IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?

Bucket · 01-20-2011, 02:31 AM

I'm actually wishing we would make a move for Flynn from GB

30gut · 01-20-2011, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

You're toeing a line that doesn't exist. There's no room to tell someone that something isn't done by people without implying that a methodology is wrongheaded. Your position that anyone, specifically talking about me, that has seen Locker play wouldn't be of the opinion that he is a wild thrower is wrong. Wild is my word, but that's the scouting report on him.

You're always assuming your conclusion.
I think that there is value in forecasting based on retrospective analysis.
Like the Lewin and other formula's.
But, i think there is a distinction between scouting the prospects and forecasting a prospects success based on stats.

I haven't seen many if any scouting reports that call Locker a wild thrower if wild implies inaccurate.
I've seen reports that mention inconsistent but not inaccurate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Mayock

He's got all the tools to be a top-level quarterback, all the physical tools. The size and the arm strength. I just question his pocket awareness. And that's where his accuracy issues come into play. When he moves outside the pocket, either right or left, and not just scrambling, because they did a good job with plays that moved him outside the pocket and had him throw on the run, he has good vision and is as accurate as any quarterback you'll see. But he gets into some trouble in the pocket, seeing the field, and that's where his accuracy breaks down. I'm really excited to see him at the Senior Bowl (in two weeks) and see him working with other receivers. To me he's got first-round ability. But I just need to get more comfortable with him, and his pocket awareness.

Its funny you posted this quote b/c it speaks to my point.
Mayock specifically mentions his accuracy as a positive and states that Locker gets into some trouble in the pocket where he doesn't see the field well and that is where Locker's accuracy breaks down and that he [Mayock] needs to take a closer look at Locker's pocket awareness.

Would you agree that its more difficult to throw on the run then from a clean pocket?

When i watched Washington it was clear that their OL lack of pass protection was the reason they moved Locker outside the pocket and the reason why the bulk of their passing game was quick game and short drops 1-3 steps.
And imo this why Locker at time doesn't appear comfortable in the pocket b/c his OL gets beat regularly.

Quote:

Well, I don't know exactly what you wanted to discuss. I thought you made your position very clear that you didn't think Locker was a particularly wild thrower. I thought you had a minority position, but I was willing to -- and still do -- respect your position. If what you really wanted to do was go play by play through a film cutup and debate pros and cons, then I'm just confused by the way you went about it.

Funny b/c this is from my OP:

Quote:

Originally Posted by 30gut

Question:
Would you or the people in this forum be interested in a thread on the top QB prospects?
A thread that invite people to take a closer look (past the stats) at the commonly available game cut-ups (youtube) and discuss the particular plays from the same game so all have the same frame of reference and can discuss the specific plays that lead to the stats in context.

Seems pretty straight forward to me and i asked the question b/c i'm in another Redskins forum where we actually do the above suggestion.(watch and discuss game cut-ups of the top prospects)

Quote:

You have made it equally clear that you don't respect my position because you don't believe I should be allowed to defend a player's ability to complete passes with stats. I have concluded that your criticism is ridiculous and cannot be taken seriously. Next issue.

Nope.
I think you cannot evaluate from stats and therefore cannot judge a QBs ability to complete passes by look at comp% alone.
Comp% doesn't equal a QBs ability to complete passes it indicates the team's ability to complete passes.

Quote:

For someone who is offended by the word bitching, you sure are adept at getting your hands dirty and slinging the mud around.

To borrow from you:

Quote:

I give as good as I get

I try to post in converstaional manner the way i would holding a conversation at a sports bar.

Quote:

I just have a tendency to be more receptive to opinions that make sense in the context of everything I already read/see/use.

Maybe you need to be expand the context of things you read/see/use to allow yourself to be more receptive to different opinions.
That way you would be more receptive to people like Mayock and Gil Brandt both of whom don't share your view about Jake Locker since both have him as 1st rounder.

BTW- Do you have any comment about the fact that Locker and Gabbert have similar efficiency numbers?

SBXVII · 01-20-2011, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

This isn't rocket science. Players 5-15 on Mel Kiper's Big Board are:

5. Marcell Dareus, DE, Alabama
6. Prince Amukamara, CB, Nebraska
7. Robert Quinn, DE/OLB, North Carolina
8. Blaine Gabbert, QB, Missouri
9. Von Miller, OLB, Texas A&M
10. Julio Jones, WR, Alabama
11. Nate Solder, OT, Colorado
12. Akeem Ayers, OLB, UCLA
13. Ryan Kerrigan, DE, Purdue
14. Aldon Smith, OLB, Missouri
15. Cam Newton, QB, Auburn

And there you have it. 11 players will can realistically be available at no. 10, but wouldn't be a reach at the same spot. The internet can do this!

