Well the debate has seemed to run its course. All of the evidence (short of a miracle finish to the season) is present for both sides to have firmly made up their minds and they have… so where do we go from here?
A lot of folks have hit on the below scenarios, I only compile and puke them out to organize my own thoughts. I’m exhausted by the potential and feeling like we’re letting a window collapse around us and typing this out feels a bit therapeutic. LONG POST DISCLAIMER: Skip/ignore the below if you feel at peace with the options ahead and have them sorted out for yourself!
The Options (as I see them):
Option 1. Let Baker play out the final year of his contract and re-evaluate.
Option 2. Replace Baker after this season via one of the following scenarios:
- Draft
- Trade for a high level improvement at the position
- FA/trade for small improvement at the position and still high draft pick
Option 3. Hybrid approach: allow Baker to play out his 5th year AND draft a QB in April. Lay out the expectation with Baker that the job next year is his, but the team won’t leave themselves empty handed going into 2023 in the event it doesn’t work out for both parties.
Option 4. Extend Baker at a team friendly deal and cast our lot with him for the future.
An evaluation…
Option 1:
The benefits:
- Gives us another year to see what impact Baker’s injuries truly had and also the opportunity to improve the WR talent around him. Eliminate every remaining excuse.
- Gives us another year of team friendly value for the QB position.
- Bridges the gap of a bad QB FA class in 2022 to a more attractive one in 2023.
- Bridges the gap of an average QB draft class to a (hopefully) more attractive one in 2023.
- Maintains continuity in an organization that has historically lacked it.
The drawbacks:
- We kick the can of solving our QB issue if it turns out he’s a full time pumpkin and not a carriage.
- The window is one year closer to closing on key rookies/high value contracts if Baker does not improve play.
- We miss the opportunity to get started on grooming a drafted QB.
- Potential for locker-room/roster turmoil if things do not play out well. This approach keeps an unnecessary microscope on the team.
Option 2a:
The benefits:
- Rips the band-aid off and purges the organization of trying to contend in the midst of a QB controversy.
- We limit the draft capital needed to potentially improve the position to 1 pick.
- Berry/Stefanski get ‘their guy’
The drawbacks:
- We’re gambling on hitting on a pick and expecting results immediately from a rookie… otherwise we’re pushing legitimate contention out several years.
- Loss of continuity.
Option 2b:
The benefits:
- IF a high level veteran is available, it’s the quickest way to capitalize on the current talent on the roster. A Rodgers or Russ level player immediately improve the team going into next season and allow us to contend ASAP.
- Rips the band-aid off and purges the organization of trying to contend in the midst of a QB controversy.
The drawbacks:
- Loss of talent and draft capital while also having to invest more in the QB position. It’s a difficult league to retool once you have the cap crater that is the QB position. Aggravate that by losing the ability to retool via the draft due to loss of high level picks is daunting to say the least. This could mean a 1 or 2 year window and then we’re done.
Option 2c:
The benefits:
- Gives us a stopgap that allows us to be as (or more) competitive as we are with Baker while buying us a year to evaluate the draft or higher impact value trade/FA targets.
- Eliminates the turmoil surrounding Baker that seems to continue to fester.
The drawbacks:
- All three options at the end of next year could be a failure. We could come up empty in the 2023 FA market, the rookie could be a bust delaying out contention and collapsing our window, and Baker could continue to be this year’s version of Baker. We’d be back at square 1.
- Baker could feel underappreciated by approach, and we spiral into some locker room/culture issues next season at the first sign of poor performance by Baker.
Option 3:
The benefits:
- Creates a competition without creating a competition.
- Gives us an extra year to evaluate Baker but doesn’t leave us without a low cost QB option after next year.
- We have the option to resign Baker, forge ahead with the rook, or buy a QB in FA (which looks better in 2023) all while only spending $18M for next year and the potential of 1 wasted pick as a fall back for the position.
The drawbacks:
- All three options at the end of next year could be a failure. We could come up empty in the 2023 FA market, the rookie could be a bust delaying out contention and collapsing our window, and Baker could continue to be this year’s version of Baker. We’d be back at square 1.
- Baker feels threatened by the approach, and we spiral into some locker room/culture issues next season at the first sign of poor performance by Baker.
Option 4:
I don’t think anyone is advocating for this approach at this point, so I won’t discuss it.
Recommendation:
Ugh. I’m still too disappointed that we’re faced with this to even bend my mind around the decision we’re faced with, but I think for the moment I’m leaning towards Option 1 unless things spiral further, and the situation becomes toxic (not at all unlikely the way things are going).
A fickle beast, this league and finding success in it.
