On the notion of trading away Ryan Tannehill...

As a follow up to CK’s suggestion that the 1[SUP]st[/SUP] rounder Minnesota gave up for Bradford was evidence of the shocking prices teams might be willing to pay if a solid, young QB hit the market, I figured I’d look at the league as it stands right now and attempt to respond to what may have been implied about the potential value of Ryan Tannehill—or at least what most of us probably starting wondering.

Looking at QBs around the league:

I was surprised to find that there may not be quite as much interest in Ryan Tannehill as some may have initially assumed if he were to hit the trade block. Here’s how I would break down the other 31 NFL teams:

7 have made big commitments at QB in the last couple years: BUF, HOU, TEN, DEN, PHI, TB, and LA
6 have reliable options that are as productive as Tannehill: JAX, WAS, DET, NYJ, ATL, KC
6 have good, young QBs who they like a lot: IND, CIN, OAK, CAR, MIN, and SEA
8 have proven veterans: NE, PIT, SD, BAL, NYG, NO, GB, ARI
4 may be primed for a change due to potential instability: CLE, DAL, CHI, SF

It seems as though Dak Prescott is the heir apparent behind Romo, so I think we can discount DAL for the time being. Knowing that, it seems like you’d be forced to either settle for what CLE is willing to pay or try and convince one of the other two that Tannehill might be an upgrade over what they have. While that sales pitch could work in SF, I don’t know if it’d work in Chicago where they’d probably be happy to roll with Cutler for the time being. Despite the fact that Tannehill may be viewed as marginally better than Cutler, it’s doubtful they’d view him as being a huge step forward. Some may be thinking about KC and I’d respond in the same way.

As a final note, some of the league’s elite QBs are getting a little long in the tooth (i.e. Brady, Brees and Rivers). More importantly, some of those teams have struggled recently and might be interested in rebuilding. Nevertheless I don’t see a team amongst them that’d be willing to pay a premium price for a guy like Tannehill in order to force the current veteran and fan-favorite out. Besides, that doesn’t really jive with the idea of rebuilding anyhow.

So I think it comes down to CLE and SF.

A look at Cleveland:

Keep in mind that Cleveland traded out of the #2 pick last year because (a) they didn’t like Carson Wentz enough and (b) they were able to amass a good deal of picks. They currently have two first round picks and two second round picks heading into 2017. They are in a position to wheel and deal having picked up the Eagles’ first rounder and the Titans second rounder. Both should be top-20 picks in their respective rounds.

Personally, I think that passing on Wentz last year makes Cleveland more likely to draft a QB this year but some would say it indicates the team wants to avoid risk so that they can continue to add talent around the roster. I think they just want to be careful and get it right, meaning they may not value Tannehill (a limited QB who’s a potential journeyman) as highly as a developmental prospect in the draft (i.e. Watson, Kelly, etc.) who could have higher upside in their eyes.

Then again, Hue Jackson might see Tannehill as his next Andy Dalton—a solid guy who under the right coaching could break out. There are some parallels there. This would also be a quicker route to legitimacy for the Browns as a franchise inside the tough AFC North. I think in the end it simply comes down to whether Cleveland wants to spend a 1[SUP]st[/SUP] rounder on their favorite prospect or whether they would consider trading that same pick for Tannehill. Knowing the Dolphins are going to be pushing for as many picks as they can get, it might be cheaper, easier and altogether more alluring for Cleveland to simply draft a QB and use their other top picks for more good prospects to fill out that roster. After all, that's probably what I would do in their situation.

A look at San Francisco:

SF doesn’t have the excess picks that Cleveland does but they are a team that seems appealing to me, at least from the perspective of a seller. First, it’s hard to believe that Chip Kelly wouldn’t view Tannehill as an upgrade over Kaepernick and Gabbert. Second, Tannehill’s familiarity with (and 2014 success working in) Bill Lazor’s offense may also play into the team’s consideration. Third, Chip Kelly traded for Bradford, an oft-maligned but intellectually-gifted QB, meaning he could be enticed to do it again or may simply prefer it outright to working with younger, less experienced guys. Four, this sort of trade would be ideal for the Dolphins who would be shipping Tannehill not only outside AFC, but all the way to California where east-coast fans would rarely see him play.

