For real, but I'd put his market value at a 5th, possibly a 4th, or a player whom the other team deems expendable but fits a need for us. Wonder if MMoore would fit in with the Bucs?
Not too familiar with Sims but if they were going to go after an established FA I think they would have by now. If anything it's more likely they will take a young guy they like that gets caught up in the numbers game.
Personally, it might better to get rid of Garrard before Moore. Moore is younger, knows the team and has the respect of the players around him. Sometimes keeping a guy who albeit unlikely to ever be a star is better than trying to get an unknown (draft pick) because its good for the chemistry of the team.
They should keep both Garrard and Moore at least until mid-season when some team may be desperate and overpay for him, and we also have a better handle on where we stand with our quarterbacks.
Suspect they want to see what we have on film first. I recall Truz playing Mike in Cleveland..it was really ugly..as in he made Crowder look like Derrick Brooks in coverage.
Agreed. Although I can't attend training camp, I haven't heard much to give me confidence in any other than our starters at LB. Trusnik has shown nothing except a propensity to commit penalties on ST's.
IMO, I don't believe waiting until the trading deadline before dealing Moore on the assumption that someone will be desperate for a QB is how you want to go about it. Either trade him right before the season or not at all. First, I don't believe anyone is going to be so desperate as to give us any significant value over what we could get for him at the end of the pre-season. He's worth a mid-round pick basically, and if traded near the deadline would need to learn and incorporate himself into a whole new offense. That could take weeks, and quite frankly if you're desperate for a QB at that time your season may be shot anyway. I think you could get the same, if not more, value for him at the end of pre-season if there's a market for his services, and I think most organizations would pay the price to have him integrated into their system sooner and under less immediate pressure. Second, there's also the question of the roster spot. They might be more willing to entertain a trade offer if there's someone they'd like to squeeze on the 53 man roster. If you trade him during the season, can the roster spot you open up be filled with more potential than the one that would have opened up in pre-season? Would any possible difference in trade value compensate for that, especially if we're talking a mid-round pick?
Yeah, if Garrard does win the starter job, but the team still liked Moore into late September though, there's something wrong. If Garrard wins for them, they'll learn to like him.
Sorry, can't agree about someone not possibly overpaying for a player late in the season, it does happen, if a contending team has a real need. I can buy the main reason that we would get rid of Moore early would be due to gaining a roster spot. It won't happen IMO.
But usually that contending team doesn;t try to switch QBs. It's so disruptive to timing, chemistry and the QB has to learn the offense. It a systemic effect on the entire offense's rhythm. That's different than getting a RB or CB if yours goes down and you are in the hunt. Time-wise, if you bring that QB in, you will probably struggle until he gets in sync with your system and players. That could be weeks. Most likely people to do that though would be coaches or GMs on a hotseat to win this season or get canned, OR a team where Moore has experience in their system or their coaches.
It rarely happens, and usually only in the case of a big name player like Carson Palmer. You'd need to show me evidence that middling players like Moore went for much more than they're worth before I buy into that argument.
I have a hard time seeing a team trading for Moore without giving him a contract. And if you're giving Moore a contract, that means you don't have a legitimate QB already on your roster. Any type of trade for Moore would have to be a team like the Cardinals that essentially wants to sign him as a FA, but doesn't want it to get to FA. I don't see a team trading for him because their starter got injured.
I see guys like yourself haughtily declare this, and as far as I am concerned, until he has a chance to prove it either way in actual games, then it is very presumptuous of anyone to declare this as if they are an authority on the matter. You could be right, but it has not really been proven, and excuse me while I'd rather take a wait and see approach.
He has not come close to justifying his draft status. 29 games, 4 starts, 7 sacks, for his 3 seasons.
You may want to check Garrard's fumble totals in recent seasons before declaring him an improvement in this dept.
Not haughtily Mr C, imo if MMoore had been allowed to develop in the style of offense we had last yr he would blossom further as a Qb. I say that stuff with regret tbvh
Yep, his arm looked Pennington like, without the occasional good throw down the hashes. He could be rusty, but he was chucking up some ducks in those 7 throws.
In a league where QBs are important and good ones are hard to come by, why trade an average starter for anything less than 3rd (not that I think we could get for Moore)? What player could we possibly trade him for that's more important than having a capable back-up QB?
He's not going to be our backup for more than a year. I would think he'll be leaving to try and get a starting spot somewhere after this year.
In case anyone needs it: Main Entry: haughty  [haw-tee] Part of Speech: adjective Definition: arrogant Synonyms: assuming, cavalier*, conceited, contemptuous, detached, disdainful, distant, egotistic, egotistical, high, high and mighty, hoity-toity, imperious, indifferent, lofty, on high horse, overbearing, overweening, proud, reserved, scornful, sniffy, snobbish, snooty, snotty, stuck-up, supercilious, superior, uppity Uppity is my favorite.
This. Which is why I'd rather have something to show for it. It *is* a higher risk though, if Garrard gets hurt and Tanny struggles.
Using that logic, then we should try to trade any backup no matter the position, if they are in the final year of their contract.
I hope he doesn't and don't see it happening either. Don't think he is ready to throw in yet. if he did start I think that would be the best scenario to trade Moore.
That's a good one, and I rather like hoity-toity too. Maybe it was too harsh a word, but when someone says something that is an opinion, as if it were a fact, then I guess it raises my hackles a bit.
From what I can gather, very few people here who think we should trade Moore rather than keep him as a backup, believe we could get a 3rd round pick minimum for him. So, when it comes to backups in general, that is a pretty big "If"
My opinion is that Matt Moore is not a fit for the offense. He isn't the ball placement, timing, throw people open type of a quarterback. In fact I think the main reason he is on the team right now is because of the respect he brings in the locker room.
I do not disagree that is a big IF. However if they can get a 3rd for Moore, then hell yea trade him. I think the best they can get is a 5th for him. The only way trading him makes sense is that Garrard looks healthy and Tannehill looks ready. More and more teams are keeping only 2 quarterbacks.
Do you think Moore will re-sign to be a backup here? I don't think that makes sense for him. Surely there will be teams that will give him a better shot at starting.
If I was Arizona I'd trade for him and get rid of Kolb but they did invest a lot in Kolb so they are pretty much married to him until he proves he's worthless. I think Moore would do well in AZ and would certainly outplay Kolb who looks like he can't play anymore. Moore deserves a chance to start somewhere longterm and that just won't be here. I wouldn't expect him to stay around here after this year anyway so it makes sense for him and us to pursue a trade. I think we are looking at a 5th rounder though, there is no way anyone gives us a 3rd rounder for a player that might be cut here if he places 3rd in the Qb race.
May be a moot point if Garrard is seriously hurt. This knee surgery could mean either: If it's bad - 1) Garrard's health is VERY suspect now and Tanny has a real chance to wiun the starting job, or Moore gets it.... and Moore DEF doesn't get traded If it's a proactive knee-cleanup - 2) They intend Garrard to start the season, he needs less work, and it's Moore and Tanny they have questions about. Maybe showcase Moore a little more tonight and get that trade value up or att least assess him better.
Probably not, but we still have this season to play before worrying about next off season, and IMO he makes the team better this season by being on the roster.
In voice of Shirley from Community. "This thread made god mad!" [video=youtube;0I5GzHN_aLI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0I5GzHN_aLI[/video] Just realized I made a pretty vague reference there. So fast forward to 2:52 for the reference ;p
