and maybe Lavonte David.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Texans will need a QB... if they dont want Lock....highly unlikely.... who could they pick with #9? Probably not even their 3rd choice of this years crop... would they take Tua and then trade down?
                            if it's not Watson or Tua throwing for the Texans then they will make a deal to get the #2 QB in the draft and won't be dealing with Denver.

                            Watson to Denver.... very unlikely

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by BiscuitBronco View Post
                              Texans will need a QB... if they dont want Lock....highly unlikely.... who could they pick with #9? Probably not even their 3rd choice of this years crop... would they take Tua and then trade down?
                              if it's not Watson or Tua throwing for the Texans then they will make a deal to get the #2 QB in the draft and won't be dealing with Denver.

                              Watson to Denver.... very unlikely
                              I wouldn't let logic limit my moves if I was Paton. McNair and Easterby are whacked out of their skulls. Logic doesn't apply to their thought process. Heck, the Broncos should bring Tebow back and offer him as trade. Easterby would definitely go for that.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Panteras View Post

                                Patrick is a one year wonder and Lock has been a bust even for a second round pick. They have 0 trade value.
                                I don't think that's even close. Lock may be a long term starter, and some teams with the right coaches would have some value for him. And Patrick "is coming off his best campaign as a pro, with 51 catches (79 targets) for 742 yards and six scores across 15 games. Perhaps even more impressively, Patrick had three performances with over 100 receiving yards in 2020." Pretty good year given the situation. And who knows what Houston is thinking with a WR group that is no longer reliable. Fuller can be a stud, but seems oft injured.

                                Regardless, Lock and Patrick are not worth nothing, and if you read my review, I said maybe Hamler, and that Patrick was just one example. Combined with Chubb, I think offering Lock and Patrick or Hamler, maybe even Fant for example, might help lessen the draft cap required.

                                But if that's all you got from the post, I must suck at this.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X