6 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

Oh I agree his value is diminished due to the fact he only has one year left on that contract and he really hasn’t played a ton since being a first round pick. No one is picking up that 5th year option at this time.

Getting to see him for yourself up close for a full year before having to decide to pick up the option or not might help, which is why your idea of the conditional pick(s) in 2023 makes a lot of sense.  It could even be conditional based on whether or not they retain him for 2023.  4th round pick if they don't.  2nd round pick if they do.    (That would be 5th round value for the 2022 draft if they don't keep him, and 3rd round value for 2022 if they do.). 

1 minute ago, Alphagrand said:

The sarcasm is not lost here, but people do have a notion for some reason that packaging up players will bring a better return; that's really not the case.  

Dillard is a tradeable asset.  LT is a premium position, and he's shown he can be a good NFL LT.  The Eagles already have a potentially dominant LT in Mailata, which makes Dillard expendable.  The real question is whether Dillard has more value in a trade before the draft, or after the draft to a team that missed on a LT and needs to fill a void in exchange for  2023 draft capital.

Hurts should be traded now IMO, while the Eagles still can.  He would carry a 3rd round value if a team views him as a possible starter.  I don't think there's any NFL team who views him as a sure starter (hopefully not the Eagles, anyway).  If you keep Hurts for the 2022 season you're not only punting on the season and hoping to go 9-8 again and maybe make the playoffs, but any trade value Hurts has will be greatly diminished after this season.  This is especially true with QBs because the 2nd contract represents a sizeable raise in pay.  I don't see any team offering anything of value when they know they'll only get one year before having to decide whether to pay $20M+ to a QB with a limited ceiling.

Sanders is another player I would trade right now.  He has market value I'm sure, but he's also a cautionary tale against drafting RB too early.  A 2nd round pick spent on a player who is way too often injured when you need him most.

I feel this is the most likely if Dillard is going to be traded. I'd like for the Eagles to have someone that can replace Dillard as there is very little depth at the tackle spot. If the Eagles take a developmental tackle they would be more comfortable trading him. A team would also need to lose out on a tackle in the draft or suffer some injury on their team like the Bridgewater/Bradford trade.

6 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Getting to see him for yourself up close for a full year before having to decide to pick up the option or not might help, which is why your idea of the conditional pick(s) in 2023 makes a lot of sense.  It could even be conditional based on whether or not they retain him for 2023.  4th round pick if they don't.  2nd round pick if they do.    (That would be 5th round value for the 2022 draft if they don't keep him, and 3rd round value for 2022 if they do.). 

I remember reading that in 2021 the NFL change the rule on the 5th year option. As soon as you exercise it, it is fully guaranteed and you can’t get out of it. I know this year teams had to exercise the 5th year option by May 3rd for 2018 rookie contracts. which i imagine it’s around the same time for 2019 rookie contracts and dillard this upcoming year. I’m actually surprised the NFL didn’t push back that date considering they change the rule that if you exercise that fifth year option it’s fully guaranteed the moment it is exercised. 

12 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

I didn't think Stafford had a good game. Kupp and Donald won it for Rams IMO

He did.  He was having a Sims-like game until OBJ went down.  Made key throws on the final drive.

McVay didn't do him any favors by continuing to run on early downs even though it wasn't working, putting Stafford in obvious passing situations.

Also, IMO, Goff doesn't win this game.

11 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

I didn't think Stafford had a good game. Kupp and Donald won it for Rams IMO

I thought he was good, not great.  Collinsworth was blowing him all game (Collinsworth is garbage, for the folks who still wish to debate this).  He played within what the defense was giving him for the most part, with the exception of his grievous mistake on the end zone INT.  

4 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

I actually think his value is likely a conditional 4th where playing time/starts likely could see it bump up to a 3rd (assuming it’s a 2023 pick). I’d probably do that cause there’s no guarantee they get a comp pick depending on what they do in FA in 2023 or if he gets signed that the formula brings back a 4th. Could be a 5-6 round comp pick. 

We're around the same ballpark for the round. There is the risk of not getting the comp pick depending on what they do in FA. I guess my line of thinking is more around if the Eagles suffer an injury to either tackle, they are screwed without Dillard. Driscoll and Clark is all they have right now for depth. The Eagles need to seriously start thinking about a succession plan for Lane Johnson, I'd like to avoid another Peters situation where he is just there because there is no other choice. I think the stars need to align to get more than a 4th for Dillard.

9 minutes ago, wussbasket said:

I feel this is the most likely if Dillard is going to be traded. I'd like for the Eagles to have someone that can replace Dillard as there is very little depth at the tackle spot. If the Eagles take a developmental tackle they would be more comfortable trading him. A team would also need to lose out on a tackle in the draft or suffer some injury on their team like the Bridgewater/Bradford trade.

I think depending on Dillard's general attitude Howie will want to send him somewhere for a chance to be a starter.  You know his agent has to have told Howie that it's his wish to be moved.  Howie tends to do stuff like that for players.  He won't give him away, though.  

By the way, I wouldn’t have let Vernon Hargreaves on the flight home.

10 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

He did.  He was having a Sims-like game until OBJ went down.  Made key throws on the final drive.

McVay didn't do him any favors by continuing to run on early downs even though it wasn't working, putting Stafford in obvious passing situations.

Also, IMO, Goff doesn't win this game.

Would add i thought the rams oline for much of the playoffs was pretty poor in run blocking. Against the Bucs i expected them to struggle as the Bucs have a great run defense. Michel and Akers combined for 25 carries and 52 yards. So just over 2 yards per carry. Against the niners Michel and Akers combined for 64 yards on 23 carries. So 2.8 yards per carry. Last night Henderson, Michel and Akers Combined for 30 yards on 19 carries which is 1.6 yards per carry. I didn’t think Akers ran well in previous contests but their run blocking against the niners and bengals was not good. They were just getting beat up front in the run game. 

