+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-2.html)
+--- Thread: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? (/thread-5553.html)
RE: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? - Who Dey Time - 03-09-2016
![[Image: ted-dibiase-sr.jpg]](http://planetawrestling.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/ted-dibiase-sr.jpg)
Everybody's got a price
RE: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? - leonardfan40 - 03-09-2016
(03-09-2016, 05:59 PM)CageTheBengal Wrote: He did fumble a first round bye though.
Also took the first 3 qtrs of the playoff game off...so he sorta got that bye back
RE: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? - StLucieBengal - 03-09-2016
(03-09-2016, 05:59 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: Highly doubt we hear about all his failures in this respect ever since he turned down 9 draft picks from the Saints in 99 in order to draft Akili. All we hear about is the Carson deal and pissing off Vance last year.
Reggie Nelson trade went well.
Ever since the akili non trade I think he has been ok.
RE: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? - wolfkaosaun - 03-09-2016
Would I want the Bengals to trade McCarron for draft picks? Absolutely.
But the Bengals have McCarron for 2 more years and can put a 1st round tenure on him as a RFA down the line.
However, 2017 is going to be worse for the QB market. Drew Brees, Kirk Cousins, Tyrod Taylor, and Andrew Luck are the 3 best QBs.
Then you got Geno Smith, Mike Glennon, Matt McGloin, Brian Hoyer, Mark Sanchez, etc.
RE: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? - StLucieBengal - 03-09-2016
AJM has a higher value because he has low salary for 2 more years. It actually would be perfect for the Broncos because they can load up on defense.
It would just cost them draft picks.
RE: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? - wolfkaosaun - 03-09-2016
(03-09-2016, 06:12 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: AJM has a higher value because he has low salary for 2 more years. It actually would be perfect for the Broncos because they can load up on defense.
It would just cost them draft picks.
Broncos are currently looking at Kaepernick.
Throw in Bradford too since the Eagles signed Chase Daniels to $20+ million, 3 year deal
RE: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? - Shake n Blake - 03-09-2016
(03-09-2016, 06:14 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: Broncos are currently looking at Kaepernick.
Throw in Bradford too since the Eagles signed Chase Daniels to $20+ million, 3 year deal
6.7 million per for a QB on his 3rd team with 2 career starts?
Yikes.
RE: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? - Bengal Dude - 03-09-2016
(03-09-2016, 06:09 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: Would I want the Bengals to trade McCarron for draft picks? Absolutely.
But the Bengals have McCarron for 2 more years and can put a 1st round tenure on him as a RFA down the line.
However, 2017 is going to be worse for the QB market. Drew Brees, Kirk Cousins, Tyrod Taylor, and Andrew Luck are the 3 best QBs.
Then you got Geno Smith, Mike Glennon, Matt McGloin, Brian Hoyer, Mark Sanchez, etc.
McCarron won't be an RFA. His 4 year rookie contract will be up and he'll be free to go wherever he wants.
RE: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? - StLucieBengal - 03-09-2016
(03-09-2016, 06:14 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: Broncos are currently looking at Kaepernick.
Throw in Bradford too since the Eagles signed Chase Daniels to $20+ million, 3 year deal
Kaep isn't better than AJM and costs 14m lol
RE: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? - wolfkaosaun - 03-09-2016
(03-09-2016, 06:16 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: 6.7 million per for a QB on his 3rd team with 2 career starts?
Yikes.
3 years. 21 million. 12 million guaranteed
(03-09-2016, 06:17 PM)Bengal Dude Wrote: McCarron won't be an RFA. His 4 year rookie contract will be up and he'll be free to go wherever he wants.
Right about the RFA. But, these QB free agencies are slim pickings
RE: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? - Shake n Blake - 03-09-2016
(03-09-2016, 06:17 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Kaep isn't better than AJM and costs 14m lol
Do we really know this? Sure, McCarron looked like an ok starter after 5 games.
Kaepernick looked like a super star after playing half a season. What I'm saying is - who knows how McCarron will play over a full season or 2-3 seasons?
RE: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? - wolfkaosaun - 03-09-2016
(03-09-2016, 06:23 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Do we really know this? Sure, McCarron looked like an ok starter after 5 games.
Kaepernick looked like a super star after playing half a season. What I'm saying is - who knows how McCarron will play over a full season or 2-3 seasons?
Because 'bama
RE: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? - BengalChris - 03-09-2016
(03-09-2016, 05:37 PM)CageTheBengal Wrote: Do you think the Bengals should consider trading McCarron? QBs have huge value in this league and if we could swing a good deal I'd be all for it. Broncos just lost Osweiler knowing that they have Super Bowl caliber team if they have a QB. That puts them in a bind they might be willing to overpay to break free of. It's not just Denver though I'm sure there are other teams that have interest in a potential starting QB.