I would also note a couple additional factors that have more to do with ego than football but which may play a role. First, the tough NFC West division would allow Miami to minimize the risk of Tannehill having major success (i.e. making them look stupid for trading him). Second, it’s fathomable that SF’s young front office might ship out the outspoken Kaepernick the same way they did Harbaugh (who was also a thorn in their side) in hopes of bringing in a figure they know will fall in line and say the right things—enter Ryan Tannehill. It’s a believable narrative that goes along with the more legitimate football-related reasons above.

Drawing Conclusions:

(1) There are not a half-dozen teams that would be lining up to hand Miami a host of picks for Tannehill. That fantasy seems unreal. The truth is that the vast majority of teams have an option that is just about as good. In reality, there would probably be mild interest coming from 2 or 3 teams.

(2) If 20-some odd NFL teams would pass based simply on the fact they don’t view Tannehill as that much of an upgrade, I think we should accept that it just might say something about him. To be honest, even if the Jets picked him up in favor of re-signing Fitzpatrick for example, I wouldn’t be all that worried about facing Tannehill twice a year. That’s the Gods-honest truth.

(3) I think the best shot to trade Tannehill would be targeting Chip Kelly and the 49ers. It makes sense both on the field and off.

(4) There appear to be 3 teams who might seriously look at QBs in the near future: CLE, SF and CHI. Since Cutler is there in Chicago, I don’t see them as a real threat, so I think Miami (should they choose to throw themselves into the mix) would be fighting only CLE and SF for “their guy.” That means that if Miami were able to trade Tannehill away to one of those teams, it would mean the Dolphins were one of only two teams looking at QBs.

That’s interesting to me because assuming you got a 1[SUP]st[/SUP] round pick for Tannehill, it indicates that Miami would stand a pretty good chance of landing their preferred QB prospect all while still having their original 1[SUP]st[/SUP] round pick to use on a defensive stud.

Summary:

So…after all of that…let’s just take a moment to let it sink in. It’s all just a hypothetical but certainly something we can openly wonder about. I don’t know how things will play out this season or how HC Adam Gase would feel having Tannehill stripped away so soon. But that also makes me wonder how much consideration has been given to the idea already. Have Tannenbaum, Grier and Gase already talked about the potential of what might happen if Tannehill isn’t the guy? Surely they’re not blind and have talked about it as a possibility but to what degree we can’t say.

If you want my personal opinion, I’ll give it to you. I like Tannehill and enjoy rooting for him because he is smart, tough and appears to be an all-around stand-up guy. He seems like a solid QB who might very well end up as a QB coach somewhere someday (if he likes football enough to hang around the game). Nevertheless, I want the Dolphins to win more than I want to see a Lifetime movie about a righteous dude. So right now I’d give serious consideration to the idea of trading Tannehill to CLE or SF if it involved a 1[SUP]st[/SUP] round pick. The fact you might get multiple picks in return due to Tannehill’s age and injury-free history is very enticing.

But that’s right now. It’s not factoring in what Adam Gase is going to do this year. We’ll see what happens as far as this season goes. But if you came from the future and told me that 2016 only provided more of the same with Ryan Tannehill (a big IF) and that in 2017 the Dolphins could be starting DeShawn Watson at QB (or whoever you prefer) and some top-end defensive stud in addition to a whole host of other picks and signings it would give me pause because that seems like the beginnings of legit rebuilding.

It’s just food for thought, and if nothing else a little perspective on where the NFL stands with QBs right now and how valuable Tannehill may or may not be.

 

Guys, make sure you read the content. There are individual conclusions for those who don't want to read the entire thing.

I'm not suggesting we trade Tannehill now and it's obvious that you'd draft a replacement if you traded him...obviously.


The timing of this post has nothing do with its content. Please make sure you realize that before adding your 2 cents. We won't make any decisions until after the season is through. I'm just making everyone aware of what the landscape may look like.

 

It depends on the optics. If you project that 'we're on the verge of cutting him, does anyone want to give us a 1st round pick?' then obviously no one is going to bite. If you already had a QB in waiting then people know what you're going to do. If you trade him before the draft however, then it looks a lot more like someone is simply stealing your QB. You float the word over to Cleveland or SF that, 'yeah, we might entertain the notion of moving this guy if we could get X amount.'