Regarding Dillard, it's similar to Big V.

To other teams, he should be perceived as an average starter at LT.  That has more value than what his role would be on this team as a backup. 

We need to cash in on that arbitrage.

 

1 hour ago, Ipiggles said:

Where I differ from you is the bolded- I cant watch another year of Hurts- it will be very detrimental to the development of our young WR's to keep having Hurts as QB1.  I am ok with a stop gap QB, but it has to be a QB who can atleast throw the ball. 

Being clear....I agree....I'd absolutely hate it, but I am just not sure that Howie will do the right thing.  To dump Hurts means that he and Lurie have to admit their error first.  In that case, we are stuck with him and whatever happens next year just is part of the "suck" that is being an Eagle fan.  There are 100s of reasons that Run Around Guy isn't the long term solution to anything and that makes it tough to watch and stomach more of it.  We may just have to.

20 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

I didn't think Stafford had a good game. Kupp and Donald won it for Rams IMO

Defense wins championships.

As much as people are all over the QBs in the post season, the Bengals do not make it there if their defensive strategy did not change in the second half of the Chiefs game and limit one of the best offenses and arguably the best QB in the league to 3 points. The Rams do not win the Super Bowl if they did not change their strategy right at the end of the first half, which allowed them to go gangbusters on the offensive line.

21 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Getting to see him for yourself up close for a full year before having to decide to pick up the option or not might help, which is why your idea of the conditional pick(s) in 2023 makes a lot of sense.  It could even be conditional based on whether or not they retain him for 2023.  4th round pick if they don't.  2nd round pick if they do.    (That would be 5th round value for the 2022 draft if they don't keep him, and 3rd round value for 2022 if they do.). 

Deadline is May 2nd so can't happen.

2 hours ago, UK Eagle said:

Not at the moment. She is with Rona.

But I wouldn't be surprised if she released the hounds on Meghan once she becomes the Queen.  I can't wait too see how that kicks off

Why the F, in the 21st century does the UK tolerate a monarchy and nobility?  If you can vote out of the EU, why not that?

33 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Actually, no one would want Hurts, the NFL is a passing league and he is not a passer.

There has to be one more Howie out there...somewhere.  Please.

4 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Deadline is May 2nd so can't happen.

Yeah i was surprised when they changed it to the moment you exercisw the 5th year option to make it fully guaranteed that they didn’t move that date. 

I wonder if the best value for Dillard is a 2017 Jernigan type player/trade. A really good player at a position of need whose team is unlikely to re-sign him a year or 2 later. Might be the way to address the WR, S, or LB need without investing a high pick there.

Draft capital wise, I just think a 27-year-old starting LT is worth at least a low 2nd, so if I'm not getting that I want a definite young starter.

3 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Why the F, in the 21st century does the UK tolerate a monarchy and nobility?  If you can vote out of the EU, why not that?

I think the institution will be circling the drain if Chuck and Camilla are King and Queen for any period of time; not even the most ardent of Royal supporters should have any desire to see that come to fruition.

At least with William and Kate they could pretend to have an air of nobility and regalness.  Harry is royally screwed for letting that dreadful Meghan Markle latch onto him.  She is a dreadful person, in every respect.

1 hour ago, NCiggles said:

Gannon seems to have zone coverages that cover zones of grass on the field whereas the Rams and Bengals have zone coverages that understand getting in passing lanes, disrupting routes and making reads difficult.  

Well the lack of speed in the LB corp and secondary and the inability of the DL to get the pressure needed factored heavily into that.  The defense run by both teams had that same defensive approach that Gannon was using against the big play.  He just lacked the horses or experience. 

I know I'm getting a little ahead of myself, but how much better is 2022 Fletcher Cox than Milton Williams?

16 minutes ago, pallidrone said:

Defense wins championships.

As much as people are all over the QBs in the post season, the Bengals do not make it there if their defensive strategy did not change in the second half of the Chiefs game and limit one of the best offenses and arguably the best QB in the league to 3 points. The Rams do not win the Super Bowl if they did not change their strategy right at the end of the first half, which allowed them to go gangbusters on the offensive line.

I can’t believe I’m not hearing more talk about Raheem Morris. He started the game going vanilla, presumably with the idea of switching it up late. His guys completely dominated after the adjustment. HE won the game.

4 minutes ago, Saltpeter said:

I know I'm getting a little ahead of myself, but how much better is 2022 Fletcher Cox than Milton Williams?

Marginally

Great career, but Cox doesn’t have long for midnight green.

3 minutes ago, Saltpeter said:

I know I'm getting a little ahead of myself, but how much better is 2022 Fletcher Cox than Milton Williams?

I love fletcher but he’s no where close to worth the money he’s being paid now. Unfortunately the only way the eagles can move on from Cox is if they trade or cut him post June 1. If they try to cut or trade Cox prior to june 1 it’s 40.9 mil dead money and 25.9 mil against the cap. 

Found this pretty good resource for the draft that has youtube links to different games for prospects:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qVz7D-21Ga1xJkSxfgZADAHTgKgevXIozQmoQ26ZyzM/edit#gid=541445360

1 minute ago, SB52 said:

I can’t believe I’m not hearing more talk about Raheem Morris. He started the game going vanilla, presumably with the idea of switching it up late. His guys completely dominated after the adjustment. HE won the game.

I know. He figured out where the weakness was and made the right adjustment and the Bengals could not counter it.

Defense won this game.