Dak Watch Thread...

[L.T. Fan]

Criticism #7 is what it all boils down to for me. All the upfront stats gave the ingication that Prescott wasn’t a barn burner in the league at least that’s what the author presented it. Criticism 7 was compelling that winning teams gave him trouble probably because their defenses pressured him and got him off his game. I see it a little different from part of the conclusions made by the writer.

Dak is a very good QB prospect and is improving. He may be in the top 10 and that’s probably a given but I cannot see him in the top 5 yet and that’s where he thinks he is. Again the compelling part is how he performs against winning teams.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Criticism 7 speaks more to the struggles of our team against good teams. Garrett has never been a good big game coach. He can't out scheme anyone and that has always been his problem. Its why we haven't won in the playoffs going even back into the Romo days.

 

[L.T. Fan]

Criticism 7 speaks more to the struggles of our team against good teams. Garrett has never been a good big game coach. He can't out scheme anyone and that has always been his problem. Its why we haven't won in the playoffs going even back into the Romo days.

So it was “what’s his name” fault that Dak couldn’t perform as well against winning teams. Yet it was the same coach that gave Dak a high offense set of stats in the league. Is that what you are saying?

 

[Cowboysrock55]

So it was “what’s his name” fault that Dak couldn’t perform as well against winning teams. Yet it was the same coach that gave Dak a high offense set of stats in the league. Is that what you are saying?

Daks stats weren't that bad against winning teams either when you read number 7 as posted. Which tells you it was more a team failure than anything. And yes when you're just that much more talented than your opponent coaching doesn't matter as much. But when the talent is close and the coach on the other side is one of the best in the NFL, that's going to make the difference most of the time.

 

[Smitty]

I don't think it's any stretch to call Dak a borderline top-10 QB which the stats this guy cites bears out.

And in that vein I don't think he deserves to be the highest paid player in history, sorry.

 

[Genghis Khan]

I don't think it's any stretch to call Dak a borderline top-10 QB which the stats this guy cites bears out.

And in that vein I don't think he deserves to be the highest paid player in history, sorry.

I agree but the problem is, what's the alternative?

The odds are pretty high that Dak, even if he is the highest paid QB, gives you a better chance at winning than does Dalton or Newton or a 1st round pick.

And in a year or less, Dak wouldn't be the highest paid QB anymore. Mahomes will certainly top it, and probably Watson will also (in addition to the fact that I don't think Dak will top Wilson in AAV).

 

[Smitty]

I agree but the problem is, what's the alternative?

The odds are pretty high that Dak, even if he is the highest paid QB, gives you a better chance at winning than does Dalton or Newton or a 1st round pick.

And in a year or less, Dak wouldn't be the highest paid QB anymore. Mahomes will certainly top it, and probably Watson will also (in addition to the fact that I don't think Dak will top Wilson in AAV).

The alternative is to stop allowing yourself to be lied to about this shit wherein it's apparently taboo to draft QBs high when you already have a "starter," of Prescott's level.

I'd explore the market for sure. Obviously if the offer isn't there you can't pull the trigger but if I can get multiple firsts+ it's an offer worth considering. I dispute the notion that he cannot be replaced. Even if the replacement isn't QUITE as good, remember you are getting him for a tenth the cost for the next 4-5 years if it's a draft pick.

Moving forward, the team has to stop being so god damned afraid of competition at the QB spot. When Brady Quinn is the BPA despite having a 30 year old Romo, you still should consider taking him.

Hopefully with McCarthy here they've learned something and so they won't be held hostage like this in the future.

...

Regarding the "in a year he won't be the highest paid anymore," argument, that logic is faulty. No one remains the highest paid ever, for forever. Everyone is eventually surpassed. The point is, even as a record-breaking contract signed right now declines over the years in it's ranking, it doesn't make it any better of a deal. If we signed him to be the 10th highest paid player in history, that deal also declines in rank over time. That deal is the much better value, not the one that makes him the highest paid player ever.

 

[data]

Say no contract extension is signed and now we're on franchise tag. If Dak holds out and doesn't play, is he unrestricted free agent next season?

