NBA OFF TOPIC THREAD

[shopson67]

@shopson67 kind of funny coming from a Rams fan who drafted a QB #1 overall that failed- and then had to spend a ton of picks and dead cap space for a couple years of Matt Stafford.

He is basically arguing for how the Rams did things. But they better hope they get some real miles out of Stafford because if he gets hurt or starts getting ineffective because of age then they are going to be up shit creek on the QB hunt with all the first round picks they have dealt.

It will be interesting to see who took the right approach

the Rams dealing multiple first rounders, their former #1 overall QB, and taking a huge cap hit to get Stafford.

Or the Browns- keeping the #1 overall QB and their assets and not blowing up their cap. (part of the reason why we have 2 DB's from the Rams secondary playing for the Browns right now).

I bet the Browns are more successful over the next 5 years.

Why is that funny? The Rams had to make that move (drafting Goff) and it didn't work out long term. Does it make more sense to waste more time with a QB that leveled off at best and had a poor relationship with his coaching staff? It's not just the Rams that recently had to jettison failed top QBs (Eagles, Bears, likely the Texans. Browns fans should understand this as well (Weeden, Johnny Foosball most recently). Soon, Mahomes will be the only 1st round QB drafted before 2018 still with his original team. Even of the 2018 first round QBs, 2 of the 5 have moved on.

You're exaggerating the cap hit. They had an out for Goff next season (as the Lions now do), so the cap hit was about $25M. Stafford's cap hit is only $20M. Combined that equals Mahomes (but falls off next season), is only $5M more than Dak, etc. It's more than ideal, but it's still within the going rate for a starting QB in 2021. Rams only have 1 other player (Donald) with a cap hit over $10M this year.

Kind of odd to spend big on those two DBs from the Rams (whom the Rams already had in house replacements for from previous drafts) only to block your 2 best defensive prospects Delpit and Newsome. Don't worry, Baker's extension will push some of those guys off the roster. His 5th year will already nearly double his cap hit from 2021 to 2022, and then it will jump again in 2023 when he gets his extension.

 

[shopson67]

It's interesting.

For basketball, I'm all about "win now" because it's easier to turn things around in basketball. You can add one great player to a bad team and at least make the playoffs. Even if you're not a destination franchise, you can turn things around virtually overnight if you can draft a special player.

In football, I think you have to be more patient. Adding a great player, even a great qb, to a bad team...might get you a win or 2 more, but you're not going to the playoffs. It takes more time to get the right pieces and get everyone on the same page.

I think that recently being in the Super Bowl is likely what's driving the Rams decision to try to win now. What's interesting about this, imo, is that through no real fault of his own, Stafford is pretty much an unknown quantity in the playoffs because he comes from a team that never makes the playoffs. Now he's on a team that expects to go to the Super Bowl.

Personally, I would go the Browns route. I think both can be successful, it just may be that the Browns success may be a season or 2 away.

...or Baker regresses again. He's not exactly the most consistent QB out there.

Really, this all moot anyway. We don't even know if Rodgers would want a trade to the Browns. It's too bad he didn't push this button earlier when the Rams inquired about his availability. I'm happy with Stafford, but getting Rodgers would've been ideal.

 

[dtgold88]

Imo, you're both right on this.

Aaron Rodgers is a proven Super Bowl champion and is coming off of an MVP season....but, he's 37, hasn't always been the picture of health and can be kind of a high maintenance asshole.

Baker, especially the 2nd half of last season, has looked like a franchise qb that the Browns could win with for a long time, seems to be a good fit and he's only 26...but, he's also given reason to question if he has the drive to do what it takes to be a Super Bowl caliber qb and there are questions about his "ceiling".

Rodgers, assuming he stays healthy, gives the Browns a better chance to win a Super Bowl or 2 right now. Baker, assuming he stays committed, gives them a better chance for the future.

They could do like Tampa, mortgage the future and go all in on winning right now...or they could stay the course and look to win in the future.

If they go all in and it doesn't work, they're screwed for years to come and people will question the wisdom of trading a 26 year old with upside for a 37 year old.

If they stay the course, and Baker isn't the guy, they're screwed for years to come and people will question why they didn't trade for Rodgers when they had the chance. These types of decisions are why every GM probably has at least 1 desk drawer filled with antacids. lol

End of the day, as Wiggy pointed out earlier, it really doesn't matter because Rodgers isn't interested in the Browns anyway.

Giving up on Winston to get Brady as a FA not exactly the same as giving up on Baker AND other picks/players for AR.

and certainly not the same as acquiring PG/AD/Kawhi, etc.

Not sure what makes you think Baker does not have the drive considering he's shown he does at every stop since HS. was a little immature, though, sure.