However I didn't ask what players would be realistically available at no. 10.

I asked what positions should be looked at being taken at no. 10. That way I could make a generalized decision as to what player I'd take there instead of a QB, since I'd rather have Dalton in a later round.

Someone before you did a better job of what I asked for by adding the "Studs and Duds" link, which showed at the bottom which positions have been taken previously with the no. 10 pick. and as someone else said a Center is usually not picked. Fine change it out with a NT, but I'd rather we pick BPA at a needed position vs. simply taking BPA.

SBXVII · 01-20-2011, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadowbyte

This has probably been mentioned but Mel Kiper has Newton going to skins. Charles Davis of the NFL Network has Newton going to the skins too. I believe Shannahan see's Cam as a challenge, something that will reap great benefits if he reaches his full potential.

Gotta love the pundits. Which one said we'd take Trent Williams last yr?

skinsfaninok · 01-20-2011, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Gotta love the pundits. Which one said we'd take Trent Williams last yr?

Actually most said we would take Trent because of his athleticism at LT, and how he would fit the system more than Okung.

Either way Locker or Newton, Rex Grossman will be the starter next season and I actually think he will have a really solid year.

skinsfaninok · 01-20-2011, 10:39 AM

Most of us havn't even thought about VY? What if he comes in? It could happen

SBXVII · 01-20-2011, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

You VT fans need to take those glasses off, tyrod taylor isn't a NFL QB, he's a very avg passer at best and honestly isn't that good even in college.. Good athlete but not a QB.

Not that I'm agreeing with you but I could have sworn the announcers during the game said something to the effect that Taylor might want to or need to switch to WR if he's picked up by an NFL team. My first thought was he looked like Randel Cunningham running around on the field and it would be nice to see the team use Grossman next yr the whole while developing Taylor to be a QB/WR or WR/QB and use him in Wild Cat formations.

Then I woke up and thought.... would the Skins even think in that direction or even use the Wild Cat enough in the coming yrs to make it worth their while to draft him? I'm figuring not but I can see some team who does use it picking him up.

skinsfaninok · 01-20-2011, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Not that I'm agreeing with you but I could have sworn the announcers during the game said something to the effect that Taylor might want to or need to switch to WR if he's picked up by an NFL team. My first thought was he looked like Randel Cunningham running around on the field and it would be nice to see the team use Grossman next yr the whole while developing Taylor to be a QB/WR or WR/QB and use him in Wild Cat formations.

Then I woke up and thought.... would the Skins even think in that direction or even use the Wild Cat enough in the coming yrs to make it worth their while to draft him? I'm figuring not but I can see some team who does use it picking him up.

I could see him in a Brad Smith role for the skins, with him and Banks in the wildcat could be scary.. But MS is old school and I doubt he would do anything like that. Taylor reminds me of ARE just a good athlete that has a decent Arm, but even Warren Noon was over looked so anything is possible.

SBXVII · 01-20-2011, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Everytime I try to make a concluding post I write too much.

I do feel the thread has reached the level of ridiculous, but can't promise there won't be another more-ridiculous response if left open. I support this going right to thread hell.

Honestly I think you both are correct but stubborn enough not to admit to either that your both right.

I think you have to look at the stats in order to get an idea of how accurate the QB was under pressure, get to see where he was most accurate in his passes like short, medium, or long. but I think you also have to actually see the player and watch film to see his mechanic's, ie; footwork, arm motion, release of the ball, pocket awarness, and over all control of the offense.

I for one give little opinion to which would be better QB from a big school vs. a little school. True the competition is different but if he has few flaws and little for the QB Coach to change when the player makes the change to the pro's then what does it matter.

I'll be happy with whoever our coaching staff decides is best for it's scheme/system and I doubt the coaching staff would go out and play pin the tail on the donkey to get the next franchise QB so I presume they will do their due dilligence and look at all aspects of the QB's on the board and have a list of who they could work with.

skinsfaninok · 01-20-2011, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Honestly I think you both are correct but stubborn enough not to admit to either that your both right.

I think you have to look at the stats in order to get an idea of how accurate the QB was under pressure, get to see where he was most accurate in his passes like short, medium, or long. but I think you also have to actually see the player and watch film to see his mechanic's, ie; footwork, arm motion, release of the ball, pocket awarness, and over all control of the offense.

I for one give little opinion to which would be better QB from a big school vs. a little school. True the competition is different but if he has few flaws and little for the QB Coach to change when the player makes the change to the pro's then what does it matter.

