What would the Colts have to give up in a trade for Derek Carr?

[Hoose]

For those on this Board who believe the Colts must get a new QB (and I include myself in this group), most of the focus has been on drafting a new QB. But the team picking in front of the Colts, the newly minted Las Vegas Raiders, potentially may move on from their starter. Derek Carr is not a top tier QB, but IMO, he's significantly better than Jacoby Brissett. He is signed through 2022, at a salary averaging around $19m per year. The Raiders are in good shape under the salary cap, but they are expected to be aggressive in free agency. Getting Carr's salary off the books would help their free agency goals. 

So lets say the Raiders approach the Colts about trading a draft pick for Carr, and the Colts are interested. What do you think the Colts would have to give up to get him? I'm thinking he could be had for the Colts' second pick in the 2nd round (#44). The Raiders don't have a second round pick. Or....perhaps it would only take pick #75 in the third round. Maybe a swap of pick #44 for Carr and one of the Raiders' three third round picks? 

Just interested to see what the Board thinks about this. 

 

[BProland85]

Tannehill went for a 4th last year, so I would hope a 3rd round would do it for Carr, since he is a few years younger. 

 

I would totally be on board with getting him unless Ballard and his scouting dept was absolutely certain one of Jordan Love, Jacob Eason, or Justin Herbert are sure fire franchise QBs. 

[stitches]

IMO at the very least a 2nd round pick. 

[jchandler7]

I don't know what it would take but I know what I'd give up. I'd be happy with giving up either of our 2nd rounders for him (not both). Anything better than that would just be a plus for me.

[colts52761]

no thanks, don't want him.

[coltsfanej]

I'd be happy with a 2nd. Depending on the market he draws it may take more. I wouldn't want to do more than a 2nd plus maybe a 5th or 6th as a kicker... The question at that point would be if JB has any value on a trade market? I wouldn't want to trade for Carr and keep JB in the roster. Just seems like an unnecessary risk for division in the locker room. So if Gruden wouldn't take him in on the trade as their backup/bridge then we may have to cut him. His salary is too high for a team to take him in for a late round pick as a rental backup. 

[richard pallo]

Trading for Carr is the move that has always made the most sense to me.  And I can see Gruden moving away from him and trying to move up in the draft.  The way Ballard covets draft picks I find it hard to believe he would trade a number of high picks to move and take a chance on a rookie.  I can see him trading one for Carr and continue to build through the draft and be more aggressive in FA this year.  In fact I would approach the Raiders first and let them know we are interested.  I would think one of our seconds would be fair and I would be very happy with that outcome.  Acquiring Carr would automatically make us SB contenders again IMO.  

[2006Coltsbestever]

I would give up our #34 for Carr + maybe a 5th round pick as well if we had too, draft a DT at #13, and a WR at #44.

[2006Coltsbestever]

9 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I would give up our #34 for Carr + maybe a 5th round pick as well if we had too, draft a DT at #13, and a WR at #44.

IF AC retires, I would draft a LT at #13, DT at #44, and a WR in round 3. If we did trade our #34 for Carr.

[#12.]

Carr, I go back and forth on.  It's borderline something I could get behind and does feel like a Ballard-type move to me.  He's young, and no he's not Andrew, but his career stats aren't that dissimilar.  Contract wise over the next three years, you wouldn't be paying him much more than Brissett is making now.  

 

What's more of a risk, trading up into the top 10 or trading a 2nd for Carr and hoping Frank could coach him up into a consistent top 10 QB?  If you're not convinced and don't want to sell out to get into the top 10, it seems like a reasonable alternative.  

 

Basically, it would be Ballard's Garoppolo-type move.  You get a steady QB and try to play and win like the 49ers.

[MikeCurtis]

Great question ... and quite honestly.... my most preferred option

 

To me... IF Available .....is an excellent option

and... one that parks us in the playoffs in 2020

 

It’s the lowest risk option vs a drafted QB

 

I would start with TWO later picks, such as a 4th this year and a 4th next year

As a starting point, with the top giveaway as a 2nd ( I agree with Stitchman)

 

I actually hope that we could pull it off for a 3rd this year and a 2nd next year

 

We could go

 

3T, OT, WR with first 3 picks

 

3 picks that could start year 1

 

[stitches]

I wonder if people know Derek Carr was even more of a dink and dunker than Brissett last year. Sure he was doing it better than Brissett, but he was doing the same constant checkdown and short passes Brissett fell in love with. 

[chad72]

If we get Carr, both Hoyer and Chad Kelly will probably get cut, helps on multiple fronts w.r.t roster spots and getting an instant starter that fits Reich's system. 

