NFL: Matthew Stafford requests trade

[DaaaaB's]

For those saying Stafford doesn't know how to win, he's 8th alltime in game winning drives. That's well ahead of Rodgers, Montana, Kelly and other great QBs. Now I'm not comparing him to those guys but he certainly knows how to win.

 

[GKJ]

I think it's pretty safe to say you haven't watched Stafford play much. Tom Brady would have a losing record if he spent the past 12 seasons playing for Detroit.

Yeah the one thing this forum knows about me is that I don’t watch like literally any NFL game possible.

I’m being told game-changing quarterback about Stafford, but in reality, we’re talking about a 6-7 year franchise quarterback if it’s first-round-plus in a trade for him. Other guys change games by not being actively-bad like Tannehill has been, or Garoppolo, Rivers, or even Derek Carr. Guys who whose teams are not really pushing all their chips to the middle on.

I did watch Tom Brady play for a few of under-staffed Patriot teams that he dragged to the playoffs and first-round byes and perhaps even a Super Bowl or two.

 

[StreetHawk]

He either is or isn’t a game-changing quarterback. You can’t say how he’s his monolith who did all this stuff to run up stats. Especially if you’re giving me things from 8 or 9 years ago. He’s not 26 years old, but 33 and has been beaten up. He’s 16 games under .500 for his career. And zero playoff wins.

Could a team like WFT or the Colts trade for him and have things work out and end up in a Super Bowl? Sure! That could happen! Especially in the NFC, and Colts have been pretty aggressive. But 1RD-plus for a 33-year old QB to turn yourselves into an elite team when the guy didn’t do that during an era where the NFC was wide open, it’s just not there.

2 2nds should be the max. Donovan McNabb was traded at 34 for a 2nd and 4th and had way better resume. Otherwise, I mean anyone giving up a 1st is probably a coach and brain trust desperate about their job security, so blowing a 1st and 2nd won’t be their problem to fix.

It should also tell you something that Philly traded McNabb within the division for that return. That they were not concerned about his future performance with Washington.

I think the reality is that NFL teams will look at Stafford's talent and say, we can make it work with him in a new environment. And most NFL teams consider 2 second round picks to be the same as a first round pick. NFL teams draft for positional needs. Always going to be deficient in more than one area.

Stafford has his money. He entered the NFL before rookie max contracts, so the man has made over $150 mill and likely closer to $200 mill in his career. I think if you are Indy and it costs you pick #21 and Eason and a day 3 pick in 2022, you make that move. Otherwise the only QB on your roster is Eason. Windows in the NFL are very small when you have a good quality roster. Guys will come off rookie deals and get paid.

Plus with Stafford, what would he count against Indy's cap if they get him? $43 million left on the next 2 years. Not going to be able to land Dak or someone else for that cap hit. It's Detroit that has to eat some dead cap by moving him. But, if they are rebuilding they can eat it.

Being realistic, how many first round picks over from 5-10 years ago, got re-signed by their club coming off their rookie contract? So, if Stafford gives you 4 years, that should be worth the first round pick. At pick 21, I think Indy makes that move. Now, with SF at #12 they might value that pick more. So, does #44 this season and whatever it comes to next year, so #55 and later mean the same to Detroit? Hard to say.

 

[GKJ]

It should also tell you something that Philly traded McNabb within the division for that return. That they were not concerned about his future performance with Washington.

I think the reality is that NFL teams will look at Stafford's talent and say, we can make it work with him in a new environment. And most NFL teams consider 2 second round picks to be the same as a first round pick. NFL teams draft for positional needs. Always going to be deficient in more than one area.

Stafford has his money. He entered the NFL before rookie max contracts, so the man has made over $150 mill and likely closer to $200 mill in his career. I think if you are Indy and it costs you pick #21 and Eason and a day 3 pick in 2022, you make that move. Otherwise the only QB on your roster is Eason. Windows in the NFL are very small when you have a good quality roster. Guys will come off rookie deals and get paid.

Plus with Stafford, what would he count against Indy's cap if they get him? $43 million left on the next 2 years. Not going to be able to land Dak or someone else for that cap hit. It's Detroit that has to eat some dead cap by moving him. But, if they are rebuilding they can eat it.

Being realistic, how many first round picks over from 5-10 years ago, got re-signed by their club coming off their rookie contract? So, if Stafford gives you 4 years, that should be worth the first round pick. At pick 21, I think Indy makes that move. Now, with SF at #12 they might value that pick more. So, does #44 this season and whatever it comes to next year, so #55 and later mean the same to Detroit? Hard to say.

