1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

What player do you take if...

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Fishhead, Jan 24, 2020.

  1. texanphinatic

    texanphinatic Senior Member

    10,325
    3,682
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Detroit Metro Area MI
    I would question that value. If Tua turns out to be an elite QB, then we got bad value and missed on a QB.

    While I like some of the selections, this kind of trading bonanza is just a bit too Maddenish and personal taste for me. The vast majority of evaluators have Tua as one of the better QB prospects in awhile and the hip injury seems to be on track for a full recovery.
     
  2. hitman8

    hitman8 Well-Known Member

    1,618
    805
    113
    Nov 11, 2016
    Tua is hit or miss. If he turns out to be great then yes its a good pick, but if it turns out he is not the same after a major injury or if he continues to be injury prone in the NFL then it is a bad pick and you would have gotten better value by trading down.

    I am of the philosophy that if a prospect is a not a sure fire top 10 pick who checks all the boxes in terms of no major injury history, great production, great game tape and good character and leadership ability then you are better off trading down. I would take a risk on tua if he falls mid to low first or early second, but not at #5.
     
    RevRick likes this.
  3. texanphinatic

    texanphinatic Senior Member

    10,325
    3,682
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Detroit Metro Area MI
    Tua is absolutely a top 10 pick and saying otherwise is just not realistic unless the medicals prove concerning later on. We will have a pretty solid idea of his movement ability prior to the draft. Take the QB. If it doesn't work, you try again. Find your QB, stop messing around.
     
    Puka-head likes this.
  4. Puka-head

    Puka-head My2nd Fav team:___vs Jets Club Member

    6,758
    3,051
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Slightly left of center
    I don't think Tua is the second coming of the Marino, but with the kind of draft capitol we have it would be criminally stupid not to take the chance. I would like to see the Phins double down and draft Eason or Hurts or even a raw prospect like McDonald from HI to back it up. They should draft 2 QBs this year, unless they still have hopes for Rosen. Which would just prove again that management should be drug tested as rigorously as players. And do it again next year. If you end up with a 1a 1b situation, trade 1b for next years picks. Keep ****ting QBs til you have it right.
     
  5. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Rosen Staff Member Club Member

    28,504
    30,028
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    LOL. You guys know that people can have a different opinion that you do regarding the quarterbacks and not be idiots, right?
     
    Cashvillesent, Mexphin and Puka-head like this.
  6. Puka-head

    Puka-head My2nd Fav team:___vs Jets Club Member

    6,758
    3,051
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Slightly left of center
    upload_2020-1-31_19-43-48.png
     
  7. Rick 1966

    Rick 1966 Professional Hipshooter

    6,982
    2,521
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    Lakeland, FL
    We currently have three first round picks. In your scenario, we'd have only two. What would we be gaining?
     
  8. hitman8

    hitman8 Well-Known Member

    1,618
    805
    113
    Nov 11, 2016
    More 2nd and 3rd round picks. Under this scenario we end up with four 2nd rounders and five 3rd rounders in exchange for giving up our top 5 pick. There are good to great players to be had in every round if you know how to scout right and have enough picks to get the guys you want.

    1st round busts are just as common as 2nd or 3rd round busts. The draft is a numbers game, the more picks you have the better your chances of success.
     
    Cashvillesent, Mexphin and Unlucky 13 like this.
  9. Rick 1966

    Rick 1966 Professional Hipshooter

    6,982
    2,521
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    Lakeland, FL
    I wouldn't do it. Any trade I'd make would have to give us another, lower first rounder this year and next year's first as well.
     
  10. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Rosen Staff Member Club Member

    28,504
    30,028
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    That's certainly an interesting take. A lot of picks to stock up with. A less massive haul, but easier to stomach, would be trading #5 to Indy for #13 and #34. That would leave the Fins with seven picks in the top 70, including five in the top 39, and still a high enough first pick to snag a premier player.

    Another possibility would be trading #19 to the Bears for #43, #50 and #145.
     
  11. texanphinatic

    texanphinatic Senior Member

    10,325
    3,682
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Detroit Metro Area MI
    Have to disagree here. It's fair to have an opinion of "I don't really like player X" but putting in a "I don't think player X is a top Y pick" when the vast majority of actual evaluators would disagree with that statement? That's just not realistic.

