I expect the coaching changes to give Dalton a new lease on his Bengals life

[*PhilHos*]

(01-14-2019, 04:11 PM)Wyche Wrote: You seen the salary differences?

Nope. But, salary aside - I'd be okay with a trade of Dalton for Carr.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(01-14-2019, 04:24 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Nope. But, salary aside - I'd be okay with a trade of Dalton for Carr.

For 11 million more per year?  No thanks.  You're basically paying 11 million more for a poor man's Andy Dalton.

[*PhilHos*]

(01-14-2019, 04:26 PM)Wyche Wrote: For 11 million more per year?  No thanks.  You're basically paying 11 million more for a poor man's Andy Dalton.

Not for 11 million more per year - that's what "salary aside" means - but player vs player. Even though Dalton is the better QB currently, Carr is young enough that he could end up being the better QB. Really, I'd do the trade because of Carr's youth and potential, salaries aside.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(01-14-2019, 04:33 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Not for 11 million more per year - that's what "salary aside" means - but player vs player. Even though Dalton is the better QB currently, Carr is young enough that he could end up being the better QB. Really, I'd do the trade because of Carr's youth and potential, salaries aside.

I get that, and know what salary aside meant......but you said yourself you didn't know the difference in salaries.  I popped that in there to let you know how ridiculous it is....lol.

As to your point, maybe, or it could be one of those one hit wonder deals too.  For me, if I'm drafting a QB this year, and I want Dalton's salary off the books, I'd try to trade him for a pick, and look to sign a guy like Foles, Bridgewater, etc as a stop gap.  You should be able to get one of those on an incentive laden deal that could save some money.  If they reach those incentives, then hey, you've likely had a good season and you have some trade bait, or another solid year to groom a pick further.

[Shake n Blake]

(01-14-2019, 04:33 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Not for 11 million more per year - that's what "salary aside" means - but player vs player. Even though Dalton is the better QB currently, Carr is young enough that he could end up being the better QB. Really, I'd do the trade because of Carr's youth and potential, salaries aside.

Carr will be 28 in March. He's only 3 years younger than Dalton (which is pretty surprising, honestly).

All things (salary and age) equal, I think it's a toss up between the two. I view them similarly.

For all of our ESPN QBR lovers though, Carr's QBR's make Dalton look elite by comparison.

Best to worst:

Dalton

70.0 (2015)
64.6 (2018)
55.1 (2013)
50.8 (2016)
48.5 (2014)
47.7 (2012)
46.9 (2011)
45.7 (2017)

Carr 

54.6 (2016)
51.0 (2017)
49.3 (2018)
41.2 (2015)
40.1 (2014)

Dalton has been better than Carr's best 3 different times. Carr also has 2 years that were worse than Dalton's worst. If you believe QBR. Which apparently some do. 

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

The numbers are pretty close......

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/CarrDe02.htm

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/D/DaltAn00.htm


....but when I look at the game winning drives, 4th qtr comebacks, etc......I roll with 14.  ESPECIALLY considering the salary.

[*PhilHos*]

(01-14-2019, 04:38 PM)Wyche Wrote: I get that, and know what salary aside meant......but you said yourself you didn't know the difference in salaries.  I popped that in there to let you know how ridiculous it is....lol.

Appreciate the knowledge. Yeah, i'm not doing the trade if we are caring about the salaries.

(01-14-2019, 04:38 PM)Wyche Wrote: As to your point, maybe, or it could be one of those one hit wonder deals too.  For me, if I'm drafting a QB this year, and I want Dalton's salary off the books, I'd try to trade him for a pick, and look to sign a guy like Foles, Bridgewater, etc as a stop gap.  You should be able to get one of those on an incentive laden deal that could save some money.  If they reach those incentives, then hey, you've likely had a good season and you have some trade bait, or another solid year to groom a pick further.

I'm not opposed to looking for a replacement (an improvement) for Dalton, but if we're drafting a QB, why trade Dalton? As someone else pointed out somewhere, a stopgap QB is probably going to cost the same as Dalton does now. Doesn't make sense to me.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(01-14-2019, 05:33 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Appreciate the knowledge. Yeah, i'm not doing the trade if we are caring about the salaries.


I'm not opposed to looking for a replacement (an improvement) for Dalton, but if we're drafting a QB, why trade Dalton? As someone else pointed out somewhere, a stopgap QB is probably going to cost the same as Dalton does now. Doesn't make sense to me.

To either get the draft position necessary to get said pick, or for impact FAs to address the holes the team has.

Also, I'm not sure a guy like Bridgewater will cost that.....or you could make it an incentive based contract for another, like I laid out.

There are many scenarios that could play out.

My personal wish would be to keep him for a couple of years and see what he can do with a new staff, and save some coin on his team friendly deal while competing and addressing needs.  Make this a desirable place to come play.  When the QB class is deeper, make some bold move then to get a much better prospect than what this class offers.

