(06-15-2021, 10:44 AM)Race Bannon Wrote: It's not that you tank if Trevor goes down.  But you do have to make some decisions on priorities -- every decision you make affects the dollars spent under the cap, the future draft picks you will have, etc.  Minshew is not a grizzled veteran, he is young quarterback with a future.  Most teams with a #1 pick quarterback will prioritize his development (whatever that means).  They do not prioritize winning a championship in his rookie season.  They want a quarterback that is most compatible with the climate of developing that young #1 pick -- like a veteran that brings stability to the film room or the practice field.  If Minshew has no trade value, it's a moot point.  But if he has trade value, you might prioritize Trevor's development over the idea of winning if he goes down.

(06-15-2021, 01:41 PM)Race Bannon Wrote:

(06-15-2021, 01:22 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: Who are you paraphrasing? 

Not me. 

Please find me a coach that doesn't prioritize winning regardless of who is starting at QB. I'll wait. 

While you're at it - find me a front office that will go with their third choice at back-up QB instead of their second choice because "we aren't prioritizing a championship this season."  

LOL

The LOL was a nice, friendly touch.  It's a joy to converse.

But anyway, to spell out it differently, the competing priorities are not "win championship, not win championship."  The competing priorities are "value at position X, value at position Y."  An NFL roster is a balance between different types of needs.  

If Minshew has no trade value, it's an entirely moot point.  Just keep him.  But if you can strengthen your roster in a different way, by trading him then it becomes interesting.  And finally, when the goals that are competing against each other are "now" and the "future," teams are put in the position of adding that into the mix.

For example, under your logic, the Jags should go hard after Aaron Rodgers.  He is a better quarterback right now than Trevor.  He is the answer to the question "Which quarterback would be a better choice if the goal is to win a championship this season."  But that would be silly, for reasons that you know.

Replies that move the goalposts and put words in my mouth inaccurately often receive such joyful and friendly touches. 

I've quoted your original failed logic so we can loop back to the original point you are convoluting more and more with each reply. 

The first bolded bit paints a picture of two things mutually exclusive from one another. 
They are not. 

The next bit moves to conflate Lawrence's development with Minshew's trade value and assumes a different (but lesser??) QB would somehow benefit him more. 

It's a fail at both turns. 
A - Prioritizing development over winning is completely unnecessary in the Jaguars situation.
B - Minshew's trade value will determine whether or not he stays or goes - Not prioritizing Lawrence's development. Every player has a price, and if they are offered enough for Minshew, they'll take it. 

You also seem to be operating under the assumption that Minshew is a bad fit to aid in Lawrence's development. I don't know how we would know that to be true either.

---