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 02-16-2010, 03:29 AM   #91
Gamebreaker
 
tryfuhl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Waldorf, MD
Age: 30
Posts: 12,514
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by 53Fan View Post
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.
and in 8 there was a 1st round QB in the game
tryfuhl is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 02-16-2010, 03:32 AM   #92
Gamebreaker
 
tryfuhl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Waldorf, MD
Age: 30
Posts: 12,514
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
...

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.
good perspective Tripp, at least if it's that clear cut

it also says that you can probably pick up a decent tackle nearly every year I think though
tryfuhl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 03:35 AM   #93
Gamebreaker
 
tryfuhl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Waldorf, MD
Age: 30
Posts: 12,514
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schneed10 View Post

But still, sack up and put the chips on the table, I'm tired of being a fringe playoff team every single year. Nothing transforms your franchise like an elite QB.
another great post itt
tryfuhl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 05:55 AM   #94
MVP
 
dmek25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: lancaster,pa
Age: 52
Posts: 10,504
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

gtripp, if your running the show, who do YOU draft?
__________________
"It's better to be quiet and thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt."
courtesy of 53fan
dmek25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 07:05 AM   #95
Pro Bowl
 
53Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C.
Posts: 7,391
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by tryfuhl View Post
and in 8 there was a 1st round QB in the game
And of the 22 QB's involved in the 11 games, 12 times the QB wasn't drafted in the first round. I'm not sure how much any of this matters, not much probably, but I think it shows you don't have to draft a QB in the first round to go, or even win the Super Bowl.

To tell you the truth I'm just enjoying the discussion. Either QB could turn out to be busts or maybe just one...OR they could turn out to be the Manning/Brady combo of the next generation. I like Bradford, others such as Sammy like Clausen. Sammy may be right. And just as Schneed said he wouldn't be upset if we took Okung, I wouldn't be upset with one of the QB's, especially Bradford.

I think my argument for Okung is sound, but I agree with SmootSmack who originally got this whole thing going by saying we shouldn't reach for a LT just for the sake of taking one. It's JMO that we need a LT more than we need a QB to win at this point in time. That combined with the frustration of trying to fix our o-line anyway possible except drafting them high puts me on the side of drafting o-line first.

Last year I wanted Alex Mack and thought we could trade down, pick up another pick, and have our replacement for Rabach. Now I'm certainly not disappointed with Orakpo. I love the guy and I'm glad we have him, but we still haven't REALLY addressed the Center position yet and another year has gone by. Still....not getting the guy you want is not the end of the world and in some cases it works out better that you didn't.
__________________
"Cautiously And Optimistically... Looking Forward To Change"

Last edited by 53Fan; 02-16-2010 at 09:32 AM.
53Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 07:13 AM   #96
Pro Bowl
 
53Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C.
Posts: 7,391
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by PHazard View Post
lol i dont think you understand. the whole fake argument of my point was SO we could draft Tebow. All you basically did was agree that we should take an LT in the 1st round haha. I dont think i meant the pick seriously but there are some good points in taking him.

An additional point/bonus to taking Tebow, with all the shitty seasons we've been having since 1990, this year we could USE god on our side LMAO
You'll get no argument from me there. LOL. But with so many needs and the chance to get another good tackle, center, or RB in the second, I sure don't want to use it on Tebow. We have enough TE's.
__________________
"Cautiously And Optimistically... Looking Forward To Change"
53Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 11:26 AM   #97
Playmaker
 
Slingin Sammy 33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Virginia Beach
Posts: 4,306
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
But what if they believe the current guy is a franchise guy AND that Clausen is also a franchise guy. Then what is the proper course of action if Clausen slips to No. 4?

And if we have the No. 4 pick in a year where the Quarterbacks are mid-round guys...tough crap, I guess. Go get something useful with the pick. You're probably right when you say we won't be picking top five again, but the NFL Draft appears to have slowed if not stopped producing elite NFL quarterbacks. I think we're in an age where you pretty much have to make one (from raw tools).
If the braintrust believes Campbell is a franchise guy they should have their heads examined.