    Like, I'm not a huge Burrow guy personally, but do I think that he should drop out of the top 10? No. I make it a point to understand why the evaluators like him and try to get past personal bias or simplistic analysis (example: weak arm). With Tua, your two basic simplistic analysis points are "injury risk" and "he had a good team." Both are worth followups and study, but neither really seem worth discounting him and his potential as a prospect at this point.

    It's not that people HAVE to like Tua or any other particular prospect, but rather that there isn't much point in going so heavily against the grain unless new evidence arises to indicate it's a likely probability. Everyone has their likes and dislikes, and that's totally fine. But letting personal bias lead to vastly different judgement on how reality will play out is not my thing.
     
  12. texanphinatic

    texanphinatic Senior Member

    10,325
    3,682
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Detroit Metro Area MI
    If Burrow and Tua are gone and Grier doesn't have a good grade on Herbert or Love, then the Indy trade is not a bad one. Not a fan of the Bears scenario though, I'd rather just keep the high round pick, or see if we can get a future round 1 and something lower in this draft.
     
  13. hitman8

    hitman8 Well-Known Member

    1,618
    805
    113
    Nov 11, 2016
    Nobody said Tua is not a top ten pick when healthy, but you cannot ignore the fact he is coming off of a very major hip fracture and dislocation, plus two ankle injuries which required surgery as well. His game depends to a large extent on his mobility, and with so many leg injuries you have to doubt wether he will be able to move around as he used to before. Not to mention the fact he was so injury prone in college is a bad sign that he would be injury prone in the pros. He had a better oline in alabama than he will have here in Miami. Which means he will have to take punishment and his body has not shown it is up to taking that kind of punishment so far.

    Top prospects can fall down boards becaus of injury concerns. It is not about going against the grain.
     
  14. texanphinatic

    texanphinatic Senior Member

    10,325
    3,682
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Detroit Metro Area MI
    Nobody is ignoring it, but we are taking the progress he has made with the medical prognosis given. If there is a serious setback or if he struggles heavily in pre-draft workouts, then yeah there will be cause for concern.

    The ankle injuries did not "require" surgery, that is just incorrect. They were optional procedures that Alabama encourages to make healing quicker and future injury less likely.
     
  15. hitman8

    hitman8 Well-Known Member

    1,618
    805
    113
    Nov 11, 2016
    Look fact is he had surgery for three different leg injuries. The last one was a major hip fracture and complete dislocation. He will throw before the draft, but nobody has said he will participate in mobility drills to see if he can still move around like he used to.

    He is an injury risk, generally speaking players who are injury prone in college will continue to be injury prone in the pros. The punishment he will recieve in the NFL will be more, not less than he got in college.

    In my opinion a player coming off a major injury and with a history of being injury prone should not be a top 5 pick, no matter how good you think he could be when healthy.
     
    RevRick likes this.
  16. RevRick

    RevRick Long Haired Leaping Gnome Club Member

    7,066
    3,774
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Itsnotevenonthemap, GA
    "The last one was a major hip fracture and complete dislocation. He will throw before the draft, but nobody has said he will participate in mobility drills to see if he can still move around like he used to."
    This is the primary reason I don't wish to see Tua as our first round pick. Do we need a quarterback? I could use some old US Navy euphemisms - but my Boss would not appreciate that. But the answer is "YES!!!!!" But not every starting quarterback in the NFL was a first round pick, and this team has needs all over the place - to me the OL is the next biggest problem and there seem to be a few biguglies out there which could also help us in the long run. I wonder if it would not be better to concentrate on the base, and find the quarterback either later, or next year. A Gold-plated Gihugeous slobberknocking left tackle would be a good place to start to build as well as putting an already fragile QB behind a needy line. Or trade down a little and get two of them.
     
    hitman8 likes this.
  17. Sceeto

    Sceeto Well-Known Member

    12,559
    5,192
    113
    Oct 13, 2008
    New York
    rafael likes this.
  18. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Rosen Staff Member Club Member

    28,504
    30,028
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
  19. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    518
    386
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    I've always wondered, whos much more responsible for a teams success? Just a year ago McVay was tauted and considered as one of the best young minded coaches in the league, to being in the hot seat the following year. Dont get me wrong a coach is really important to a football team but people always seem to forget that the GM is probably the biggest. Niners really hit homerun in their draft, wich I think is the biggest reason to their success.
     