 

[trojanfan12]

...or Baker regresses again. He's not exactly the most consistent QB out there.

That's a bit overstated, imo. When he's had solid coaching, he's played well.

 

[dtgold88]

If you are going to quote me, quote me right.

There isn’t any info on Lawrence.

Fields and Lance show elite qualities.

The reason I said nothing earth shattering is because I figured you would go on with your typical “but anyone could predict that Fields and Lance will be good” BS.

And I won’t post about Lawrence one way or the other because my friend doesn’t have data on him.

I gave you the exact quote. Hilarious. strike 1

As for TL as I said.....Kind of odd to have "no data" with 3 seasons of games to watch. strike 2

Why would I say "anyone could predict Fields/Lance will be good"? If anything, I'd say easier to predict they wont as not likely the top 4 QBs drafted will all be good. strike 3

you're out.

 

[Shanemansj13]

@Stakesarehigh @Shanemansj13 @dtgold88

You hear about this yet?

Massage therapist looses license after targeting Ohio State football players for sexual encounters

Article said 5 players have banged her after massage sessions. And more than 20 players have received services from her through social media. Didn't mention her name, but she's 41.

Pics?

 

[dtgold88]

That's a bit overstated, imo. When he's had solid coaching, he's played well.

Right....guy played as well as expected in every year but one going back to Oklahoma, but the year with Freddie is the one we should think is the norm?

I mean, sure, he could regress but seems odd to think the Freddie year is the one we should not discount.

 

[trojanfan12]

Giving up on Winston to get Brady as a FA not exactly the same as giving up on Baker AND other picks/players for AR.

It's not about who they traded. It's about going all in on an older, proven Super Bowl winning qb vs. sticking with a younger, unproven qb with upside.

Tampa chose to go all in with the old guy. The Browns are staying the course with the young guy. The Bucs may have had a little easier decision because of Jameis struggling. But the decision was essentially the same one.

Not sure what makes you think Baker does not have the drive considering he's shown he does at every stop since HS. was a little immature, though, sure

I didn't say I thought that, but that is the impression some have of him because of how he regressed after having success in his rookie season. Based on how he has conducted himself since then, he seems to have learned...but until he at least duplicated what he did last year, there will be questions about how he handles success.

 

[dtgold88]

@shopson67 kind of funny coming from a Rams fan who drafted a QB #1 overall that failed- and then had to spend a ton of picks and dead cap space for a couple years of Matt Stafford.

He is basically arguing for how the Rams did things. But they better hope they get some real miles out of Stafford because if he gets hurt or starts getting ineffective because of age then they are going to be up shit creek on the QB hunt with all the first round picks they have dealt.

It will be interesting to see who took the right approach

the Rams dealing multiple first rounders, their former #1 overall QB, and taking a huge cap hit to get Stafford.

Or the Browns- keeping the #1 overall QB and their assets and not blowing up their cap. (part of the reason why we have 2 DB's from the Rams secondary playing for the Browns right now).

I bet the Browns are more successful over the next 5 years.

Clearly he has an agenda toward Baker and that's fine. Now it's possible the kid regresses, but the idea he will because he did with Freddie seems a bit out there. Baker has played as well or better than expected in every other season going back to OU but the Freddie Fiasco is the one he wants to hang his hat on?

 

[dtgold88]

I'll try to discuss it straight up. Imo the Rams kinda blew it getting Stafford. Goff was never going to develop into a great QB, but MS is an older QB who does have skills, but highly doubtful he'll get any better...

So in the short term the Brownies have a leg up in the QB department because they DO have a guy who's younger, and still has some upside...

As far as a Browns Superbowl it's too early to discuss that I think, but hey, time'll tell...

I'm too jaded to ever think a Cleveland team will get to a title game until they do. Even when we had Lebron.

I definitely like where the Browns are now over the Rams but I guess I could understand why they did what they did. They probably figure they have a 2-3 year window before a crash and it wasn't happening with Goff.

 

[dtgold88]

He had his #1 WR (Landry). OBJ has been a wasted acquisition to this point; they seem better with him off the field.

Idea you think Landry is a #1 WR just shows your lack of football knowledge. I mean he can be one, but he is better suited to be a very good #2. You really think a #1-3 of Landry, Higgins and Khaderal Hodge is a stud WR group?

FYI, they were 4-1 in OBJs last 5 games, scoring between 32-49 points in each game. He was badly needed against KC in the playoff game.

 

[dtgold88]

It's interesting.

For basketball, I'm all about "win now" because it's easier to turn things around in basketball. You can add one great player to a bad team and at least make the playoffs. Even if you're not a destination franchise, you can turn things around virtually overnight if you can draft a special player.