That being said, if they feel he's a franchise guy, sign him to a long term deal and be done with it, then draft the LT. If they don't feel either Clausen/Bradford is a franchise guy, but rather mid-rounders, then you're absolutely right...tough crap, get something useful (LT).

I disagree about the draft producing elite QBs, we may have had a lull for a few years but I think Clausen, Luck, possibly Locker have the tools to be elite QBs. I think the prevalence of the spread offense in college has something to do with it too.
__________________
"I would bet.....(if), an angel fairy came down and said, '[You can have anything] in the world you would like to own,' I wouldn't be surprised if you said a football club and particularly the Washington Redskins.'' Jack Kent Cooke, 1996.
Slingin Sammy 33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 11:34 AM   #98
Living Legend
 
Ruhskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,654
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33 View Post
If the braintrust believes Campbell is a franchise guy they should have their heads examined.

That being said, if they feel he's a franchise guy, sign him to a long term deal and be done with it, then draft the LT. If they don't feel either Clausen/Bradford is a franchise guy, but rather mid-rounders, then you're absolutely right...tough crap, get something useful (LT).

I disagree about the draft producing elite QBs, we may have had a lull for a few years but I think Clausen, Luck, possibly Locker have the tools to be elite QBs. I think the prevalence of the spread offense in college has something to do with it too.
I don't think anyone thinks that Campbell is a franchise QB, I mean he could prove us wrong, but so far he's just a serviceable QB that could allow us to focus on the offensive line in the first round, rather than a QB. I think my opinion of getting a first-round QB would be different if we had Collins at QB right now or some other old veteran.
__________________
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 02-16-2010, 11:37 AM   #99
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,963
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33 View Post
I disagree about the draft producing elite QBs, we may have had a lull for a few years but I think Clausen, Luck, possibly Locker have the tools to be elite QBs. I think the prevalence of the spread offense in college has something to do with it too.
I think the spread has a lot to do with it. There are hundreds of competent college QBs out there but NFL teams, on the whole, want to take these guys to the next level and make them do something completely foreign. That's going to eliminate a lot of potentially great players. And so there are like 10 colleges who, in any given year, might send a quarterback to the NFL draft who gets taken highly.

And because of the market conditions (spread quarterbacks undervalued, or not valued at all), guys are coming out earlier and earlier, which is of course, a negative indicator of potential. But it's worth a lot of cash, because the guys who are waiting around are getting picked apart as prospects.

And so the NFL draft isn't producing anymore Mannings, or Rivers', or Carson Palmers anymore...I think the polished, can't miss quarterback prospect is probably a thing of the past. Maybe once every three years, you'll get a Matt Ryan. Christian Ponder could be that guy next year, as they are incredibly similar. And I like Jacory Harris in a year or two.

But I think: if you're going to have to culture a successful environment anyway, why spend the top five pick on a quarterback? Why inflate the price of an asset beyond what it's actually worth--if you're the one going to be paying the bill anyway?
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 11:40 AM   #100
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,963
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruhskins View Post
I don't think anyone thinks that Campbell is a franchise QB, I mean he could prove us wrong, but so far he's just a serviceable QB that could allow us to focus on the offensive line in the first round, rather than a QB. I think my opinion of getting a first-round QB would be different if we had Collins at QB right now or some other old veteran.
Then again, if everyone shared my definition of franchise QB (and there's no reason anyone else should, except for clarity), I think everyone would agree that Jason Campbell is a franchise QB.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 11:48 AM   #101
Living Legend
 
Ruhskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,654
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Speaking of Campbell, here's a good take on the QB situation by Matt Williamson from Scouts, Inc.

Should the Redskins keep Jason Campbell?

For the most part, the answer is yes. I would tender him the highest offer with every intention of making him new coach Mike Shanahan's next quarterback project. But I would also listen to offers and would do diligent scouting on Sam Bradford and Jimmy Clausen in case an offer for Campbell was too good to pass up. I would prefer to add a franchise-caliber left tackle with that fourth overall draft pick, because I think the Redskins can get where they want to go with Campbell. The catch: They need to be patient with him and surround him with a vastly improved running game and offensive line. Campbell has gone through offensive system after offensive system at a remarkable rate, but he still shows glimpses of being a very solid NFL starting quarterback.

