3 QB’s vs 2

[28222]

Assuming we draft a developmental QB, the question becomes do we keep Hoyer as well or roll with Brady and the rookie and become far more dependent on Brady’s health. Obviously the rookie’s performance in OTA’s and camp will have a lot to do with the final decision. If he is overwhelmed, we keep 3. If he looks like The second coming of Brady, we keep 2. Most likely scenario and more interesting scenario is the in between- the rookie makes a good impression and is not overwhelmed, but predictably isn’t ready to run an NFL offense week1. In this case, I think the Hoyer decision is still an interesting one. If we look back next February with the benefit of hindsight at the following Brady scenarios, here is how I would see it playing out.

A) Brady stays healthy starting all games.
Keep 2... Brady + Rookie. 3rd roster spot can go to a layer of depth/development at another positional group.
B) Brady has minor injury missing a portion of regular season (say 4-6 games) before returning and finishing the season/playoffs.
Keep 3... Brady + Hoyer + rookie. This where Hoyer’s value to the 2018 team is IMO. I think they can win at least half the games Brady misses with him under center depending on opponents, keeping us in line for division and home playoff game(s) including potential bye. I wouldn’t be confident in getting wins with a rookie filling in having to simplify the offense significantly.
C) Brady sustains a season ending injury at some point.
Keep 2... Brady + rookie. I don’t think anyone thinks Hoyer is capable of being a 2018 Nick Foles leading us to a SB. So if we won’t win with him, I think we give the kid some valuable experience and use the roster spot for another positional group.

For me, it comes down to how much the Pats might value scenario B and the belief that Hoyer will outperform the rookie in spot duty mid season. The chance of Tom getting dinged up at 41 and missing some time (and the luxury of not rushing him back) is real. The offense would have to be watered down for the rookie, whereas little changes in design if Hoyer comes in.

All things considered, if we invest a pick on QB and he doesn’t seem overwhelmed in camp, I think I roll the dice and go with 2... Brady + rookie. The added value of the roster spot at one of the other positional groups feels important enough to me with what should be a larger than usual influx of youth between 2018 draft picks + 2018 UDFA + unusual number of 2017 injured youth. I think that roster position is best spent elsewhere.

 

[Patstopia]

If we draft a QB assuming there is one BB likes, then we will have 3 QBs. There is no way Bill would go with a rookie as a backup.

Lets face it, the media and the sky is falling types are going to turn this draft and preseason into a hell on earth. There is no sense in sending a rookie into the maelstrom of BS that is coming.

 

[28222]

If we draft a QB assuming there is one BB likes, then we will have 3 QBs. There is no way Bill would go with a rookie as a backup.

Lets face it, the media and the sky is falling types are going to turn this draft and preseason into a hell on earth. There is no sense in sending a rookie into the maelstrom of BS that is coming.

He made Jimmy the lone backup his rookie yr IIRC. More risky at Brady’s age for sure,but there are some thin positional groups that could use that roster spot. Will be interesting to see it play out.

 

[mgteich]

I agree.

Even if the rookie could play, I think that it worth keeping Hoyer. If we didn't have Hoyer, it might be an issue. But, having Hoyer, it makes sense to keep him as our 2018 backup.

If we draft a QB assuming there is one BB likes, then we will have 3 QBs. There is no way Bill would go with a rookie as a backup.

Lets face it, the media and the sky is falling types are going to turn this draft and preseason into a hell on earth. There is no sense in sending a rookie into the maelstrom of BS that is coming.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Don’t forget that my nonsensical binky, David Wells, TE, YOUR San Diego State Aztecs, was yet another high school QB.

Emergency QBs FTW!

But Tom has to work on those drops...

 

[Hyped]

I don't even want a rookie QB. Sign a raw guy to the PS and work with him for a year.

I am all in on Brady all the way to the bitter end. I want this team as loaded as possible for Brady. A rookie QB only helps us in 2020 at the earliest, IMO.

I'd rather have Brady blow out a knee and subsequently retire.....and we can draft a QB early like the Colts did when Manning got knocked out for the year.

The price of a 3rd QB is a #6 WR, a #3 TE, #5 CB, or an extra pass rusher.

Yup, BB probably disagrees with me as he has said repeatedly that leaving your team vulnerable to a QB injury is irresponsible...but I don't care. I am OK with Brady or bust....then following a bust...we rebuild.