It’s wasn’t Andy Reid’s problem what Washington thought of it. He always knew when it was time to ditch someone. He was even up front and public about what it would take to get McNabb (top 42 pick) and someone met it-plus. It’s someone else’s problem if they fail to evaluate. But most everyone thought the Eagles were crazy, they were a year removed from the NFC championship game. McNabb had numerous playoff wins and got to a super bowl

BTW, Eason is a non-factor in this. With no pre-season he hasn’t put anything on tape to give him any value.

 

[TheAngryHank]

he can ball. not his fault the oline, defence and run game has been far below average his whole career with the exception of I believe one year of a top 10 defence.

he still has accomplished the following

NFL records

• Most passing touchdowns in a single game by a rookie quarterback: 5 (tied with Ray Buivid, Jameis Winston, Deshaun Watson, and Daniel Jones)[210]
• Youngest quarterback to throw for at least five touchdowns in a single game (21 years, 288 days) (November 22, 2009 against the Cleveland Browns)[211]
• First player in NFL history to complete 60% or more of all passes in each game in a season (2015)[212]
• Most games with at least one touchdown pass in a season: 16 (2011, tied NFL record)[213]
• Most consecutive 350+ yards passing games: 4 (2011–2012, tied with Drew Brees)[214]
• Most passing yards thrown for in a single game without a touchdown pass: (443, December 22, 2012 against the Atlanta Falcons)[215]
• Most passing attempts in a season: 727 (2012)[216]
• Most pass attempts per game, season: 45.44, 2012[217]
• Most games with 40+ pass attempts in a season: 13 (2012)[218]
• Fastest player to reach 15,000 career passing yards (53 games played)[219]
• Fastest player to reach 20,000 career passing yards (71 games played)[220]
• Fastest player to reach 25,000 career passing yards (90 games played)[221]
• Fastest player to reach 30,000 career passing yards (109 games played)[222]
• Fastest player to reach 40,000 career passing yards (147 games played)[188]
• Fastest player to reach 3,000 completions (125 games played)[223]
• Most passing yards in first 100 games (27,890) [224]
• Most fourth quarter comebacks in a season: 8 (2016)
• Most game-winning drives in a single season: 8 (2016)

Your going to put up massive passing numbers when your playing from behind in 90% of your games. Not trying to discredit your post ,just adding context.

I hope he lands in a good spot ,dude deserves a fair shake for once. Pittsburg would be a great fit and the Big Ben tantrum would be epic.

 

[tacogeoff]

Your going to put up massive passing numbers when your playing from behind in 90% of your games. Not trying to discredit your post ,just adding context.

I hope he lands in a good spot ,dude deserves a fair shake for once. Pittsburg would be a great fit and the Big Ben tantrum would be epic.

I'm just saying he can ball

 

[TheAngryHank]

I'm just saying he can ball

And you are correct.

 

[tacogeoff]

And you are correct.

the OP I was responding too asked how he was a game changer. give him a competent oline, a good defense and he could be . unfortunately in Detroit he got fd but still shot the lights out in terms of personal performance

 

[TheAngryHank]

the OP I was responding too asked how he was a game changer. give him a competent oline, a good defense and he could be . unfortunately in Detroit he got fd but still shot the lights out in terms of personal performance

Thats why i mentioned him landing in a good spot to get a fair shake , in his prime he would have been scary on a legit team.

 

[Unholy Diver]

For those saying Stafford doesn't know how to win, he's 8th alltime in game winning drives. That's well ahead of Rodgers, Montana, Kelly and other great QBs. Now I'm not comparing him to those guys but he certainly knows how to win.

Those guys don't get credit for game winning drives when their teams are ahead from the first quarter on

 

[StreetHawk]

He’s going to get traded. If you are a fan of a team that may be interested in him, I think the market will dictate that it won’t be a cheap ask like a second round pick only.

I think if you have a good roster he’s worth a shot at a price of a first this season and maybe a third next season if that is the ask. If he only counts around $21 mill against your cap I think you go for it. When his deal is up I don’t see he commanding $35 mill. If the team is doing well with him he will likely work with the club to come in at a good number.

 

[DaaaaB's]

Those guys don't get credit for game winning drives when their teams are ahead from the first quarter on

That's obviously true and the reason those guys are lower. You also dont get game winning drives when you're defence is so bad that you have no chance of making a comeback which was the case a lot with Detroit.

 

[DaaaaB's]

Yeah the one thing this forum knows about me is that I don’t watch like literally any NFL game possible.

I’m being told game-changing quarterback about Stafford, but in reality, we’re talking about a 6-7 year franchise quarterback if it’s first-round-plus in a trade for him. Other guys change games by not being actively-bad like Tannehill has been, or Garoppolo, Rivers, or even Derek Carr. Guys who whose teams are not really pushing all their chips to the middle on.

I did watch Tom Brady play for a few of under-staffed Patriot teams that he dragged to the playoffs and first-round byes and perhaps even a Super Bowl or two.

