Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room > NFL Draft Central


The Mid Round QB fallacy

NFL Draft Central


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-14-2010, 09:52 PM   #46
RG Glee
 
Schneed10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 35
Posts: 8,293
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by 53Fan View Post
Well just to put it out there, Bill Polian blamed the o-line and ST's for losing the SB. And if Bradford or Clausen are Peyton Manning, draft one. Peyton is being touted as the best QB to ever play the game so they would have some pretty big shoes to fill. If Jake Locker would have come out, it's very possible he would be the #1 pick this year, not Bradford or Clausen. The argument seems to be if we don't get a QB at #4 this year, we won't be in position to get a top one next year. I would assume that's because the thought is our record is going to be better....even without a new QB. Schneed is right, not many teams won the same way the Redskins did. I just think the first round, especially this high, is much more hit or miss as far as Franchise QB's go compared to offensive linemen. Now I'm not talking about starters, we have a first round starter. The argument is for FRANCHISE QB's. Franchise QB's can take many picks and years to find, or you may hit one after the first round like Brady, Brees, Favre, or Warner. None of whom were selected in the first round. THOSE guys are true Franchise QB's and will be going to the HOF. It's a hard call. I really like Bradford, but I'm tired of trying to catch lightning in a bottle with FA's, UDFA's, guys off the street and 3rd round picks for our o-line. It may take time, but draft o-line high and you can have a dominant line.
I can't argue with the logic too fervently, simply because LTs are incredibly important. Not quite as important as the QB, which is why I prefer going for the gusto and grabbing one if you think they're a star in the making. But getting a franchise LT is critical to future success and I can't say I'd be upset with a decision to go with Okung.

But it should be noted that Chris Samuels has not announced his retirement yet. He's older and will need replacing soon even if he doesn't retire, so maybe it doesn't change things all that much. But if before the draft he announces that he's still playing, that's all the more reason to go QB.
Schneed10 is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 02-14-2010, 11:04 PM   #47
Living Legend
 
Ruhskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,849
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schneed10 View Post
I can't argue with the logic too fervently, simply because LTs are incredibly important. Not quite as important as the QB, which is why I prefer going for the gusto and grabbing one if you think they're a star in the making. But getting a franchise LT is critical to future success and I can't say I'd be upset with a decision to go with Okung.

But it should be noted that Chris Samuels has not announced his retirement yet. He's older and will need replacing soon even if he doesn't retire, so maybe it doesn't change things all that much. But if before the draft he announces that he's still playing, that's all the more reason to go QB.
As much as I like and respect Samuels, at really hope it doesn't come to this. Barring a miracle, Samuels is not going to be 100% especially with the whole danger of being paralyzed.
__________________
R.I.P. #21

New words created on The Warpath:
Rewalsr - Somretimes - Fualt - Jersesy - Itiot - Composetory
Afeard - Storgn - Empliment - Gaissn - Saftys - Minnisota
Faviort - Hatter - Phsyched - Foof - Heloing - Brutual
Stroried

"Give an opinion and move on. Your life doesn't depend on winning the internet." -FRPLG
Ruhskins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 12:45 AM   #48
Naega jeil jal naga
 
Dirtbag59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Atlanta, Georgia From: Silver Spring, Maryland
Age: 29
Posts: 14,524
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruhskins View Post
As much as I like and respect Samuels, at really hope it doesn't come to this. Barring a miracle, Samuels is not going to be 100% especially with the whole danger of being paralyzed.
I agree, the guy hasn't even lived half his life yet. To risk it in the way he would most likely have to, it defies logic.
__________________
6.6710−11 m3 kg−1 s−2

"I feel like Dirtbag has been slowly and methodically trolling the board for a month or so now."
- FRPLG
Dirtbag59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 03:28 AM   #49
Special Teams
 
PHazard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Originally Portsmouth, VA but now Ocala, FL
Posts: 207
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Thanx CRedskinsRule. Damn tho, they made it seem like this big production like it was gonna get really in-depth n stuff. Bullshit lol
PHazard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 11:27 AM   #50
Playmaker
 
NYCskinfan82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Queens, NYC
Age: 44
Posts: 3,400
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

If we draft a QB so be it i don't agree but i support whatever our new regime does. I would like for us to trade back pick up more picks & go OL, OL, & OL you can fill in the rest. I'm JC supporter but whatever happens i'll back it.
NYCskinfan82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 11:45 AM   #51
Playmaker
 
NYCskinfan82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Queens, NYC
Age: 44
Posts: 3,400
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by PHazard View Post
Thanx CRedskinsRule. Damn tho, they made it seem like this big production like it was gonna get really in-depth n stuff. Bullshit lol
Yeah just saw some of the interviews no new info, but then again with free agency & the draft coming you can't expect them to tip their hand.
NYCskinfan82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 12:26 PM   #52
Playmaker
 
Longtimefan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Germantown, Md.
Posts: 4,832
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

To add further credibility to the support of 1st round QB selections and their success and failure in Super Bowls, here is a graphic I found.

