(04-16-2017, 04:34 PM)Marlon23 Wrote: Andy Dalton might be getting a little heavy and can't seem to keep in football shape during the off season.  Or in the parameters.  He might been eating and drinking a bit to heavily.  Perhaps as of February he has added an extra 2 and half inches of love handles which are protruding over his belt loops.

(04-16-2017, 08:40 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: That title may mislead folks, and that was not my intention, but I was trying to understand why the trade had not happened at this point.  The answer I came up with was:  Why should it?

I mean, why make the trade today without knowing of the value of pick #33 for the Bengals?  Also, why would the Jets or someone (Texans?) offer a pick without knowing what QB they will have a shot at in the 2nd round or if they can trade back in the first to get a Kizer or Mahonnes.  

What I am hoping for (for more reasons than just an AJM trade) is that there is a run on QBs in Rd 1.  No one saw Ponder, Gabbert, and Locker going as early as they did in Dalton's draft class.  Teams will talk themselves in to a QB.  Then, if the Browns are left without a QB.  Say, SF surprises and takes Trubisky, and the Browns wait and another team takes Watson, that #33 pick might be offered for AJM.

My hope would be a player that can compete at LT, but could also be a very good prospect at Guard, would be there target at #33.  The only two players I can think of that fit that prospect are Forrest Lamp and Cam Robinson.  Most see Lamp as a guard anyways, but he has a lot of LT experience and he actually held up very well against Alabama's defensive talent.  

The more I think about it, the more I believe the Bengals are better off waiting with AJM until draft day and see what happens elsewhere.  His value could actually go up.

(04-17-2017, 01:46 AM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: It also comes down to value as well. People tend to over-hype McCarron around here, but you have to think about it this way.

If you're the Browns, would you rather draft Mahomes, Tribusky, Watson, Webb, Kizer; or trade a pick for AJ McCarron who has one year left?
Same with the other QB needy teams, which actually aren't as many as people believe.

Browns need a QB, 49ers need a QB, Texans need a QB, Jets may need a QB (no idea what they want to do), Chargers and Cardinals need a QB for the future. Sure, there's other wildcards, but there's no real desperation at QB this year.
Plus, if you miss out on a QB, you still have players like Cutler and Kaepernick who are free agents.

I honestly don't see McCarron going anywhere this year. I'd like to trade him, but I honestly don't think it'll happen.

(04-17-2017, 02:14 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: No doubt it comes down to value on behalf of both teams.
Acquiring team - is AJM their 2017 starting QB and possible franchise QB?

Bengals - Who do we replace a solid back up with and how much will he cost us to have a guy we know can step in and win if AD goes down.

I know most fans don't care about economics and think that is a MB only issue, but with cap constraints to me it is huge to have a Back up making only 700 K a year or so as a 3 million dollar back up means one or 2 better quality back ups at other positions

(04-17-2017, 06:29 AM)BigSeph Wrote: The Bengals haven't traded AJM because the Bengals don't want to trade AJM.

There's not a better backup QB in the NFL.  They aren't paying him much.  They also don't have to play against him if he's on the squad.

There is literally zero reason to trade a cheap, reliable backup with starting NFL QB potential when you're the team that owns his rights.  The only reason to trade him would be if you were offered a package that would result in at least one instant starter and multiple other potential starters.  AJM's not going to see the field unless there's an injury, so he's not going to help unless something bad happens.  Starters on either side of the ball would help no matter what.

So until the Bengals get an offer that provides them with a player who can help on every play on either side of the ball and an extra pick to attempt to replace what AJM was for the team, they have zero motivation or reason to move him.

(04-16-2017, 08:40 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: That title may mislead folks, and that was not my intention, but I was trying to understand why the trade had not happened at this point.  The answer I came up with was:  Why should it?

I mean, why make the trade today without knowing of the value of pick #33 for the Bengals?  Also, why would the Jets or someone (Texans?) offer a pick without knowing what QB they will have a shot at in the 2nd round or if they can trade back in the first to get a Kizer or Mahonnes.  

What I am hoping for (for more reasons than just an AJM trade) is that there is a run on QBs in Rd 1.  No one saw Ponder, Gabbert, and Locker going as early as they did in Dalton's draft class.  Teams will talk themselves in to a QB.  Then, if the Browns are left without a QB.  Say, SF surprises and takes Trubisky, and the Browns wait and another team takes Watson, that #33 pick might be offered for AJM.

My hope would be a player that can compete at LT, but could also be a very good prospect at Guard, would be there target at #33.  The only two players I can think of that fit that prospect are Forrest Lamp and Cam Robinson.  Most see Lamp as a guard anyways, but he has a lot of LT experience and he actually held up very well against Alabama's defensive talent.  

The more I think about it, the more I believe the Bengals are better off waiting with AJM until draft day and see what happens elsewhere.  His value could actually go up.

(04-17-2017, 06:29 AM)BigSeph Wrote: The Bengals haven't traded AJM because the Bengals don't want to trade AJM.

There's not a better backup QB in the NFL. They aren't paying him much. They also don't have to play against him if he's on the squad.

There is literally zero reason to trade a cheap, reliable backup with starting NFL QB potential when you're the team that owns his rights. The only reason to trade him would be if you were offered a package that would result in at least one instant starter and multiple other potential starters. AJM's not going to see the field unless there's an injury, so he's not going to help unless something bad happens. Starters on either side of the ball would help no matter what.

So until the Bengals get an offer that provides them with a player who can help on every play on either side of the ball and an extra pick to attempt to replace what AJM was for the team, they have zero motivation or reason to move him.