Well, considering Detroit almost never plays Thursday, Sunday or Monday night games and 90% of their games are at 1pm then you must be passing up a lot of other games to watch the Lions. I'm sure you've seen him play some but I've watched almost every game of his career and he's a lot better than Alex Smith.

Brady always had great defences too. You could argue that their D was a bigger part of winning 5 of the 6 super bowls than Brady was. That being said, Stafford has never been near as good as Brady anyhow. Doesn't mean he's not really good.

 

[GKJ]

Well, considering Detroit almost never plays Thursday, Sunday or Monday night games and 90% of their games are at 1pm then you must be passing up a lot of other games to watch the Lions. I'm sure you've seen him play some but I've watched almost every game of his career and he's a lot better than Alex Smith.

Brady always had great defences too. You could argue that their D was a bigger part of winning 5 of the 6 super bowls than Brady was. That being said, Stafford has never been near as good as Brady anyhow. Doesn't mean he's not really good.

I didn’t say he wasn’t good, I said giving you the type of package of a mid-1st plus 2nd is way too high for a beaten up 33-year old QB with zero playoff wins. Unless you’re Al Davis, that’s not a guy you’re pushing your chips to the middle on. If you want a 1st round pick, then make it performance-based.

 

[StreetHawk]

I didn’t say he wasn’t good, I said giving you the type of package of a mid-1st plus 2nd is way too high for a beaten up 33-year old QB with zero playoff wins. Unless you’re Al Davis, that’s not a guy you’re pushing your chips to the middle on. If you want a 1st round pick, then make it performance-based.

The second rounder would likely be the piece that is conditional on say a playoff win or something like that.

if you are a SF fan them #12 may be too high a price. I think for other teams that pick closer to 20, that pick they would move for an established QB. Maybe it’s a first and a conditional third that can become a second if that team either wins a playoff game or makes the championship game.

I think that is something a team that views itself as a legit playoff team sans the QB position is willing to do.

 

[Halladay]

TBH, id be surprised if he returned a first round pick. Unless a team (probably the Colts) thinks he is the missing piece.

 

[StreetHawk]

TBH, id be surprised if he returned a first round pick. Unless a team (probably the Colts) thinks he is the missing piece.

To each their own.

but they are in need of a QB unless season has impressed them all season long in practice as third string.

The 2016 draft which was the wentz and Goff draft these guys are just finished their 5th year options or they signed new deals. Of the first round I think there were like 12 guys or more who either got cut or were allowed to leave via free agency.

if you review the 2013-2015 drafts it’s probably about the same between 10-13 first rounders get cut or walk in free agency.

so if you are in need of a QB and 1/3 of first rounders don’t stick around after their rookie deals you take that shot to get a QB imo.

 

[Reality Check]

This is why I wanted Detroit to take a QB last year. Because Stafford was coming off an injury, isn't getting younger and this franchise isn't contending for anything.

Now watch them draft the next hack QB from Ohio State.

Back to Stafford. If he is on the right team and situation, he could go deep into the playoffs. Even win a Super Bowl. But he is on the heir to Phillip Rivers as the "good, not great" veteran QB.

 

[StreetHawk]

This is why I wanted Detroit to take a QB last year. Because Stafford was coming off an injury, isn't getting younger and this franchise isn't contending for anything.

Now watch them draft the next hack QB from Ohio State.

Back to Stafford. If he is on the right team and situation, he could go deep into the playoffs. Even win a Super Bowl. But he is on the heir to Phillip Rivers as the "good, not great" veteran QB.

Unfortunatley, with the GM and coach being there for a couple of years, there is no reset at the QB spot.

I think that there is a range of 1st round picks that I would give up for him. Denver in the top 10, maybe is too expensive. SF at 12 is borderline. Indy at 21 is a no brainer to me to give up. WFT & Chicago at 19/20 I would give that up as well.

I just look back at the 1st round picks from several years ago and there is around 1/3 of them that either get cut during their rookie contracts or walk via free agency. So, to me, I would trade a 2nd half of the draft 1st round pick for Stafford, who is under contract for the next 2 years to 35 and if things go well, I hope that he appreciates a team that can achieve double digit wins annually to work with the club on an extension. If I get 4 years from Stafford, that's what I get from a 1st round pick.

 

[DangleCity]

He’s going to get traded. If you are a fan of a team that may be interested in him, I think the market will dictate that it won’t be a cheap ask like a second round pick only.

I think if you have a good roster he’s worth a shot at a price of a first this season and maybe a third next season if that is the ask. If he only counts around $21 mill against your cap I think you go for it. When his deal is up I don’t see he commanding $35 mill. If the team is doing well with him he will likely work with the club to come in at a good number.

I disagree. There are going to be a lot of QBs on the market via FA and the draft so I think the market is going to be surpressed a bit. Teams are going to have options.