Super Bowl records of starting Quarterbacks by round drafted:

Round W L Pct.
1 24 19 .568
2 2 3 .400
3 5 6 .455
4 1 3 .400
8 0 1 .000 - David Woodley - Miami
9 1 1 .500 - Johnny Unitas - Baltimore
10 2 2 .500 - Roger Staubach - Cowboys (twice)
17 2 0 1.000 - Bart Starr - Green Bay (twice)
18 0 1 .000 - Joe Kapp - Vikings
24 0 1 .000 - Daryle Lamonica - Raiders
Undrafted 1 3 .250 - Jake Delhomme - Carolina, Kurt Warner (twice) Ariz. St. Louis

The wisdom of selecting a QB in the top ten is supported by the finding that their SB winning totals surpass all QB's drafted in other rounds combined. This graphic dates back to when the draft consisted of twenty four rounds, but is inclusive of every Super Bowl win since 1967.
Longtimefan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 12:27 PM   #53
Gamebreaker
 
CRedskinsRule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pasadena, Md
Age: 47
Posts: 12,551
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by PHazard View Post
Thanx CRedskinsRule. Damn tho, they made it seem like this big production like it was gonna get really in-depth n stuff. Bullshit lol
I agree that the hype around made it sound like you would get some depth of discussion. In the end it was just a meet and greet session. I would like it if after the draft there will be much more in depth.
__________________
Dirtbag59, sending songs to oblivion 1 writer at a time.
CRedskinsRule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 12:34 PM   #54
Gamebreaker
 
CRedskinsRule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pasadena, Md
Age: 47
Posts: 12,551
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Longtimefan View Post
To add further credibility to the support of 1st round QB selections and their success and failure in Super Bowls, here is a graphic I found.

Super Bowl records of starting Quarterbacks by round drafted:

Round W L Pct.
1 24 19 .568
2 2 3 .400
3 5 6 .455
4 1 3 .400
8 0 1 .000 - David Woodley - Miami
9 1 1 .500 - Johnny Unitas - Baltimore
10 2 2 .500 - Roger Staubach - Cowboys (twice)
17 2 0 1.000 - Bart Starr - Green Bay (twice)
18 0 1 .000 - Joe Kapp - Vikings
24 0 1 .000 - Daryle Lamonica - Raiders
Undrafted 1 3 .250 - Jake Delhomme - Carolina, Kurt Warner (twice) Ariz. St. Louis

The wisdom of selecting a QB in the top ten is supported by the finding that their SB winning totals surpass all QB's drafted in other rounds combined. This graphic dates back to when the draft consisted of twenty four rounds, but is inclusive of every Super Bowl win since 1967.
I know Brady is the exception to the rule, but wasn't he drafted in the 6th round but your graphic has no 6th round win/loss record. Just nitpicking though.

I think if Shanahan is sold on a qb in the draft he should get him, but I would really like to see a lot of quality OL talent brought in through FA AND Draft.

We hopefully won't see a pick this high for a longtime, so whichever way they go, I hope they have a plan in place to develop the player to be a franchise player.
__________________
Dirtbag59, sending songs to oblivion 1 writer at a time.
CRedskinsRule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 12:41 PM   #55
Playmaker
 
Longtimefan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Germantown, Md.
Posts: 4,832
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule View Post
I know Brady is the exception to the rule, but wasn't he drafted in the 6th round but your graphic has no 6th round win/loss record. Just nitpicking though.

I think if Shanahan is sold on a qb in the draft he should get him, but I would really like to see a lot of quality OL talent brought in through FA AND Draft.

We hopefully won't see a pick this high for a longtime, so whichever way they go, I hope they have a plan in place to develop the player to be a franchise player.
You're absolutely correct about Brady, and I don't know why he wasn't included in the graphic, But you'll notice there were no mention of 5, 6, or 7.
Longtimefan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 01:03 PM   #56
Playmaker
 
Longtimefan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Germantown, Md.
Posts: 4,832
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule View Post
I know Brady is the exception to the rule, but wasn't he drafted in the 6th round but your graphic has no 6th round win/loss record. Just nitpicking though.

I think if Shanahan is sold on a qb in the draft he should get him, but I would really like to see a lot of quality OL talent brought in through FA AND Draft.

We hopefully won't see a pick this high for a longtime, so whichever way they go, I hope they have a plan in place to develop the player to be a franchise player.
I found another graphic that did include the 6th round selections but nothing for 5 and 7.

Round w L Pct.
6 4 3 .571

The four Super Bowl QB's were: Tom Brady, Stan Humphreys. Mark Rypien and Matt Hasselbeck drafted in the 6th round.
Longtimefan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 01:15 PM   #57
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

If the whole point is thinking we need a first round quarterback to compete....you know, just whoever, as long as they were highly touted in college and can produce: I'd like to introduce you to our current roster.

No one, myself included would be mad for taking the best quarterback in the draft at fourth overall. But it's HIGHLY probable that whoever the best quarterback in this draft class is will be around until the second, third, or maybe fourth round.

