Dolphins Could Have A Chance At Getting Haskins | Page 5 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Dolphins Could Have A Chance At Getting Haskins

Agree with most of this, but Haskins throws with great touch, and he's natural at varying his trajectory. When you factor in his accuracy and intelligence, you get a QB who can help you win games. You just need a high-quality OL and a smart OC. Because of the importance of the position, and because there are only so many QB's who can help you win games, that's still worth a 1st to me.

I also disagree that Mahomes was a notch above Watson. Mahomes landed in the best situation a 1st RD QB had seen in a decade plus. He capitalized in a big way. Credit to him. Watson landed in a terrible situation, where no QB before him looked even decent. Then they traded away his only decent Offensive Lineman, who happened to play LT. If Andy Reid is a 9 or 10 as a playcaller, O'Brien is a 2 or 3. Despite all that, he posted one of the highest completion percentages above expectation in the NFL last season.
Lots to like about Haskins and I do think he'd be a perfect fit in a NE, precision-type offense. If that's what Miami is going to run, Haskins is higher for me. That said, I don't think he gets past the NYG. He may even go #4 to Oakland or #5 to TB.

I think Miami ends up with a mid-rounder like a Finley or CK's guy Easton Stick.
 
If experience is the knock on Haskins put his number against what we currently have on our roster.

If he sucks TUA will be ours for the tanking. I meant taking.
 
I like Haskins a lot. I was hyping him up mid season, and in SOME WAYS (key right there) I think he's more ready for the NFL than Murray is. While it is understandable to be concerned by the system he came from, you cannot look past how he completely changed how Urban Meyer called offense.

Now the biggest question for Haskins is his ability to improvise. There were times this year where it looked like he absolutely refused to run when it was there. While Haskins obviously isn't fast when he did decide to move he was effective. But the only reason he started to move was Urban and Day started to take him out in the redzone and put Tate Marshall in.

In short the question with Murray is can he deal with pressure and how much of the issue is experience or how much is truly something he cannot do. I personally an more than happy to take a shot on Haskins. His throwing ability is something I admire
Finally someone who is warm on Haskins.

I soured on Murray when reports came out that he is "lazy" (unwilling to put in the work in the QB room) and ...well....not very bright (problems understanding complex defensive schemes). I think whoever drafts him will be very unhappy in the long run.
 
Ideal fit for the system O'Shea wants to run. Jake Fromm is my top choice for 2020.

Disclaimer: I'm not one of these guys watching 100s of hours tape playing talent evaluator but

Fromm just "looks like" a PRO QB and at least for now I'd be very happy if the kid was on our roster!

Beyond that my instinct tells me the best PRO QB is usually NOT the most typed college kid.
I'd keep that in mind for this draft and 2020.

Last, I don't see us drafting a QB in '19 in the top end of the draft. Just don't see the value there
and I'm totally down on the fact Grier is all about value and he's going to trust the process and
not force picks...
 
Haskins only make sense to me:

1. If he's there at 13.
2. If Miami sits him a year.
3. If Miami is still willing to draft a QB in the Top 5 (preferably at 1) in 2020.

Haskins' combination of inexperience and limited athleticism point to a slow start in the NFL without even considering the situation in Miami.

He does enough good things to say that he has the potential to develop into a quality QB, but he has enough limiting factors that you should still look for better options. Back in January, when everyone was sure Arizona would draft Bosa or Williams or trade back, I said they should draft Murray. Haskins is in the same tier as Rosen, and Tua figures to be in the same tier as Murray. There's a big difference between a 1st RD QB and a Top 10 QB.
I don’t think you can allocate a #13 pick on Haskins if you don’t believe he is you QB of future. This relates to your #3 pt above. Poor use of the asset IMO. If you don’t believe he is your guy, trade down to build OL to protect your 2020 QB or take BPA.
It’s a 2-3 year rebuild.
We don’t have to take a QB 2019.
 
Haskins is the only guy that would get me to give up on the tank for 2020 plan. It's a risk either way. Either he sucks or get thrown into the wolves or we suck all year and Tua gets hurt or we win too many games. Tua, Herbert, and Fromm could all disappoint as well.

If you truly feel Haskins is your guy and you love him as a prospect, you pull the trigger. If you have doubts, don't bother. My point is no matter what we do there's major risk.
 
eh, I don't think he's a game changer

I'd rather draft a top 2020 qb than roll the dice on haskins develophing.

Tua, Fromm, Love, Herbert

4 better options
What’s your basis? Popular opinion? Genuinely curious
 
I've got a couple questions for you if you dont mind...

1) How likely is it that Haskins is the best player available(regardless of position) in range 10-13?
2) Are Haskins and Rosen close enough in terms of talent that you'd consider passing on Haskins at 13 if you could get Rosen for a 2nd?


I will answer. The answers are:


How likely is it that Haskins is the best player available(regardless of position) in range 10-13?