 

However, we'd have to make that trade after the No.12 pick, IMO. You have to force the Raiders' hand first, to declare their pick and call them over the next 15 minutes to do it. In other words, a few things need to happen:

 

1. Stay pat at No.13, no matter what

 

2. Then, see if the Raiders get a QB at No.12

 

3. If both of those happen, I feel the Raiders will take the No.34 for Carr but if the Raiders do not go QB, you go on as originally planned because that might mean Raiders would demand No.13 for Carr, which would be a non-starter for me

[chad72]

1 minute ago, stitches said:

I wonder if people know Derek Carr was even more of a dink and dunker than Brissett last year. Sure he was doing it better than Brissett, but he was doing the same constant checkdown and short passes Brissett fell in love with. 

 

He was far more accurate doing that than Brissett, IMO. He led his pass catchers much better, and a lot of his quick passes were also due to his OL beating that he took before this year. He also throws those outside passes accurately on a rope and hits his TEs and WRs down the seam much better. Again, just my observations from this year. 

[stitches]

5 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

He was far more accurate doing that than Brissett, IMO. He led his pass catchers much better, and a lot of his quick passes were also due to his OL beating that he took before this year. He also throws those outside passes accurately on a rope and hits his TEs and WRs down the seam much better. Again, just my observations from this year. 

He was more accurate, absolutely. He wasn't throwing more downfield. He had lower intended air yards per attempt, lower completed airyards per attempt, lower AGG%, highest YAC in the league, etc. 

 

Essentially, he was doing what Jacoby was doing, only much better with better accuracy.  

[chad72]

1 minute ago, stitches said:

He was more accurate, absolutely. He wasn't throwing more downfield. He had lower intended air yards per attempt, lower completed airyards per attempt, lower AGG%, highest YAC in the league, etc. 

 

Essentially, he was doing what Jacoby was doing, only much better with better accuracy.  

 

Valid points.

 

But I'd suggest you look at this article to figure out if Carr is as bad as you think he is:

 

https://www.raidersbeat.com/derek-carrs-ypa-overblown-statistic-or-cause-for-concern/

 

Look at his salary and dead cap hit:

 

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/oakland-raiders/derek-carr-14445/

 

This is probably why the Raiders might rather cut him because his dead cap money is low but if they can get No.34 for him, I feel they'd be happy because they know they cannot get greedy asking for No.13, just talking us.

 

[#12.]

14 minutes ago, stitches said:

I wonder if people know Derek Carr was even more of a dink and dunker than Brissett last year. Sure he was doing it better than Brissett, but he was doing the same constant checkdown and short passes Brissett fell in love with. 

 

He's not Brissett.  I've seen enough of him to know that.  

 

The YAC - like Chad said, he actually hits receivers in stride.

[stitches]

Just now, chad72 said:

 

Valid points.

 

But I'd suggest you look at this article to figure out if Carr is as bad as you think he is:

 

https://www.raidersbeat.com/derek-carrs-ypa-overblown-statistic-or-cause-for-concern/

 

Look at his salary and dead cap hit:

 

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/oakland-raiders/derek-carr-14445/

 

This is probably why the Raiders might rather cut him because his dead cap money is low but if they can get No.34 for him, I feel they'd be happy because they know they cannot get greedy asking for No.13, just talking us.

 

For the record - I do NOT think he was bad. I think he was the very high level of what we wanted Jacoby to be. It's just not particularly exciting or high level of quarterbacking. It's low risk, low reward type of quarterbacking. BUt he was doing it very well. 

[DougDew]

9 minutes ago, stitches said:

He was more accurate, absolutely. He wasn't throwing more downfield. He had lower intended air yards per attempt, lower completed airyards per attempt, lower AGG%, highest YAC in the league, etc. 

 

Essentially, he was doing what Jacoby was doing, only much better with better accuracy.  

And when JB was doing that, we were 5-2 and many here thought we were a playoff team (despite a crappy defense).    

 

If Carr can't see open receivers down field, and if he can't hit them in stride, then he's JB.  Is anybody suggesting that he can't do those two things much better than JB? 

[chad72]

11 minutes ago, stitches said:

For the record - I do NOT think he was bad. I think he was the very high level of what we wanted Jacoby to be. It's just not particularly exciting or high level of quarterbacking. It's low risk, low reward type of quarterbacking. BUt he was doing it very well. 

 

This is an objective view of Derek Carr's passing numbers this year if you want to focus just on YPA:

 

https://www.footballdb.com/stats/stats.html?mode=P&yr=2019&lg=NFL&sort=passypa

 

You are getting a Top 9 QB in the league in YPA, top 4 in INT%, Top 8 QB in yards, and Top 2 QB in completion percentage. I am sorry, you are downplaying the reward aspect if you look at this objectively for 2019. The last 2 years, Carr has had 7.3 and 7.9 YPA and the last 2 year numbers are the BEST of his career by far. You will be getting a QB getting into his prime if you get him.