Having a capable backup is nice for a change but considering Andy's lack of injury history (The one time he did get injured having a capable backup wasn't enough anyways.) I don't see the value as high as a team like the Cowboys would.
Why? Why would we trade a valuable backup?
Fluke plays happen and you gotta be prepared. It wasn't the QB who kept the Bengals from winning that playoff game, just saying.
RE: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? - StLucieBengal - 03-09-2016
(03-09-2016, 06:23 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Do we really know this? Sure, McCarron looked like an ok starter after 5 games.
Kaepernick looked like a super star after playing half a season. What I'm saying is - who knows how McCarron will play over a full season or 2-3 seasons?
Would you roll with AJM or Kaep right now with his team?
Kaep looked like a star because people played man coverage and allowed him lanes to run. Once they contained rushed him and played zone he struggled.
RE: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? - Shake n Blake - 03-09-2016
(03-09-2016, 06:33 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Would you roll with AJM or Kaep right now with his team?
With this team? I'd consider Kaep but I'd probably roll (tide) with McCarron...based on taking what we know over the unknown.
I thought we were talking about the Broncos though?
RE: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? - Nate (formerly eliminate08) - 03-09-2016
(03-09-2016, 05:37 PM)CageTheBengal Wrote: Do you think the Bengals should consider trading McCarron? QBs have huge value in this league and if we could swing a good deal I'd be all for it. Broncos just lost Osweiler knowing that they have Super Bowl caliber team if they have a QB. That puts them in a bind they might be willing to overpay to break free of. It's not just Denver though I'm sure there are other teams that have interest in a potential starting QB.
Having a capable backup is nice for a change but considering Andy's lack of injury history (The one time he did get injured having a capable backup wasn't enough anyways.) I don't see the value as high as a team like the Cowboys would.
(03-09-2016, 05:40 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: I almost posted this five minutes ago. If there was any time to trade McCarron right now would be it. Trade him to Denver, and get compensated well.
However I think the FO values a good backup which is understandable.
Yeah, we should trade him while he has interest. He played good last season and this would be good for our
team as a whole and McCarron so he can get a shot at starting. He is not going to start over Dalton here.
RE: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? - ochocincos - 03-09-2016
With the amount of $$ QBs are making now, a team would save a ton since McCarron is on a tiny rookie contract for two more years. A team like the Broncos would have to give more than just the #31 pick now to get McCarron. The Bengals realize how desperate they are to get a QB.
RE: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? - Nate (formerly eliminate08) - 03-09-2016
(03-09-2016, 06:42 PM)ochocincos Wrote: With the amount of $$ QBs are making now, a team would save a ton since McCarron is on a tiny rookie contract for two more years. A team like the Broncos would have to give more than just the #31 pick now to get McCarron. The Bengals realize how desperate they are to get a QB.
No doubt, after seeing what some pretty average QB's are getting it would be a great time to see what we can get
for our backup. Not saying that a good backup QB is worthless either, just seems like this would help us more now
than at any other time with the ridiculousness going on.
RE: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? - StLucieBengal - 03-09-2016
(03-09-2016, 06:35 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: With this team? I'd consider Kaep but I'd probably roll (tide) with McCarron...based on taking what we know over the unknown.
I thought we were talking about the Broncos though?
Denver has a similarly built team. Strong defense and run game. So both have similar qb needs. Accurate passers who are smart. Kaep isn't accurate, lacks touch, and struggles with multiple reads.
RE: Should Trading McCarron Be Considered? - Shake n Blake - 03-09-2016
(03-09-2016, 06:50 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Denver has a similarly built team. Strong defense and run game. So both have similar qb needs. Accurate passers who are smart. Kaep isn't accurate, lacks touch, and struggles with multiple reads.
Kubiak's offense values athletic QB's.
http://broncoswire.usatoday.com/2016/02/27/colin-kaepernick-a-potential-fit-in-denver/
"Imagine Kaepernick running one of Kubiak’s famous bootleg plays. He is a real dual threat, capable of making tough throws as well as outrunning nearly every defender on the field."
One of the reasons why the Broncos stuck with Osweiler last year is that Peyton wasn't capable of running those boots effectively. McCarron has some positive traits, but athleticism isn't one of them. He's a very slow pocket QB. He also has a much weaker arm than Kaep and lacks the postseason success. Kaep is a much better fit for all of these reasons, and that's probably why it looks like Kaep is the guy they'll be targeting.