  20. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Rosen Staff Member Club Member

    28,504
    30,028
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    Its everything together, of course. But I would take McVay as one of my top five if I were starting a team right now, zero question. The Rams were a top ten offense and a top half defense this year. Its hardly like they sucked. They play in a division with two of the best teams in the league. Not everyone can win.
     
    texanphinatic and AGuyNamedAlex like this.
  21. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    6,689
    8,825
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    I mean, Ryan Tannehill is the perfect example of why you shouldn't give up on a QB too soon. The first four years he was average and if we're judging in a vacuum, then average is not good enough. But then you look at the dysfunction at line, the coaching carousel, the continually changing offense, etc and it's very hard to say Ryan wasn't above average all along playing for a below average team.

    I'm not trying to start another RT conversation here- it's simply the only situation we're 100% knowledgeable about. For instance, Prescott had a solid rookie year behind that behemoth of a line with a stud RB and a solid receiving corps- I could make the same argument that we didn't see the real Prescott either. In my opinion Mahommes is proven with three solid seasons under his belt, but we can't say the same for Jackson, Darnold, Mayfield, Allen, Trubisky, Watson, Haskins, Murray, etc. While we think we know where most of those careers will go, the truth is that several of those names will be labeled "bust" by year 5 while maybe one or two of them end up being called elite. We just don't know and I think it takes 3-4 years for the variables around them to "normalize" enough to know what you really have.

    The other reason I think you're wrong statistically is because if a QB doesn't show something special by year 4, he's often benched for the new guy and you don't end up getting that 5-10 years of data. That doesn't automatically make him a bust though in my opinion, that just means he didn't fit that system and/or that system failed him. Since players have no control over who drafts them it's pretty tough to solely blame the QB in any rookie situation (AKA, a guy like Josh Rosen). In my opinion, it falls more on the organization for not giving that QB the tools and development to play their best ball.
     
    Unlucky 13 likes this.
  22. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,722
    9,173
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Tannehill would almost certainly have remained average had we NOT given up on him, precisely for the reasons you mention. So to use Tannehill as an argument for not giving up on a QB doesn't make sense. He did well precisely BECAUSE we gave up on him.

    Regardless, the exception doesn't prove the rule. In most cases, QB's that don't do well after 4 years or so don't do well elsewhere.

    That only strengthens the statistical argument. If most of the data comes from QB's that actually ARE good and THOSE QB's plateaued from year 4 then it goes to show that most good QB's show it by year 4.
     
    texanphinatic likes this.
  23. rafael

    rafael Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    27,219
    30,960
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    I kind of see Garappalo as Tua's floor so there's a potential similarity. I also expect that we'll invest heavy on the OL this year. Though I expect that our defense would be more dime centric. I think having more speed on the field would be particularly useful against a team like KC. SF did a great job of rebuilding quickly. And with the resources Miami has this year and next they might have greater flexibility and a larger margin for error.
     
    Sceeto likes this.
  24. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    6,689
    8,825
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    But that's the REAL question here- why was he average in Miami? Because if it's because of the team/coaching/scheme/players/etc. more than personal growth (or lack there of), then how do we really evaluate ANY QB on an average or below team? I bring this up going back to your stats that most drafted QB's are busts....it's equally likely that they're drafted by "busted" teams and never have a chance to develop because of it.

    Again, what makes a QB "good"? Passer rating is based on yards, TD's and other stats generally associated with winning. So when someone like Burrow is drafted by 3-win Cincinnati, the odds are HEAVILY against him having a winning season in year one. I don't think evaluating him in that offense tells us a whole lot UNLESS he happens to be so far ahead of the means, he lifts up that entire organization.

    In other words, we expect rookie QB's to do the impossible and then judge them harshly when they're "only average". The expectations are just completely out of whack and I feel like the NFL gives up on a lot of talent because of each front office's failures.
     
    RevRick likes this.
  25. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,722
    9,173
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah those stats are telling you expected QB production in the real world.. with all the coaching changes, variations in surrounding cast, etc... The precise reasons WHY things happened is less important because you're probably not going to be doing some experiment where you make totally different decisions than NFL teams usually do.

    For example, those QB stats might not be relevant if you forced yourself to keep the same coach and QB no matter how bad their performances are for at least 10 years. But who does that? So as long as you're dealing with scenarios that often occur in the NFL, those stats are useful and 4 years is usually enough to see whether you have a winner at QB.
     