 

[mgteich]

Yup, the cost of a 3rd QB is a 6th WR.

I've done this research many times each year. I leave it for you as an exercise.

Please list the receptions for the #5 WR and the #6 WR for the last whatever number of years. IMHO, the annual total are instructive.

I don't even want a rookie QB. Sign a raw guy to the PS and work with him for a year.

I am all in on Brady all the way to the bitter end. I want this team as loaded as possible for Brady. A rookie QB only helps us in 2020 at the earliest, IMO.

I'd rather have Brady blow out a knee and subsequently retire.....and we can draft a QB early like the Colts did when Manning got knocked out for the year.

The price of a 3rd QB is a #6 WR, a #3 TE, #5 CB, or an extra pass rusher.

Yup, BB probably disagrees with me as he has said repeatedly that leaving your team vulnerable to a QB injury is irresponsible...but I don't care. I am OK with Brady or bust....then following a bust...we rebuild.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

He made Jimmy the lone backup his rookie yr IIRC. More risky at Brady’s age for sure,but there are some thin positional groups that could use that roster spot. Will be interesting to see it play out.

Another example is when he made Brian Hoyer the lone backup his rookie year.

Hoyer doesn't make much, $915K this year, so unless they need the roster spot, I could see him sticking. And I'm not so sure we will draft a QB this year. I think we should, but BB tends to zig when you expect him to zag.

Interestingly, $1.5M of his $2.805M base salary in 2019 is guaranteed, though I would assume there must be offset language in there so if he gets cut and signed elsewhere, that would alleviate that from our cap.

 

[Hyped]

Yup, the cost of a 3rd QB is a 6th WR.

I've done this research many times each year. I leave it for you as an exercise.

Please list the receptions for the #5 WR and the #6 WR for the last whatever number of years. IMHO, the annual total are instructive.

A #6 WR isn't important in the grand scheme of things. However, the difference for me with QB vs. other positions is that if the QB gets hurt...the season is shot (Philly was a rare exception, ditto 2001 Patriots).

 

[mgteich]

A #6 WR isn't important in the grand scheme of things. However, the difference for me with QB vs. other positions is that if the QB gets hurt...the season is shot (Philly was a rare exception, ditto 2001 Patriots).

First, I recall a season not too long ago when the backup quarterbacks played 4 games, and the season was not shot. I do NOT believe that a season is shot when your QB goes down. Some folks have this philosophy. Others consider the backup QB an important part of every team.

The 3rd QB is no different than a developmental player at any position, other than being more important for the future. IMHO, there is always room for 2-3 developmental players on the 53 who are expected to inactive all season. IMHO, this attitude is critical for developing players.

I will answer separately with regard to the 6th WR who has averaged one reception EVERY OTHER YEAR.

 

[mgteich]

For me, the best use of roster spots is to have FOUR wide receivers on the 53 man roster. I'm OK with 5 if the 5th is active to be a special teamer. We've had Amendola and now Patterson.

THE FIFTH WR
The 5th WR has totaled 47 receptions over the past TEN YEARS. That's a an average of 4.7 a year or an average of ONE catch every 3 or 4 games.

THE SIXTH WR
The 6th WR has a total of 16 receptions over the past 10 years or 1.6 per YEAR. This position is NOT a luxury. It is gross negligence to use a roster spot for a 6th WR.

FOUR WIDE RECEIVERS OR FIVE
If the 5th wide receiver is a special teamer, I can see carrying five. However, the total receptions for the #5 and #6 WR over the last 10 years has been 63 or 6.3 per year. That's not even one reception every 2 games. There were NO SEASONS where the total receptions for the #4 and #5 wide receivers was as much as ONE per game. I suspect that there is a better use of a roster spot than a position that averages one catch every 2-3 games.

AS AN ASIDE - THE FOURTH WR
averages less than one catch per game. All the backups TOTAL an average of 19 catches per season or a bit more than one catch per game.

OPTION 1
I suspect that all we need is FOUR WR's plus a one on the Practice Squad. That's plenty. Of course, we should have lots of WR's during camp and the pre-season. Injuries do happen, and sometimes players don't come back from injuries as fast as we would like.