With Shanahan on board, Campbell finally would be fortunate enough to have some offensive stability in terms of the system, expectations and play-calling on a year-to-year basis. For once he wouldn't have to pick up a new language every offseason. Physically, Campbell has what it takes. He can move well enough to execute Shanahan's scheme, has a big strong arm to drive the ball down the field and is accurate enough. The tools are there, and he just had his best year as a starter. I contend that he could use a real confidence boost and some of the responsibility off his plate; he was simply asked to do way too much last year as nearly every aspect of the Redskins' offense crumbled around him. He was also sacked 43 times and was constantly under siege. But the beauty of sticking with Campbell is that the Redskins could then use the resources on building a quick zone-blocking offensive line and finding a ball carrier they can trust. Shanahan does have an impressive history of getting first-round production from mid-round running backs. I can live with the receiving corps that is in place and the defense.
__________________
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 02-16-2010, 12:00 PM   #102
The Starter
 
30gut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,098
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
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.

Not talking specifically about the Skins....

I don't think that teams with a decent starting QB in place at need to draft their QB top 5-10-15. (or teams with QB guru's).
I think the safer way to find a QB is to draft one after the 1st round every year; (plenty of team do this and try to groom a QB) or to nab a QB via FA or trade after the team is built.
Finding a QB via draft imo is a crap shoot no matter where you draft.
You just can't know.
Imo most QBs that are draft worthy are different by large %.
QBs like Heath Shuler fail unknown cast-offs like Kurt Warner succeed.
Because the QB is such a crap shoot taking one with a top pick 5 scares the heck out of me.
The lower you draft your QB the less investment there is and therefore more objective decisions can be made and if the QB isn't picking up the system (see JaMarcus Russell). Teams aren't worried about sunken cost because there isn't any and you have a good QB starting and you know you're gonna bring in another QB next year anyway.

I wish we would just drop the 'franchise' label.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33 View Post
I disagree about the draft producing elite QBs, we may have had a lull for a few years but I think Clausen, Luck, possibly Locker have the tools to be elite QBs. I think the prevalence of the spread offense in college has something to do with it too.
I think there is no such thing as an elite QB until they become one.
Imo there is no such thing as an eilte QB prospect independent of the team and situation around them.

I think the physical differences between most NFL caliber QB prospect is mere %.

I think in a raw skills competition like the combine or an arm strength throwing/accuracy/ touch contest some will do better in different areas but at the end of the day most will be in the same ballpark. And even the ones the are the tops in every category like Shuler or Leaf still aren't locks to become good QBs much less elite.
__________________
No longer were NFL coaches dealing inflexibly with spread [QBs] in ways that caused stunted development for players like [A. Smith and Vick] now, the idea is to bring what the quarterback can do, and what he should do, together as an organic whole
30gut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 12:12 PM   #103
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 44,484
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paintrain View Post
Without picking sides in the Bradford/Clausen vs. Okung at #4 pick, it bugs me when I see people say to 'just pick up a QB in the mid rounds' like that's a recipe for success in the league.. Doing a little research (very little) it's pretty clear that it's not.. Of the playoff teams the past 5 years, the QB breakdown is (non first round QB in parenthesis):

2009, 7-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Brees, Warner, Brady, Romo, Favre)
2008, 9-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Warner, T. Jackson, Delhomme)
2007, 5-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Favre, T. Collins, Brady, Garrard, Romo, Garcia, Hasselbeck)
2006, 7-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Brady, Brees, Romo, Hasselbeck, T. Green)
2005, 6-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Brady, Plummer, Brunell, Hasselbeck, Garcia, Delhomme)

So nearly 60% of the playoff QB over the past 5 years have been 1st round picks. The exceptions have been the greatest 6th round pick in league history (Brady) 4 undrafted FA (Romo, Delhomme, Garcia, Warner)-including perhaps one of the most unlikely stories of all time in Warner. Three second round picks (Brees, Favre & Jackson) and 5 late round picks who eventually became something after playing behind established QB for years (Garrard, T. Green, Collins, Brunell, Hasselbeck).