    KeyFin and texanphinatic like this.
  26. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    6,689
    8,825
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Oh, I definitely agree...the stats are all we have at the moment. My only argument is that it may sometimes take that full four years to have the QB in the right offense, with the right coordinators and pieces around him. So I'm not only looking at the progression from year 1-4...I'm looking at the overall stability as well.

    I think the greatest benefit the Pats had was consistency between coach/QB for 15+ years, and few teams ever get that stability to simply build, tweak, and fine-tune without tearing down. For instance, Gase had his QB less than 20 games out of three seasons plus the hurricane, so like you said, we never saw the long-term plan come together (for better or worse). I think as an organization we need to reach that point though and fully get out of the rebuild mode to fully see what we really have in terms of talent across the board.
     
    RevRick likes this.
  27. RevRick

    RevRick Long Haired Leaping Gnome Club Member

    7,066
    3,774
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Itsnotevenonthemap, GA
    A few dozen (or more) years back, the conventional wisdom was that it took 3 or more years to rebuild a team - not just to patch the worst spots, but to rebuild. [That's assuming that there were at least a few good players on the team at that point.] And then it took another year of playing together to become good. It takes that long, in reality, to figure out just who's who in the zoo. But what usually happens is that by year three, fans, sportswriters, and owners figure that if the coaching staff has not built a contending (at least) team - it's time to head for the broom closet again.
    And the coaching merry-go-round begins all over again.
    Now, sometimes you just know by the product on the field that the coach is abominable. That is usually indicated by more than the team on the field. Sometimes, it is not the coach, because you can't make chicken salad out of.... well, you know, and that points to the front office.
    The Dolphins have had both of those offices flop miserably in the last few years. Thankfully, we had some wonderful years under Shula! It appears (as a rough guess) that the only missing ingredient at this point in this current edition of the Dolphins is the requisite time and some good draft choices. So, hopefully, hang on for the ride...
     
    Unlucky 13 likes this.
  28. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Rosen Staff Member Club Member

    28,504
    30,028
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    The problem that the Dolphins have had, for decades now, is that the teams just don't seem to get better past the second year after hiring a new coach. And so it ends up not being an issue of time and patience, but of realizing that they've hired the wrong people who can't aquire and coach the players. I mean, what are the odds of a NFL team making six straight bad head coaching hires? But here we are, hoping that number seven is different....
     
  29. Rick 1966

    Rick 1966 Professional Hipshooter

    6,982
    2,521
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    Lakeland, FL
    The more I think about this, the more I hope we don't try to trade up to three to take Tua. It would be a huge waste of picks.
     
    hitman8 and Unlucky 13 like this.
  30. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Rosen Staff Member Club Member

    28,504
    30,028
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    I'm fully opposed to any trade up. Period.
     
    hitman8 likes this.
  31. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    6,689
    8,825
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    That's been my main argument for some time here as well- we've been in a 3-year rebuild cycle for the past 15+ years now. If we would have stuck with Philbin, Sparano or virtually any of the former coaches all these years....would they still be a 6-10 to 9-7 team, or would they have tweaked enough to take that extra step and have us playoff bound on a consistent basis?

    Expecting ANY coach to deliver a playoff team in three seasons, while rebuilding and installing new schemes, feels like a fool's errand to me. Add in the instability in our front office and it's almost impossible without sticking with the same faces in the building.
     
  32. Deus ex dolphin

    Deus ex dolphin Well-Known Member

    2,824
    1,394
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    Any call from the Lions will be them trying to get a free pick or two for bluffing Miami into moving up. Once free agency happens we'll have a better idea about teams like the Chargers and Panthers and how much they need a new QB.

    Besides the medical risk of taking Tua, he won't be ready to play for most of the season (and if you start him and he gets hurt again then there will be a lot of second guessing). Miami is already set with Fitzmagic and maybe Rosen for 2020, so no real push to play the rookie QB. Plus with multiple first round picks, risking one on Tua is more acceptable. Compare that to say the Chargers giving up a first, second and probably a third rounder in 2021 to move up. The Panthers will need to give up even more.

    Stay put and see how things fall.
     
  33. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,722
    9,173
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Philbin, Sparano, Gase I think are all no better than average. There was no point in sticking with any of them.