OPTION 2 (the most likely)
Since our backup receivers are pretty good this year, and one is our KR, then I'm fine with 5 WR's on the 53. We really don't need any backup on the Practice Squad. However, it always a good idea to have one or two to develop for the future: say McCarran and/or anther.
===========
AS AN ASIDE
We could have the same analysis for the 4th TE, a 15th front seven player or whoever we might want to keep instead of the 3rd QB. My BOTTOM LINE is that we often do indeed have a better use for the roster spot than using it for a 3rd QB. However, a 3rd QB does not exactly put huge pressure on roster decisions.

A #6 WR isn't important in the grand scheme of things. However, the difference for me with QB vs. other positions is that if the QB gets hurt...the season is shot (Philly was a rare exception, ditto 2001 Patriots).

 

[PatriotSpy]

If Brady goes down, we're screwed anyways. Hoyer is not going to help us win a championship so might as well go with Brady and a rookie.

 

[supafly]

If Brady goes down, we're screwed anyways. Hoyer is not going to help us win a championship so might as well go with Brady and a rookie.

And what if he goes down and only misses 3-4 games? Then, what? You want a backup QB who knows the system.

Ultimately, it will likely come down to how the new QB looks. Maybe Belichick felt that Garoppolo looked good enough to only have 2 QBs in 2014, or maybe he felt that there weren’t any other decent options. With Hoyer on the roster, I think that changes.

 

[Simpelton]

I think we bring in multiple QBs. One from the draft and probably a potential project or two in th usual round of udfa arms and late picks. Bill isn't going to waste those camp arm slots when he can take a crack at another Kirk Cousins if not a TB12

 

[maineman209]

And what if he goes down and only misses 3-4 games? Then, what? You want a backup QB who knows the system.

Ultimately, it will likely come down to how the new QB looks. Maybe Belichick felt that Garoppolo looked good enough to only have 2 QBs in 2014, or maybe he felt that there weren’t any other decent options. With Hoyer on the roster, I think that changes.

In the 2009 pre-season, it seemed pretty obvious to me that Hoyer had a command presence that Gutierrez and O'Connell did not. While I suppose that the Pats could've tried adding another veteran as a backup, neither Gutierrez nor O'Connell seemed worth keeping on the active roster, so Hoyer probably became Brady's backup somewhat by default.

It's not that I thought that Hoyer was "great" or anything like a long-term Brady successor, but I felt confident that he could keep the team at least competitive in Brady's absence. I never really had as much confidence in Mallett, so it was a bit of a surprise to me that the Pats cut Hoyer and went with Mallett as Brady's sole backup in 2013.

It as significantly different with JG. I saw him in Camp practices his rookie season, and he looked like he could've been an effective NFL starter even then - very good mechanics/footwork, quick/accurate decision-making, accurate throws, calm and cool command presence, etc. So, it wasn't a huge surprise to me when Mallett got traded to the Texans during cutdowns and JG became the sole backup.

For 2018, I think it's somewhat more likely that the Pats keep Hoyer in addition to a rookie, but it could go either way at the end of Camp, I suppose. Assuming, of course that the Pats draft a QB.

 

[Soliel]

If we draft a QB assuming there is one BB likes, then we will have 3 QBs. There is no way Bill would go with a rookie as a backup.

Lets face it, the media and the sky is falling types are going to turn this draft and preseason into a hell on earth. There is no sense in sending a rookie into the maelstrom of BS that is coming.

That rookies in deep trouble no matter what happens

 

[Hyped]

For me, the best use of roster spots is to have FOUR wide receivers on the 53 man roster. I'm OK with 5 if the 5th is active to be a special teamer. We've had Amendola and now Patterson.

THE FIFTH WR
The 5th WR has totaled 47 receptions over the past TEN YEARS. That's a an average of 4.7 a year or an average of ONE catch every 3 or 4 games.

THE SIXTH WR
The 6th WR has a total of 16 receptions over the past 10 years or 1.6 per YEAR. This position is NOT a luxury. It is gross negligence to use a roster spot for a 6th WR.

FOUR WIDE RECEIVERS OR FIVE
If the 5th wide receiver is a special teamer, I can see carrying five. However, the total receptions for the #5 and #6 WR over the last 10 years has been 63 or 6.3 per year. That's not even one reception every 2 games. There were NO SEASONS where the total receptions for the #4 and #5 wide receivers was as much as ONE per game. I suspect that there is a better use of a roster spot than a position that averages one catch every 2-3 games.