So unless we're hoping for another miracle (Brady, Warner, Romo, Delhomme) or a slightly undervalued gem (Favre, Brees) or are hoping to find an undiscovered star (Hasselbeck, etc) then 'picking up a QB in the mid rounds' is likely not going to yield us anything beyond mediocre football in the future.
You're famous "Paint Rain"!

The folks at TheWarpath.net, for example, have an interesting conversation going about the potential for drafting a successful QB in the later rounds. Someone posting there as Paintrain (a name that I found intriguing when I was reading it as "paint rain," and a bit less so as "pain train," which I'm guessing it actually is) has broken down the playoff QBs from the last five years, and his numbers seem revealing (the names in parentheses are that year's non-first-round QBs):

A Whole Mess Of Links, Many Dealing With Quarterbacks
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 12:22 PM   #104
Impact Rookie
 
skinster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 754
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Yo we need a first round qb, no question. To bank on finding one in the late round/free agency is ludacris. To find a qb in the late rounds that can win is just dumb luck, which we cannot rely on. If someone thinks that qb can win they will take him early. We can't just hope to luck out on some guy that the other teams keep passing on. The QB is too important, and we have to get it while we have the opportunity to. If we get another position now, it might be too late to get a qb next year if we do better. QB is the one position that we cannot pass up if we have a guy to get, no matter what.
skinster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 01:02 PM   #105
Naega jeil jal naga
 
Dirtbag59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Atlanta, Georgia From: Silver Spring, Maryland
Age: 28
Posts: 14,146
Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruhskins View Post
Speaking of Campbell, here's a good take on the QB situation by Matt Williamson from Scouts, Inc.

Should the Redskins keep Jason Campbell?

For the most part, the answer is yes. I would tender him the highest offer with every intention of making him new coach Mike Shanahan's next quarterback project. But I would also listen to offers and would do diligent scouting on Sam Bradford and Jimmy Clausen in case an offer for Campbell was too good to pass up. I would prefer to add a franchise-caliber left tackle with that fourth overall draft pick, because I think the Redskins can get where they want to go with Campbell. The catch: They need to be patient with him and surround him with a vastly improved running game and offensive line. Campbell has gone through offensive system after offensive system at a remarkable rate, but he still shows glimpses of being a very solid NFL starting quarterback.

With Shanahan on board, Campbell finally would be fortunate enough to have some offensive stability in terms of the system, expectations and play-calling on a year-to-year basis. For once he wouldn't have to pick up a new language every offseason. Physically, Campbell has what it takes. He can move well enough to execute Shanahan's scheme, has a big strong arm to drive the ball down the field and is accurate enough. The tools are there, and he just had his best year as a starter. I contend that he could use a real confidence boost and some of the responsibility off his plate; he was simply asked to do way too much last year as nearly every aspect of the Redskins' offense crumbled around him. He was also sacked 43 times and was constantly under siege. But the beauty of sticking with Campbell is that the Redskins could then use the resources on building a quick zone-blocking offensive line and finding a ball carrier they can trust. Shanahan does have an impressive history of getting first-round production from mid-round running backs. I can live with the receiving corps that is in place and the defense.
If Campbell wants to truly take the next step he'll need to do two things

1. Work on his deep ball accuracy: Despite his strong arm Jason is horrible when it comes to throwing the deep ball.

2. Reading defenses better: From what I've seen and heard Jason is only average in this category. If he wants to stay around he'll need to do a better job of looking off safeties and not staring down receivers as well as making proper pre-snap reads.

It might only be two bullet points but they're easily two of the most important aspects of being an NFL QB.
__________________
Charlie: Okay. Take off your seat belt.
Alan: Why?
Charlie: Because when I slam on the brakes I want to watch you go through the windshield.
Dirtbag59 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 01:26 AM.


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 0.40698 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