[stitches]

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

And when JB was doing that, we were 5-2 and many here thought we were a playoff team (despite a crappy defense).    

 

If Carr can't see open receivers down field, and if he can't hit them in stride, then he's JB.  Is anybody suggesting that he can't do those two things much better than JB? 

He was better than what Brissett was doing when we were 5-2. The problem was that 5-2 was not representation of the real performance of the team and a lot of things were not sustainable. A lot of indicators were pointing to us being more a .500 team than that 5-2. 

[stitches]

5 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

This is an objective view of Derek Carr's passing numbers this year if you want to focus just on YPA:

 

https://www.footballdb.com/stats/stats.html?mode=P&yr=2019&lg=NFL&sort=passypa

 

You are getting a Top 9 QB in the league in YPA, top 4 in INT%, Top 8 QB in yards, and Top 2 QB in completion percentage. I am sorry, you are downplaying the reward aspect if you look at this objectively for 2019. The last 2 years, Carr has had 7.3 and 7.9 YPA and the last 2 year numbers are the BEST of his career by far. 

I'm not downplaying it. Jacoby had similarly high numbers that were not representative of his play before he got injured. due to the nature of what he was doing to get those numbers - relying on a ton of YAC, on extremely safe play(low int-> higher ANY/A, low INT%, high completion % due to lack of difficulty of the passes, etc.). I think Carr is about average QB in the league. He is what many here wished Jacoby would be, but wasn't. He was very good in what he was doing... just what he was doing wasn't high reward type of play.

[DougDew]

14 minutes ago, stitches said:

He was better than what Brissett was doing when we were 5-2. The problem was that 5-2 was not representation of the real performance of the team and a lot of things were not sustainable. A lot of indicators were pointing to us being more a .500 team than that 5-2. 

I agree.  

 

Our QB needs to see open receivers and get them the ball for a few chunk plays.  We hardly got any.  If we got a few more, to a variety of receivers and not just TY, the offense would have been good enough.  We don't need top 5 passing stats, IMO, but we need to be able to score on a 30 yard pass when its there.

 

Carr can at least do that, and probably a lot more given our pocket protection.

[richard pallo]

24 minutes ago, chad72 said:

If we get Carr, both Hoyer and Chad Kelly will probably get cut, helps on multiple fronts w.r.t roster spots and getting an instant starter that fits Reich's system. 

 

However, we'd have to make that trade after the No.12 pick, IMO. You have to force the Raiders' hand first, to declare their pick and call them over the next 15 minutes to do it. In other words, a few things need to happen:

 

1. Stay pat at No.13, no matter what

 

2. Then, see if the Raiders get a QB at No.12

 

3. If both of those happen, I feel the Raiders will take the No.34 for Carr but if the Raiders do not go QB, you go on as originally planned because that might mean Raiders would demand No.13 for Carr, which would be a non-starter for me

So you're thinking the Raiders are going to wait at 12 to select a QB.  I don't think so.  I can't see Gruden taking a chance on losing the guy he wants hoping he makes it to 12.  He strikes me more as a move up and get him kind of guy.  If he wants to move up he can negotiate now and make the trade early like we did with our 3rd.   His trade with us gives him another high pick to negotiate with and gets himself in ahead of other possible suitors.  He could work up the trade up simultaneously with ours.   I just can't see him holding back at 12 and keeping his fingers crossed. 

[DougDew]

53 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

So you're thinking the Raiders are going to wait at 12 to select a QB.  I don't think so.  I can't see Gruden taking a chance on losing the guy he wants hoping he makes it to 12.  He strikes me more as a move up and get him kind of guy.  If he wants to move up he can negotiate now and make the trade early like we did with our 3rd.   His trade with us gives him another high pick to negotiate with and gets himself in ahead of other possible suitors.  He could work up the trade up simultaneously with ours.   I just can't see him holding back at 12 and keeping his fingers crossed. 

You've got Mayock's personality to consider. 

 

I could see Gruden coveting Tua or Herbert and trying to trade up ahead of MIA.  I'm not sure he would trade up for Love, who probably is a bit too risky for what he likes.  I go back and forth on whether he would want Love.

[richard pallo]

28 minutes ago, DougDew said:

You've got Mayock's personality to consider. 

 

I could see Gruden coveting Tua or Herbert and trying to trade up ahead of MIA.  I'm not sure he would trade up for Love, who probably is a bit too risky for what he likes.  I go back and forth on whether he would want Love.