    And you're right that most coaches don't turn into HoF coaches or consistently winning ones, so expecting a coach to deliver a playoff team in 3 seasons is a fool's errand. But what IS true is that most HoF coaches do produce a consistent winner by year 3-4. So if the question is whether to stick with a coach for more than 3-4 seasons, then that's the stat you should go by.

    Also.. our time has to come at some point. I think picking the right coach mostly comes down to dumb luck, and we're due for one.
     
  34. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,722
    9,173
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    If we pick Tua, Rosen needs to go. Actually he needs to go period.

    I do however agree that we should start the season with Fitz even if we pick Tua unless Tua totally impresses in the offseason. The fact Flores doesn't have to win in 2020 is an asset because it allows us time with Tua.
     
  35. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    6,689
    8,825
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    I agree...the last three coaches were slightly above/below average on any given year. Average gets you an 8-8 team though, which is only a couple of games away from a playoff team. Could an average coach make that leap with a few extra pieces MORE OFTEN THAN starting over with a new coach & all the other pieces that comes with it? That's the real question that we've never explored answering.

    When it comes to Flores, I think he's a pretty good coach that holds people accountable. It's too soon to say where he falls on the great/horrible spectrum but even if he's just average a few seasons from now, that doesn't mean we can't be a great team with the right coordinators and players. A head coach's job is to lead...he doesn't have to call plays, train athletes or run the franchise if that's not in his wheelhouse. So I hope we stick with Flores no matter how our record falls the next few seasons...I just want this continual rebuild process to end.

    The one constant all the powerhouse teams have is consistency in coach/front office/QB and I think making that commitment is equally as important to actual talent. I DO NOT like Grier but at the same time, he seems to work well with Flores and that alone is worth quite a lot. So I hope we fire everyone tomorrow OR stick with this staff for the next four years like we originally planned. The only thing that's not acceptable in my book is another 2-3 year try-out, only to start all over again and waste the top talent that we have today.
     
  36. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    6,689
    8,825
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Interestingly, Miami released their 2020 hype video today and Fitzpatrick wasn't in the footage. That has a lot of folks guessing that Miami may not bring him back next season after all....which I think is a bunch of rubbish. Rosen was in the video though and that sort of catches my interest- I still think developing him into a starter would be our best case long-term scenario.

    However, I do think we're locked on Tua and I do think he'll sit for the season out of an abundance of caution. I have my fingers crossed on him or Rosen being a 10-year starter since that's the key piece we need in place ASAP. I know a lot of folks disliked RT because he was slightly above average, but we can definitely build a team around that and it's important to commit to someone sooner rather than later.
     
  37. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Rosen Staff Member Club Member

    28,504
    30,028
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    I found that interesting as well.

     
  38. Deus ex dolphin

    Deus ex dolphin Well-Known Member

    2,824
    1,394
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    So, if Fitz goes down in week two you start Tua the rest of the way? Rosen can be the insurance policy for an injury to Fitz. Maybe Rosen shows something or more likely we end up with a top 10 pick for 2021.

    I could see starting Tua the last 4 games or so, just to give him some real NFL game experience and film to look, but only if he knows the offense well and is fully recovered from the hip injury (as much as can be shown -the long term stuff like arthritis won't show up for years).
     
  39. texanphinatic

    texanphinatic Senior Member

    10,325
    3,682
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Detroit Metro Area MI
    It wouldn't be surprising to see Rosen jettisoned in favor of your standard third string types - the Fales of the world.

    In your scenario, if Fitz goes down or sucks horribly in the first few weeks, then Tua goes in if healthy if the staff feels he is ready. If he is not healthy enough or the staff feels it would be unhelpful to expose him to live game action at that point, just insert cheap third stringer for a few weeks until Fitz can return or Tua is ready. I am not a big fan of the "hold them back for a year or two" these days simply because of the massive advantage a rookie QB payscale gives.

    While I feel we should compete for a playoff wildcard spot, I personally wouldn't hold a ton of expectation for year 2 other than being better overall. Year 3 is really the point to make a run.
     
    cbrad likes this.
  40. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,722
    9,173
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    If healthy Tua is probably already ready to start in the NFL so yeah I’d have no issue starting him. Great thing about Fitz is that you CAN sit Tua if you think that will help.

    But keeping Rosen on the roster is wasting a roster spot. That guy is a bust and it’s time to move on.
     

Share This Page