Plus the Lions lost leverage now that everyone knows he's being moved

 

[StreetHawk]

I disagree. There are going to be a lot of QBs on the market via FA and the draft so I think the market is going to be surpressed a bit. Teams are going to have options.

Plus the Lions lost leverage now that everyone knows he's being moved

I think that for the draft, that's not where teams who have good rosters right now are going to be looking. Indy at 21 is going to have to give up more than what it takes to get Stafford to get into the range of the other QBs at the draft for example, same with Chicago, WFT, and others like them. Plus out of Fields, Lance, Wilson I feel that Lance and Wilson should sit and not get thrown into the fire. And I don't see Fields stepping onto the field and performing great right off the hop. So, a matter of the learning curve to get the QB up to speed. Can you afford upwards of 2 years to develop the QB given the roster that you currently have.

As for free agents, Jimmy G won't be available unless SF has a better option. Dak is available coming off a serious injury and costing a big cap hit. Goff/Wentz if they were to be traded, you are likely having to work the contract out to lessen the dead cap to those teams and thus take a bigger cap hit than just a straight trade. Watson is super expensive asset wise but better and younger, though with 2 ACL injuries. Rodgers, big price tag to get him.

I just feel that if you have a good roster, you push for a plug and play QB. Free agent QBs have yielded Cousins, Bridgewater, Taylor, and who else as starters in recent years? No Brady/Manning out there this off-season.

 

[CupofOil]

I disagree. There are going to be a lot of QBs on the market via FA and the draft so I think the market is going to be surpressed a bit. Teams are going to have options.

Plus the Lions lost leverage now that everyone knows he's being moved

Who is a better option for a contender on the open market outside of Watson and potentially Prescott (which would then put the Cowboys on the market)?

Lets take Indianapolis and San Francisco for example, teams that are in win now mode.
What's the better option? Taking the 5th, 6th or 7th best QB in the mid to late 1st round and hoping that MAYBE he could be a decent QB in 2-3 years, signing Fitzmagic or Tyrod Taylor on the free agent market, sticking with Brissett or Jimmy G, or trading for Stafford who has a pretty team friendly contract for the next two year btw? The choice seems pretty clear to me. I don't see many better options out there for a contending team and that's why I think Stafford will return a nice haul of picks for the Lions.

 

[StreetHawk]

The choice seems pretty clear to me. I don't see many better options out there for a contending team and that's why I think Stafford will return a nice haul of picks for the Lions.

I don't think it's going to be a bounty of picks. But I think a first and a third or later makes sense. SF or Indy is where I would hope to end up if I was Stafford. Denver/LV solid spots but same division as Mahomes. WFT is a winnable division.

 

[DangleCity]

I think that for the draft, that's not where teams who have good rosters right now are going to be looking. Indy at 21 is going to have to give up more than what it takes to get Stafford to get into the range of the other QBs at the draft for example, same with Chicago, WFT, and others like them. Plus out of Fields, Lance, Wilson I feel that Lance and Wilson should sit and not get thrown into the fire. And I don't see Fields stepping onto the field and performing great right off the hop. So, a matter of the learning curve to get the QB up to speed. Can you afford upwards of 2 years to develop the QB given the roster that you currently have.

As for free agents, Jimmy G won't be available unless SF has a better option. Dak is available coming off a serious injury and costing a big cap hit. Goff/Wentz if they were to be traded, you are likely having to work the contract out to lessen the dead cap to those teams and thus take a bigger cap hit than just a straight trade. Watson is super expensive asset wise but better and younger, though with 2 ACL injuries. Rodgers, big price tag to get him.

I just feel that if you have a good roster, you push for a plug and play QB. Free agent QBs have yielded Cousins, Bridgewater, Taylor, and who else as starters in recent years? No Brady/Manning out there this off-season.

I get what you are saying that he might be a better option for some teams, but the simple economics is that with a lot of QB available you may not get what you want for him.

The market is also surpressed because of covid and the cap is going down over $20 million which is going to factor into who can take on his cap hit and bring down his market value.

 

[CupofOil]

I don't think it's going to be a bounty of picks. But I think a first and a third or later makes sense. SF or Indy is where I would hope to end up if I was Stafford. Denver/LV solid spots but same division as Mahomes. WFT is a winnable division.

Oh, I agree. That's what I speculated on a Lions message board that I frequent where some fans are expecting crazy returns like two 1sts or, as somebody posted last night, from the WFT #19, Jonathan Allen+2nd rounder. That's crazy, just like those in this thread who think he won't even return a 1st.

I think a 1st+3rd from one of the teams in the latter half of the 1st round is most realistic. If it's San Francisco, perhaps 12th overall straight up or a mid to late rounder attached. If it's Indy, maybe #21+#85.