AS AN ASIDE - THE FOURTH WR
averages less than one catch per game. All the backups TOTAL an average of 19 catches per season or a bit more than one catch per game.

OPTION 1
I suspect that all we need is FOUR WR's plus a one on the Practice Squad. That's plenty. Of course, we should have lots of WR's during camp and the pre-season. Injuries do happen, and sometimes players don't come back from injuries as fast as we would like.

OPTION 2 (the most likely)
Since our backup receivers are pretty good this year, and one is our KR, then I'm fine with 5 WR's on the 53. We really don't need any backup on the Practice Squad. However, it always a good idea to have one or two to develop for the future: say McCarran and/or anther.
===========
AS AN ASIDE
We could have the same analysis for the 4th TE, a 15th front seven player or whoever we might want to keep instead of the 3rd QB. My BOTTOM LINE is that we often do indeed have a better use for the roster spot than using it for a 3rd QB. However, a 3rd QB does not exactly put huge pressure on roster decisions.

Awesome break down....thanks for posting. Still in the "QB-Going-Down=Season-In-Crapper" camp though. I will agree that a 6th WR is not worth it if it is someone like Britt who is already a proven commodity and you are paying him to take limited reps., but someone like Dorsett is worth it to get in your offensive system with OTA's/Camp...etc....as he has upside. Or someone like Croston who might be an answer at LT at some point.

With QB's...they either have it or they don't, IMO. We have had many backups come and go in NE with only Cassell, Brisset, and Garoppolo playing significant snaps. We spent a 7th, 3rd, and a 2nd....and got a 2nd, Dorsett, and a 2nd in return. For all the others, we only got a 7th for Mallet...nobody else really developed into anything and if they do...we usually trade them after 3-4 seasons. I think Brady has 3 seasons left in the tank...I'd rather not waste a pick on a QB this year and get one next year to be ready in 3 years.

 

[tasmlab]

If Brady goes down, we're screwed anyways. Hoyer is not going to help us win a championship so might as well go with Brady and a rookie.

I agree with this.

Although Hoyer may be currently the 2nd or 3rd best backup in the league, given his experience with actual playing time. Foles probably has to be ranked #1 backup, super bowl MVP and all that.

 

[mgteich]

to be clear, it is the 4th WR who gets the limited reps, 1-2 a game. The 5th and 6th get almost none.

it if it is someone like Britt who is already a proven commodity and you are paying him to take limited reps., but someone like Dorsett is worth it to get in your offensive system with OTA's/Camp...etc....as he has upside. Or someone like Croston who might be an answer at LT at some point.

 

[mgteich]

Awesome break down....thanks for posting. Still in the "QB-Going-Down=Season-In-Crapper" camp though. I will agree that a 6th WR is not worth it if it is someone like Britt who is already a proven commodity and you are paying him to take limited reps., but someone like Dorsett is worth it to get in your offensive system with OTA's/Camp...etc....as he has upside. Or someone like Croston who might be an answer at LT at some point.

With QB's...they either have it or they don't, IMO. We have had many backups come and go in NE with only Cassell, Brisset, and Garoppolo playing significant snaps. We spent a 7th, 3rd, and a 2nd....and got a 2nd, Dorsett, and a 2nd in return. For all the others, we only got a 7th for Mallet...nobody else really developed into anything and if they do...we usually trade them after 3-4 seasons. I think Brady has 3 seasons left in the tank...I'd rather not waste a pick on a QB this year and get one next year to be ready in 3 years.

I guess that our perspective is different. I would celebrate a season where we were competitive even though our QB went down. For me, the job of the GM isn't to win the SB each year/ it just isn't SB or bust. Curiously, when a team has the attitude of preparing for injuries with quality backups, then team can win over 10 game a season for 16 years. And yes, I do think that it important to be able to play Hoyer instead if the rookie. I wouldn't be shocked if Hoyer led us to be 5-3 or even 6-2 for half the season. Would you? And then Brady would go in for the last half, and we would likely make the playoffs. heck, Hoyer could finish the season 10-6 or 11-5 and we might still win the East.

To go back to one of my past comments. I focus on the division first. I think that Hoyer would have a better chance than a rookie of winning the division, if he had to play 4-6 games, or even the whole season.