In football, I think you have to be more patient. Adding a great player, even a great qb, to a bad team...might get you a win or 2 more, but you're not going to the playoffs. It takes more time to get the right pieces and get everyone on the same page.

I think that recently being in the Super Bowl is likely what's driving the Rams decision to try to win now. What's interesting about this, imo, is that through no real fault of his own, Stafford is pretty much an unknown quantity in the playoffs because he comes from a team that never makes the playoffs. Now he's on a team that expects to go to the Super Bowl.

Personally, I would go the Browns route. I think both can be successful, it just may be that the Browns success may be a season or 2 away.

Exactly as I see it. Browns look better now and for future......but I get why Rams did what they did as probably think they have a 2-3 year window before a major crash and stafford gives them a better chance

 

[dtgold88]

...or Baker regresses again. He's not exactly the most consistent QB out there.

Really, this all moot anyway. We don't even know if Rodgers would want a trade to the Browns. It's too bad he didn't push this button earlier when the Rams inquired about his availability. I'm happy with Stafford, but getting Rodgers would've been ideal.

Other than the Freddie Fiasco season when's the last time Baker did not play as well or better than expected going back to college?

 

[dtgold88]

It's not about who they traded. It's about going all in on an older, proven Super Bowl winning qb vs. sticking with a younger, unproven qb with upside.

Tampa chose to go all in with the old guy. The Browns are staying the course with the young guy. The Bucs may have had a little easier decision because of Jameis struggling. But the decision was essentially the same one.



I didn't say I thought that, but that is the impression some have of him because of how he regressed after having success in his rookie season. Based on how he has conducted himself since then, he seems to have learned...but until he at least duplicated what he did last year, there will be questions about how he handles success.

It is about who they traded, though (or gave up on). If the Browns QB was Winston it's a no brainer to do all they can to get AR. Because he was the TB QB that is why they went all in on Brady? and all in was signing him. Not trading picks and/or players for him.

No doubt some have that impression of baker and why they are even entertaining this idea...they just don't like Baker. It's pretty much a fact the kid has played as well or better than expected every year but one going back to his OU days (or before them). But they think the year with Freddie is the one that should define him.

Not saying you, as you correctly pointed out with decent coaching he's been good.

 

[trojanfan12]

Right....guy played as well as expected in every year but one going back to Oklahoma, but the year with Freddie is the one we should think is the norm?

I mean, sure, he could regress but seems odd to think the Freddie year is the one we should not discount.

It would seem that the Browns were keeping how he performed under Kitchens in mind as well since they chose to pick up the option instead of just extending him this off-season.

You can't just dismiss it as being "all-Kitchens" when Baker spent more time in the off-season after his rookie year making commercials than working on his game.

To be fair, he seems to have learned his lesson because I can't remember the last time I saw a commercial with Baker in it.

 

[trojanfan12]

with decent coaching he's been good.

This is why I think he will be just fine with the Browns and will be their qb for years to come. He appears to be coachable and that is huge. Especially for a young qb.

It's funny, I'm not even really a Browns fan, but I'm almost as excited to see how the Browns do this year as I am the Seahawks. lol

 

[Wamu]

I could see Phil before Lebron. Phil did win a total of 5 titles with 2 different Lakers teams (Kobe being the common denominator).

To really do it any justice, you'd basically have to pick the 5 most important per era.

Along with the ones you named...what about Jack Kent Cooke. Without him, they might never have come to LA and the Forum doesn't get built.

Then there's Jeanie herself. She saved the Lakers from her brother.

I liked that Lakers better when Jimmy was running things. And JKC, good call. Forgot about him.

 

[Wamu]

Pics?

No pics and the article didn't say who she was. I'm hoping she's a Harbaugh. That would be hilarious.

 

[trojanfan12]

I liked that Lakers better when Jimmy was running things.

This is my shocked face.

And JKC, good call. Forgot about him.

lol

Most do. I forgot about him until I started giving some thought to that question.

She also didn't mention Chick Hearn. He may be as or more responsible for the Lakers gaining an early foothold in LA as anyone.

 

[Wamu]

...or Baker regresses again. He's not exactly the most consistent QB out there.

Really, this all moot anyway. We don't even know if Rodgers would want a trade to the Browns. It's too bad he didn't push this button earlier when the Rams inquired about his availability. I'm happy with Stafford, but getting Rodgers would've been ideal.

He had a good rookie season.

He sucked in Freddie's offense.

And showed potential last year in Stephanski's offense.


@dtgold88

Do I got this right? In Mayfield's first three season's he's had 4 different coaches (Hue, Williams, Freddie & Stephanski) & 4 different systems. Remember the HC's. But really don't remember the OC's.