Yes, Haskins is the best player at 13. Haskins is a #1 overall player in this draft and any draft! That is because Haskins is an elite quarterback. He is not the only elite quarterback in this draft. Every elite quarterback is a #1 overall, better than all other prospects.

The reason for that is the purpose of the game, winning, something Chris Grier knows nothing about -- the guy who wants to tank, who fails on his duties, who cannot draft a QB, who is losing culture leader, who does not get it.

To win, you have to roll on offense, have an efficient consistent offense, and to do that, you need an efficient consistent quarterback. Cannot do it without that.

And to win you need to stop the opponent, have a defense that gives the ball to your efficient and consistent offense. That's why an elite DC is required. He will get it done.

That's why in a rebuild, the first things are QB, and the DC! And you do everything and anything to get it done.



Are Haskins and Rosen close enough in terms of talent that you'd consider passing on Haskins at 13 if you could get Rosen for a 2nd?

No, Rosen and Haskins are not close. Rosen is undraftable, and Haskins is a #1 overall elite quarterback type.

There is an abyss between elite-quarterback prospects and the second tier prospects. An abyss of 7 rounds.

Rosen is not an efficient consistent quarterback, he is not elite, he does not check the boxes, and in the NFL nobody needs him! Nobody needs a bad quarterback. Because we want to win, and for that we need an efficient consistent quarterback, an elite quarterback. And that is Haskins. There is an abyss between the two.

Haskins fulfills the critical role of the whole point of playing, which is winning. Rosen does not, Rosen's role is to fk around, which is nowhere near winning. It's a complete miss.



Extra: How do you get an elite quarterback?

You either draft a phenom or you train them for years. Nobody wants to waste year. You only train bad quarterbacks if you must. You want to draft the phenom, at all cost, if you can, if one is available.

However, good colleges like Alabama and Ohio State for example, train quarterbacks for a couple of year, to play in their system, to throw their routes, to execute their reads. And when they monitor them on whether they are ready, whether they are consistent, efficient, leaders, competitors, and they pick the best one to start. Or, if they recruit a phenom, who is better out of the gate, than that guy starts.

Same thing in the NFL. You draft a phenom, always, and you should always be training backups. Rosen can be a backup. Haskins is a phenom. Quarterbacks are graded on performance, competitiveness, leadership. That's how you know.


Performance: Stats, completion percentage, TDs, INTs, Sacks, yards, big arm, prototype frame, throws all over the field, and all kinds of routes, from the pocket and outside the pocket, athleticism, pocket movement, scrambling, rushing, four minute offense, two minute offense.

Competitiveness: Wins, Close scores in losses, third down situations, come backs, drives off turnovers, fourth down conversions.

Leadership: all about football, is on time, studies and has gained knowledge and experience, trains, comes early leaves late, takes charge, is responsible, his head is on the chopping block when things go wrong -- meaning he carries the team.

In the end, all this can be summed up in the STATS except arm, frame, athleticism which is FILM. The mantra is do your job and that is contained in the final stats and film.

Rosen is nowhere near in performance, competitiveness, leadership. He does nto fulfill the point of playing football.

If you listen to Haskins interviews, you will hear that he needed to become a better leader this, since he was a backup previously. And he did that. Competitiveness and Performance were never an issue. He is addressing the red flag of leadership, he was one year starter.

If you listen to Lock, he talks about turmoil of coaches at Missouri. He is addressing a red flag of consistency and efficiency, he did not the benefit to train in one system over his career.

Nonetheless, the three quarterbacks, Murray, Haskins, Lock, are elite. Rosen is not. Rosen even after three years of starting did not achieve the level of performance, competitiveness, leadership the other to have.
The difference is an abyss. Nick Mullens and Jake Rudock are better than Rosen. Nobody needs a Rosen. Teams needs phenoms.
 
Last edited:
I've got a couple questions for you if you dont mind...

1) How likely is it that Haskins is the best player available(regardless of position) in range 10-13?
2) Are Haskins and Rosen close enough in terms of talent that you'd consider passing on Haskins at 13 if you could get Rosen for a 2nd?

Good questions. The last couple of years, I've separated QB's altogether. The position is so much more valuable than any other position that I can't find a sensible way to say that Haskins is player 12 and Lindstrom is player 13 - for example. If Haskins is put in a good situation, I think he'd have a bigger impact than any other player at 13. I don't see that situation being good enough in Miami in 2019, though, and I do think Haskins is likely to take his lumps early regardless of the situation.

Question 2 is tough, because I prefer Haskins to Rosen even though they're in the same tier, and I think there's more pressure to start Rosen if you trade for him, because he'll be going into his 2nd season. I can see arguments for each. Obviously, you'd rather the 1st RD pick.
 
Love Haskins as well. I just think there are too many teams picking ahead of Miami that need quarterbacks. Starting with Arizona, then the Raiders, Tampa Bay, NY Giants, Denver. I could see Jon Gruden taking Haskins at #4. We know how much he loves quarterbacks and he must know you can only get so far with Derek Carr type qb's.

Or teams currently below Miami moving up
 
Back
Top Bottom