 

[Cotton]

Say no contract extension is signed and now we're on franchise tag. If Dak holds out and doesn't play, is he unrestricted free agent next season?

Yes.

 

[Rev]

1.
I'm not getting rid of Dak unless there is a definite upgrade

 

[Smitty]

1.
I'm not getting rid of Dak unless there is a definite upgrade

You'll notice I specifically said, "then let's not let ourselves get held hostage anymore and start drafting replacements." So yeah, I agree more or less. Sick burn attempt, though.

What you'll also notice is that I didn't say "Let's just dump Dak and then worry about his replacement later, maybe we'll get someone in the draft, maybe we won't." Getting two first round picks (maybe plus some) definitely gets you the ammo to get into the top 10 or so and probably draft a QB as well, which in that range is gonna be a guy you feel very good about that can be a top QB.

Unfortunately the sheer quality isn't the only factor when deciding about players - since there is a salary cap. Sometimes having a lesser but cheaper player is actually better, the same does not apply with coaches.

 

[NoDak]

 

[deadrise]

There's eight or ten good QBs in the league right now. Is Dak among them? If he is, then the team needs to get down on its knees and thank the QB gods and pay him, knowing that in two or three years his contract will seem like a bargain.

Eight or ten good QBs in the NFL. It's not like there are prospects just waiting out there. Most of the QB draft picks turn out to suck.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Getting two first round picks (maybe plus some) definitely gets you the ammo to get into the top 10 or so and probably draft a QB as well, which in that range is gonna be a guy you feel very good about that can be a top QB.

So the term "QB that you feel good about" is scary. You've already got a QB that you feel better than just good about. And on top of that the QB you get in the first round has at least what a 50% chance of being a bust? Look through the list of first round QBs since say 2000. There are far more guys that you don't want leading your team than guys that you do want leading your team. For every Watson and Mahomes there are more Joey Harrington's, Jameis Winton's, Marcus Mariota's and Jay Cutlers.

And no two first round picks probably aren't getting you Lawrence.

 

[NoDak]

And no two first round picks probably aren't getting you Lawrence.

Don't need Lawrence. Think... Trey Lance.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Don't need Lawrence. Think... Trey Lance.

Lets just hope he is better than that Gingerturd Wentz...

 

[NoDak]

Lets just hope he is better than that Gingerturd Wentz...

Not sure what Wentz has to do with Lance, but ok.

Also, this sounds like we should hope that Wentz is better than he is. Why. He's in philly now. I hope he sucks hard.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Not sure what Wentz has to do with Lance, but ok.

Also, this sounds like we should hope that Wentz is better than he is. Why. He's in philly now. I hope he sucks hard.

They both went to the same school that you love? Well one still goes there.

 

[NoDak]

They both went to the same school that you love? Well one still goes there.

Carson Wentz died to me the instant he was drafted by the eagles. I wish him nothing but failure until he leaves that wretched organization.

 

[Simpleton]

I think Lance has a long way to go as a passer to be a legitimate top 5-10 type prospect. He threw the ball less than 20 times a game last year, ran the ball almost as much as he passed it, and when he did pass it was almost always off of play-action, some sort of RPO-type action or a schemed up throw designed to simplify reads.

NDSU usually has an absolutely dominant running game and defense, and the talent advantage they enjoy over most of their opponents is similar to what you'd see at a place like Alabama in D-1 or FCS or whatever it's called now. So even though he comes from a "small school" he enjoys a massive talent advantage in most of his games, and for the most part he's playing/making throws in very comfortable game situations where he's only passing in controlled, maximized situations. Basically, he isn't carrying the team with his arm, they're almost always playing with a lead and have an excellent defense.

With all that said, last year was his very first as a starter and he could easily make that jump as a passer next year. I just don't think he's there yet and I think he's being hyped based off his stats, which are extremely impressive, and based on the pedigree NDSU has cultivated over the last 10 years, combined of course with the fact that the "draft types" are always looking for that next under the radar QB who bursts onto the stage.