I really think Tua would be his guy but Herbert could be also.  Those are the only two IMO.

[CR91]

The raiders need to stop trying to replace Carr. They should count their blessing they actually have a good QB after years of mediocrity at the position.

[Defjamz26]

5 hours ago, stitches said:

I wonder if people know Derek Carr was even more of a dink and dunker than Brissett last year. Sure he was doing it better than Brissett, but he was doing the same constant checkdown and short passes Brissett fell in love with. 

Not like he had many down field receivers. Tyrell Williams, Darren Waller, and Hunter Renfrow aren’t exactly burners. 

[richard pallo]

6 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Not like he had many down field receivers. Tyrell Williams, Darren Waller, and Hunter Renfrow aren’t exactly burners. 

True.  And what if we get Carr and Cooper somehow gets free.  A reunion?  Hey you never know.  

[#12.]

Watched some Carr film.  He does have one hell of an ability to hit a receiver in stride.  With a burner like Campbell, that could be lethal.  TY, too.  Throw it for 10, run for 50.  

[NewColtsFan]

5 hours ago, chad72 said:

If we get Carr, both Hoyer and Chad Kelly will probably get cut, helps on multiple fronts w.r.t roster spots and getting an instant starter that fits Reich's system. 

 

However, we'd have to make that trade after the No.12 pick, IMO. You have to force the Raiders' hand first, to declare their pick and call them over the next 15 minutes to do it. In other words, a few things need to happen:

 

1. Stay pat at No.13, no matter what

 

2. Then, see if the Raiders get a QB at No.12

 

3. If both of those happen, I feel the Raiders will take the No.34 for Carr but if the Raiders do not go QB, you go on as originally planned because that might mean Raiders would demand No.13 for Carr, which would be a non-starter for me

Hiw did you come to the conclusion that BOTH Hoyer and Kelly get cut?

 

Inquiring minds?

 

[Four2itus]

Honestly, the OP asked for "What would it take", but quickly becomes, "What we should or should not give up".

 

To answer, I doubt the Raiders would take #34 alone, because they will get better from another team. I'm afraid it would take #32 & the #75..or better. 

[chad72]

2 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Hiw did you come to the conclusion that BOTH Hoyer and Kelly get cut?

 

Inquiring minds?

 

Brissett being around for 1 more year with a couple of years in Reich’s system elevates him to the reliable backup spot that Hoyer was supposed to be. Having a backup with a floor like Brissett with Carr as starter makes Kelly expendable. That’s my thought process.

[NewColtsFan]

2 minutes ago, chad72 said:

Brissett being around for 1 more year with a couple of years in Reich’s system elevates him to the reliable backup spot that Hoyer was supposed to be. Having a backup with a floor like Brissett with Carr as starter makes Kelly expendable. That’s my thought process.

 

OK....   fair enough....   I think it's possible that Kelly might have some practice squad eligibility left,  but that's neither here nor there.    Didn't realize you wanted to keep Brissett as the backup.

 

Thanks for explaining....

 

[NewColtsFan]

I don’t think Carr gets traded for less than a one.

 

But if it was, then it would likely be two high picks...  a 2 and a 3.

 

I don’t see Gruden getting rid of Carr for pennies on the dollar.   

[WifiGuy]

I'd rather try to work a deal with the Lions for Stafford

[colts52761]

carr not anything that great, not much different than brissett.

 

 

[zibby43]

38 minutes ago, colts52761 said:

carr not anything that great, not much different than brissett.

 

 

 

Not even close.  Derk Carr has a higher career QB rating than Andrew Luck lol.

 

Career QB Rating (* denotes leader):

 

Luck - 89.5

 

Carr - 90.7*

 

And when it comes to QBR in 2019 . . .

 

Brissett - 52.1

 

Carr - 63.7*

 

In terms of the "eye test," Carr makes more "wow" throws in the first 6 minutes and 20 seconds of this 2019 highlight video than Jacoby Brissett has made his entire career as a Colt.

 

 

[BleedBlue4Shoe86]

 

So we can bring this back up. As much as I support Brissett, this is the one FA/Trade I would be super excited about. 
 

So with this new information, Could the Colts actually pursue Derek Carr? 

[richard pallo]

2 minutes ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:

 

So we can bring this back up. As much as I support Brissett, this is the one FA/Trade I would be super excited about. 
 

So with this new information, Could the Colts actually pursue Derek Carr? 

If you take Ballard at his own word then I don't see how he can not look into acquiring Carr.  He said he is always looking to upgrade every position including QB.  So yes I think he will be a viable option and maybe even our top target.