If you look like you're perfectly happy to roll with Tannehill (which most of us probably will be given our beliefs about Gase), and yet you dangle him over a team like Cleveland or SF, you may very well get a bite. That's definitely possible. Nobody can tell me that's not possible, especially when Chip Kelly traded for Bradford while with the Eagles.

It's definitely a situation where you might be able to trade him this offseason and if so, you better have thought it through. If the opportunity is there you have to consider doing it and that's why this year with Gase matters.

After this offseason, I agree, there's no chance it's either a cut or hold situation.

 

Yep, the biggest take-away for me was that there may not be anyone standing in line waiting to give Miami anything for Ryan Tannehill which is surprising when you typically assume there are always worse-off teams out there. At this point, almost every team has done something to address the QB position so there are very few left begging.

The truth is, most teams aren’t going to be interested and if that’s the case I don’t think Miami makes a move personally. Strategy would dictate that if you can’t turn a profit selling Tannehill that you just keep him. And subsequently, if you keep him for 2017, I think you either re-sign to keeping him or you end up drafting his replacement on down the line.

All hypothetical but the original point is, Tannehill just isn’t the trade bait I figured he was prior to digging a little deeper. That said, I absolutely do think Chip Kelly is stupid when it comes to managing a roster so I believe there's potential to fleece the 49ers.

 

Doughty is most likely not a guy the franchise is looking at very seriously. We both can admit that. Everybody always likes the potential they see in the 3rd string QB.

I'm more interested in the fact Chip Kelly brought Bradford to the Eagles than the fact that he wound up in Minnesota because of a weird incident with Bridgewater. I agree that's flukey but if Kelly has any influence in roster decisions over in SF (which "officially" I don't think he does) then the possibility is there to move Tannehill I think--at least in theory.

I think so, too. I like Tannehill. This however is the conversation that Tannenbaum and Grier get paid to have so we can surely weigh in casually. So if not...

Gotcha.

And in the end, this was just about pointing out how there are VERY FEW teams with needs at QB right now. I thought Tannehill would be in-demand if he hit the market. I don't think that's the case at all quite honestly.

 

Can you enlighten me on that? What are the odds it happens?



I'm not totally clear on Tannehill's contract anyway. I know he's expensive after this year. Someone want to educate me on whether there's any way around it?

 

Yeah, yeah, yeah...I get it. We can't have certain conversations because the flinch reactions of some people are too loud and obnoxious.

Well, here's the deal, if you don't ask questions you never get answers. A week ago I'd have figured Tannehill would be valuable on the open market. Turns out, that's probably not the case. Might not be news to you, but it's eye-opening to me because it means Miami doesn't have the assets I thought they did were they to reset.

So if 5 people call me an idiot for following through some investigation on a premise that's logical and possible, it's those people who get left out. I've defended Tannehill countless times so I'm allowed to go the other way as well, at least in terms of discussing strategy.

A look around the NFL makes it clear that in the event Tannehill isn't the guy (or a fan didn't think he was the guy) the answer would have to involve a draft pick and that may very well be one that has to again be taken away from roster building.

This may all seem too much to some but over the course of this season the topic of conversations will shift from how Gase is changing Tannehill to whether it's enough to continue down that road.

I actually don't believe this is a make or break year for Ryan personally. I think his job is secure. But that said, I'm in the minority. The vast majority of people are talking about year-5 as though it's a critical point.

 

In general I'd say this, if you don't have a response to the topic then don't offer one.

And if objectively laying the cards on the table to explore all options offends you then obviously you're biased and should go re-examine your views.

I'm largely pro-Tannehill, one of the accused "apologists" on this site. But don't expect me to accommodate people who simply want to drop into a thread to offer a snarky reply.

If you don't have a take that's valuable don't offer it up.

And lastly, don't give me that "discussing a trade during week 1" HS. If you're not interested, don't partake. Go watch games and ignore the conversations that are detached from weekly events and aimed at what's happening next year.

 

Good point! The team did make it clear as you're pointing out.

I guess I just figured that a guy of Tannehill's caliber would surely be valuable to someone. I figured there would be a team somewhere willing to eat that contract just to get a serviceable QB but now I'm feeling less confident in that being the case. A look around the league makes it seem like pretty much everyone has a guy who's at least close to the level Tannehill's on.