(04-17-2017, 08:19 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: The reason I offered is a potential STARTING LT prospect would be there at #33.  If that happened, do you think the Bengals would cling to McCarron over attempting to trade him for that pick?  When they kept Driscoll for the entire 2016 on the roster?  I would say the odds of Lamp or Robinson being there (Garcia?) are long, but my point was that instead of trading him now for whatever player is best at #33, if one of the LT prospects slides to that spot I would certainly be calling the Browns.

You can say you don't think the Bengals would do that, but would you?

(04-16-2017, 08:40 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: That title may mislead folks, and that was not my intention, but I was trying to understand why the trade had not happened at this point.  The answer I came up with was:  Why should it?

I mean, why make the trade today without knowing of the value of pick #33 for the Bengals?  Also, why would the Jets or someone (Texans?) offer a pick without knowing what QB they will have a shot at in the 2nd round or if they can trade back in the first to get a Kizer or Mahonnes.  

What I am hoping for (for more reasons than just an AJM trade) is that there is a run on QBs in Rd 1.  No one saw Ponder, Gabbert, and Locker going as early as they did in Dalton's draft class.  Teams will talk themselves in to a QB.  Then, if the Browns are left without a QB.  Say, SF surprises and takes Trubisky, and the Browns wait and another team takes Watson, that #33 pick might be offered for AJM.

My hope would be a player that can compete at LT, but could also be a very good prospect at Guard, would be there target at #33.  The only two players I can think of that fit that prospect are Forrest Lamp and Cam Robinson.  Most see Lamp as a guard anyways, but he has a lot of LT experience and he actually held up very well against Alabama's defensive talent.  

The more I think about it, the more I believe the Bengals are better off waiting with AJM until draft day and see what happens elsewhere.  His value could actually go up.

(04-16-2017, 05:05 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Too many tuna on rye sandwiches.

(04-17-2017, 01:46 AM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: It also comes down to value as well. People tend to over-hype McCarron around here, but you have to think about it this way.

If you're the Browns, would you rather draft Mahomes, Tribusky, Watson, Webb, Kizer; or trade a pick for AJ McCarron who has one year left?
Same with the other QB needy teams, which actually aren't as many as people believe.

Browns need a QB, 49ers need a QB, Texans need a QB, Jets may need a QB (no idea what they want to do), Chargers and Cardinals need a QB for the future. Sure, there's other wildcards, but there's no real desperation at QB this year.
Plus, if you miss out on a QB, you still have players like Cutler and Kaepernick who are free agents.

I honestly don't see McCarron going anywhere this year. I'd like to trade him, but I honestly don't think it'll happen.

(04-17-2017, 06:29 AM)BigSeph Wrote: The Bengals haven't traded AJM because the Bengals don't want to trade AJM.

There's not a better backup QB in the NFL.  They aren't paying him much.  They also don't have to play against him if he's on the squad.

There is literally zero reason to trade a cheap, reliable backup with starting NFL QB potential when you're the team that owns his rights.  The only reason to trade him would be if you were offered a package that would result in at least one instant starter and multiple other potential starters.  AJM's not going to see the field unless there's an injury, so he's not going to help unless something bad happens.  Starters on either side of the ball would help no matter what.

So until the Bengals get an offer that provides them with a player who can help on every play on either side of the ball and an extra pick to attempt to replace what AJM was for the team, they have zero motivation or reason to move him.

(04-16-2017, 08:40 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: That title may mislead folks, and that was not my intention, but I was trying to understand why the trade had not happened at this point.  The answer I came up with was:  Why should it?

I mean, why make the trade today without knowing of the value of pick #33 for the Bengals?  Also, why would the Jets or someone (Texans?) offer a pick without knowing what QB they will have a shot at in the 2nd round or if they can trade back in the first to get a Kizer or Mahonnes.  

What I am hoping for (for more reasons than just an AJM trade) is that there is a run on QBs in Rd 1.  No one saw Ponder, Gabbert, and Locker going as early as they did in Dalton's draft class.  Teams will talk themselves in to a QB.  Then, if the Browns are left without a QB.  Say, SF surprises and takes Trubisky, and the Browns wait and another team takes Watson, that #33 pick might be offered for AJM.

My hope would be a player that can compete at LT, but could also be a very good prospect at Guard, would be there target at #33.  The only two players I can think of that fit that prospect are Forrest Lamp and Cam Robinson.  Most see Lamp as a guard anyways, but he has a lot of LT experience and he actually held up very well against Alabama's defensive talent.  

The more I think about it, the more I believe the Bengals are better off waiting with AJM until draft day and see what happens elsewhere.  His value could actually go up.

I know i sound like a broken record.

(04-18-2017, 02:01 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: If one of the 10 or so teams in need of a QB felt that McCarron were a viable option, they would've offered up such a pick or "package" last year. Or maybe even this year. The Bengals don't need an extra "throw in" type of pick to replace McCarron. They already have 11 picks...12 picks if they trade Mac...plus there are some excellent backup options currently available in FA. Either way, if teams believed in Mac as much as you do, he would've been gone a long time ago.

Mike Brown traded Palmer for a late 1st and a 2nd round pick. At the time, it was said that Mike would have to be absolutely floored in order to consider a trade. Now Palmer was a proven franchise QB...so I imagine the price tag on McCarron is substantially less. Say a 2nd rounder would probably get it done. Why has McCarron not even been part of any rumored trades for going on 2 full offseasons? 

Either (a) you think the price tag is substantially higher than a 2nd round pick...which doesn't seem likely, or (b) you think teams aren't willing to cough up a 2nd round pick for a supposedly flawless prospect (you still haven't mentioned a single flaw for Mac). Which is it?