[Joelist]

New coaching especially with the HC changing as well as the OC will change a lot of things. For one thing I expect we are going to see a proper emphasis on really fixing the OL now.

And, hopefully, we will see the end of the godawful vanilla schemes that have plagued our offense for a while now. We typically do nothing to confuse defenses or trick them - we would just line up and expect our people to win their battles. Gruden to a lesser extent and to some extent Hue would at least try to use scheme to get people into space with the ball but not since then.

[Sled21]

Roll with Andy for 2 more year, then trade up and draft the hippy from Clemson.....

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(01-15-2019, 09:28 AM)Sled21 Wrote: Roll with Andy for 2 more year, then trade up and draft the hippy from Clemson.....

This is EXACTLY what I'd like to see them do. :andy:

[HuDey]

(01-15-2019, 09:28 AM)Sled21 Wrote: Roll with Andy for 2 more year, then trade up and draft the hippy from Clemson.....

Or roll with Driskel for 2 more years and not need to trade up to draft the hippie from Clemson.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(01-15-2019, 10:44 AM)HuDey Wrote: Or roll with Driskel for 2 more years and not need to trade up to draft the hippie from Clemson.

Why?  We can do it like the Chiefs did.....you can still be competitive and get upper echelon talent by being creative.  There seems to be a new approach in the FO.  They can make it happen.  Driskel is absolutely terrible.  Comparatively speaking, Dalton is cheap.

[*bengalfan74*]

(01-15-2019, 10:33 AM)Wyche Wrote: This is EXACTLY what I'd like to see them do. :andy:

Me three  :andy:

[HuDey]

(01-15-2019, 10:50 AM)WychesWarrior Wrote: Why?  We can do it like the Chiefs did.....you can still be competitive and get upper echelon talent by being creative.  There seems to be a new approach in the FO.  They can make it happen.  Driskel is absolutely terrible.  Comparatively speaking, Dalton is cheap.

Agreed on Driskel. Just saying we would be in good position to draft the kid who looks like the elder Hanson brother if we trotted Driskel out there.
I don’t really want to watch 2 years of Driskel, but at the same time I don’t believe that a culture change can happen with Dalton still here.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(01-15-2019, 11:50 AM)HuDey Wrote: Agreed on Driskel. Just saying we would be in good position to draft the kid who looks like the elder Hanson brother if we trotted Driskel out there.
I don’t really want to watch 2 years of Driskel, but at the same time I don’t believe that a culture change can happen with Dalton still here.

If we really wanted to tank for Trevor we would have hired Hue lol

[BengalChris]

(01-15-2019, 10:44 AM)HuDey Wrote: Or roll with Driskel for 2 more years and not need to trade up to draft the hippie from Clemson.

We want to get away from the culture of losing is acceptable.

[The Real Deal]

(01-15-2019, 11:50 AM)HuDey Wrote: Agreed on Driskel. Just saying we would be in good position to draft the kid who looks like the elder Hanson brother if we trotted Driskel out there.
I don’t really want to watch 2 years of Driskel, but at the same time I don’t believe that a culture change can happen with Dalton still here.

Changing all the important coaching pieces will force a culture change in itself. The only question will be if Andy takes to and can thrive in the new culture that is to come. And this is all assuming that Andy is even the new staffs guy. If not there could be some huge changes still on the horizon.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(01-15-2019, 11:50 AM)HuDey Wrote: Agreed on Driskel. Just saying we would be in good position to draft the kid who looks like the elder Hanson brother if we trotted Driskel out there.
I don’t really want to watch 2 years of Driskel, but at the same time I don’t believe that a culture change can happen with Dalton still here.

I hear you, that's fair enough.  However, I'd kind of like for the kid to come in here while the team is at least decent...that's just one man's opinion there.

(01-15-2019, 11:52 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: If we really wanted to tank for Trevor we would have hired Hue lol

 .....no doubt!

(01-15-2019, 12:20 PM)BengalChris Wrote: We want to get away from the culture of losing is acceptable.

That's kind of my thoughts.....I think you could trade Dalton and move some pieces around to move up in the draft and get Lawrence.  IDK, maybe move Dalton after next season, I just want our new staff to get off on the right foot.  I really would like to have Trevor Lawrence though....if he continues on this pace.

[sandwedge]

(01-15-2019, 12:35 PM)The Real Deal Wrote: Changing all the important coaching pieces will force a culture change in itself. The only question will be if Andy takes to and can thrive in the new culture that is to come. And this is all assuming that Andy is even the new staffs guy. If not there  could be some huge changes still on the horizon.

I would think Andy would fit great in LA's offensive scheme, if in deed Taylor is our guy and he keeps their system, because that is pretty much what he ran at TCU, if I'm not mistaken.