The problem is, as Paintrain laid it out, is that while someone is going to get a major steal on that quarterback, waiting until the middle rounds and then drafting some guy promises you absolutely nothing. While I think it's a virtual certainty that someone will get lucky in this draft, if there was a predictive measure that could project the difference between mid rounders (outside of eliminating the obvious characters, like Snead), they would start to rise towards the second or back end of the first round. I do not believe it's a crapshoot, but the predictive ability of any team at that level of the draft is questionable...no one's best quarterback is available at that point.

There's no way you can simply count on getting a QB in the middle rounds to be your franchise player eventually. You would take a QB first to be the back-up, and only to play if he performed above expectation or the starter got hurt.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 01:18 PM   #58
Pro Bowl
 
53Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C.
Posts: 7,391
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

2000-2010 SB QB's with round selected in nfl draft:

2000
W- K.Warner-UDFA---L-S.McNair-1
2001
W-T.Dilfer-1---L-K.Collins-1
2002
W-T.Brady-6---L-K.Warner-UDFA
2003
W-B.Johnson-9---L-R.Gannon-4
2004
W-T. Brady-6---L-J.Delhomme-UDFA
2005
W-T. Brady-6---L-D.McNabb-1
2006
W-B.Roethlisberger-1---L-M.Hasslebeck-6
2007
W-P.Manning-1---L-R.Grossman-1
2008
W-E.Manning-1---L-T.Brady-6
2009
W-B.Roethlisberger-1---K.Warner-UDFA
2010
W-D.Brees-2---L-P.Manning-1

Out of the last 11 SB's, 6 times the winning QB was not drafted in the first round.
__________________
"Cautiously And Optimistically... Looking Forward To Change"
53Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 01:25 PM   #59
Playmaker
 
sportscurmudgeon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,159
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

About ten years ago, the scouts declared that there would be a bonanza of QBs in the draft. If I recall the order correctly it went like this:
1st overall: Tim Couch to the Browns

2nd overall: Donovan McNabb to the Eagles

3rd overall: Akili Smith to the Bengals

10th overall: Duante Culpepper to the Vikings

12th overall: Cade McNown to the Bears
Couch, Smith and McNown were busts to say the least. Culpepper had some good years until he suffered a humongous knee injury. McNabb has been a star.

The moral of the story is that a team's scouts had better know what they are doing when they feed the GM data on the player to take in the early rounds of the draft. There are quality players out there; it really hurts if a team misses out on the quality players and takes a dud.

For April 2010, an important - - and totally unanswerable - - question is this:

Will the Redskins' scouts get accurate data to the draft day decisionmakers on the potential players available in the early rounds of the draft?
It matters more than the Redskins get a quality player than the position that quality player occupies. I say this having been on record for 2 years now that the Skins' OL must be upgraded.

The team has multiple needs (as witnesed by a 4-12 record in 2009); what they cannot afford to do is to waste early round picks on players who are merely "decent". They need to find positive impact players in this draft - - and more than one.
__________________
The Sports Curmudgeon
www.sportscurmudgeon.com
But don't get me wrong, I love sports...
sportscurmudgeon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 01:26 PM   #60
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

But here's the more important point: addressing the line "later on in the draft" is no less of a fallacy, especially for a team that appears to need a pair of tackles.

You can choose to not take the best tackle on your board at No. 4, opting instead for a higher player on your board. That's the BPA principle. It's worked for teams in the past. But it's a poor strategy to BPA the first round, and then try to compensate for that by drafting for need after that.

It's contradictory, in my mind, to identify the line (specifically tackle) as a pressing need, which I believe it is, and then look at the number four pick and say: let's try to pick up one later. Sure, it's a strategy that might pay off. Heck, we could not draft a tackle until 2014 and win two super bowls before then. It's certainly possible.

If you do well in your evaluations, going BPA in every round could land us three starting quality football players in addition to a pretty solid quarterback prospect who is only 22. If you're right, of course. And maybe the value suggested that no OT should be taken at any pick we had.

But I'll say this. In every draft I can remember, there has been an offensive tackle, if not two, who was worthy of a top five draft choice, who went somewhere in the first round. This player has not always been the first guy drafted. Mike Williams was the first guy off the board in 2002. Alternatively, there have been 3, maybe 4 years, in the last decade where a quarterback taken in the first round was worthy of a top five draft choice.

So if you have good scouting, and the market conditions are equal (not heavily weighted towards either QBs or OTs), which I think they are, and you have a shot at the No. 1 QB, and No. 1 OT on your board, the OT is the more valuable player about 2/3 of the time in a ten year sample.

When you consider that our needs between the positions are certainly NOT equal, the confidence level in the QB has to be extremely high to justify the pick. There are people here who believe Clausen is the best QB, and those who believe Bradford is the best. The point is, if it's not really, really, REALLY obvious to the front office who the best of the two is, (and if it is, that's a very easy BPA pick), then this is without a doubt the wrong course of action.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.33997 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25