Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by Chance:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by Chance:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by Chance:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by Chance:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by NYniner85:
Mac will have to be Tom Brady for him to be worth 3 1st rd picks...
So what would Lance and Fields have to become to be worth it? Patrick Mahomes (the one who won a Superbowl)?
Or Deshawn Watson, or Josh Allen, or Russell Wilson, or Kyler Murray. There's a number of athletic QBs that can beat you from inside and outside the pocket and would flourish in a Shanahan system. Tom Brady is a unicorn and much harder to project his intangibles onto a young player. I'd say the likelihood of Mac becoming the next Brady is far less than Fields becoming the next Mahomes, or Lance becoming the next Allen.
So one Superbowl riding a historic defense and absolutely nothing else?
Let's play an even playing field. If Mac has to be Tom Brady to be considered "worth it" what does Lance and Fields have to be?
I never said he has to be Brady. There's just so few examples of guys with Mac's traits becoming great QBs. Guys like Ryan and Manning had much better arms coming out of college. Maybe his arm talent improves when he puts more effort in his physique (why is this not a concern???). The other guys are already at an advantage by being far physically superior while comparable mentally to Mac.
Honest question, do you think Mac is a better prospect than Fields?
Your arguing neighbors did. Fair enough.
How about you? What would Fields/Lance have to do to also be considered "worth it?"
There's this belief one has zero elite traits and the other two have elite traits so this should be a really simple answer coming.
To be worth the trade, I think Watson, Wilson, Kyler, Allen, Mahomes, or Herbert would be wonderful analogs to be a considered a success, especially with the creative mind of Shanahan. I think that's totally achievable with either of these two prospects.
For Mac, I think somewhere in a bit better than Cousins and up to the unicorn Brady to be considered a success. There's just not a lot of examples of current QBs that lack both agility and arm strength to create good comparisons. Maybe Matt Ryan, but again he's not a good comp because he has a bigger body to withstand the rigors of the game and a stronger arm. I totally think Mac can be good if he's as elite as they say processing the game. That's one of the most important traits there is in the QB position.
It just sounds like there are two different sets of standards. One of your examples won a Superbowl off a historic defense in 2014 and nothing since, the other is a generational talent that had to win in the final 7 minutes against our defense that gave up 21 points in 5 minutes.
The others are young and exciting but haven't done anything yet in reality.
So let's call a spade a spade and hold identical standards.
In order for it to be worth it:
Mac Jones has to at least reach the Jimmy Garoppolo and Matt Ryan Superbowl level given most never get their team to the dance
Fields/Lance have to at least become Patrick Mahomes (the year he lost)
Fair?
I am not bringing Super Bowls into this argument as there are lots of factors outside of QB play.
If you trade two firsts and a third, you want your QB to be better than Jimmy or Cousins at their best. Better than cousins, somewhere in the Ryan/Rivers (moderate stars) to Brees/Brady (future HOFers) arena for Jones.
For Lance/Fields somewhere between Watson/Allen (young stars) to Wilson/Mahomes/Young (future/current HOFers).
Like I said elsewhere, elite physical traits has become a feature of QB play rather than a crutch. We're seeing a renaissance of QB play as the league transitions to pocket passers who have elite physical traits. This is why there's a bunch of young budding stars, almost all possessing great physical gifts. Not saying that guys who do not possess those physical gifts cannot be successful and win SBs (obviously the can), but the game is evolving and teams are seeking Tom Brady with elite speed and agility.
You have to bring up Superbowls because that's why this move is taking place. We already have a QB that proved to get us there. We're going youth to sustain that ideal for a dynasty.
I guess, outside of Mahomes, who's played poorly in Superbowls overall, there really isn't a standard yet. You can't even put in Allen or Jackson or Watson in that category either. Mahomes is a pocket passer who runs < 300 yards a year and has the best weapons in the NFL behind an OL that is permitted to hold every down.
Maybe in a few years there will be better comps.
Don't get me wrong, the list you provided is "exciting" with lots of really good regular season stats to boot but I think Kyle is shooting much higher here with this move.
So, Superbowls are the goal...for it to be worth it. No matter the preferred style.
I don't disagree that Super Bowls are the goal, but there's a whole lot to qualify regarding defenses, weapons, offensive lines, officiating, etc. Hell, Colin friggin' Kaepernick was probably a missed illegal block in the back away from being a Super Bowl winning QB.
My point, because I don't want to get in the weeds rehashing old Super Bowls, is that you want a QB that always gives you a chance to get there. Aaron Rogers, Drew Brees, Russ Wilson, always give their teams a competitive shot because they are consistently great QBs. That's what you want, a guy who always performs well enough that if the rest of the stars align will deliver that ultimate goal. I see this young crop of dual threat guys following in those footsteps especially once they mature to master the position.