I'll be happy with whoever our coaching staff decides is best for it's scheme/system and I doubt the coaching staff would go out and play pin the tail on the donkey to get the next franchise QB so I presume they will do their due dilligence and look at all aspects of the QB's on the board and have a list of who they could work with.

So Gtripp wants Newton and 30 wants Locker? Or the other way around? Sorry but I didn't want to read their 8 page essays on the matter LOL.. Either way I hope the guy sits for a season.. Sexy Rexy is good enough for next year IMO

30gut · 01-20-2011, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SBXVII

I think you have to look at the stats in order to get an idea of how accurate the QB was under pressure, get to see where he was most accurate in his passes like short, medium, or long. but I think you also have to actually see the player and watch film to see his mechanic's, ie; footwork, arm motion, release of the ball, pocket awarness, and over all control of the offense............I'll be happy with whoever our coaching staff decides is best for it's scheme/system and I doubt the coaching staff would go out and play pin the tail on the donkey to get the next franchise QB so I presume they will do their due dilligence and look at all aspects of the QB's on the board and have a list of who they could work with.

I agree with you here.
Except i think there should be distinction made between comp% and accuracy.
Imo you have to watch a QB too assess their acuracy.
But, i agee with you about everything else.

HTTR

SBXVII · 01-20-2011, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

Actually most said we would take Trent because of his athleticism at LT, and how he would fit the system more than Okung.

Either way Locker or Newton, Rex Grossman will be the starter next season and I actually think he will have a really solid year.

Thank You.

Someone who views the same situation as I do. It really doesn't matter who we pick, cause I doubt they will start next yr. The team went out and picked up a HOF QB brought him in and even he didn't have the full grasp of the offensive scheme. Only Grossman showed that he had the full understanding. Not that I'm in love with him cause I hate his 1 interception per game ratio but he knows the system. Whoever we bring in will take time to get up to speed as it did with McNabb and more then likely won't know the offense fully.

So, I foresee Grossman standing in for a year till said drafted QB learns for a year. On a side note what if it turns out to be Beck? It was reported that the Shanahan's coveted Beck when he was in the draft. Now they have him. We might all be supprised in the coming yrs.

30gut · 01-20-2011, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

So Gtripp wants Newton and 30 wants Locker? Or the other way around? Sorry but I didn't want to read their 8 page essays on the matter LOL.. Either way I hope the guy sits for a season.. Sexy Rexy is good enough for next year IMO

LoL,
in re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
Jake Locker

But, I would hope we're in position to select a top defensive prospect that miraculously falls (Orakpo) like Marcel Dareus.
If the above situation doesn't occur then i would hope we're in position to trade down and still acquire a QB we like.

I like all this years QBs.
I think the top 4 prospects all have above average arm talent and generally sound fundamentals.
The top of my list would be Jake Locker.
Followed by Newton and Gabbert; althogh i have a hard time thinking Kyle would want a QB like Cam Newton.
Lastly there's Mallett i like his arm but not his feet, i prefer QBs that can move and make plays but there are plenty of successful QBs that don't move well.

SBXVII · 01-20-2011, 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 30gut

I agree with you here.
Except i think there should be distinction made between comp% and accuracy.
Imo you have to watch a QB too assess their acuracy.
But, i agee with you about everything else.

HTTR

The only reason I think you have to look at the stats is because you might find a QB whose team ran the ball more then passed. Is it fair to look at him and say another QB threw for 3,000 yrds when this one only threw for 1,000? no but to see out those passes how many were caught might give you an idea of his accuracy, but you are also correct in saying that if the team has a horrid OL and it constantly breaks down and the QB is always throwing under heavy pressure should he be evaluated the same as a QB who has OL who gives him all day to find an open receiver and get them the ball? no.

Which is why I said both of you are correct. Ya have to look at all the facts not just one side and even then it's a crap shoot as to how well they will do in the NFL.

tryfuhl · 01-20-2011, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

As long as we're talking about players who vastly underacheived expectations in 2010, I like Texas A&M's Jerrod Johnson as a 6th or 7th round project. I think he has a lot of Tyrod Taylor's skill set, but with way less of the steep curve that's ahead of teams who look at Taylor as a future NFL starter.

Taylor is a lot like Troy Smith coming out of college. 4 years later, Smith really still plays like a successful college QB instead of a long-term pro prospect. There's nothing inherent to suggest that Taylor is doomed to the same fate: I could see him being a great pro player. But having the complete skill set isn't a guarantee of NFL success.

So do we.. and apparently our scouts all have walkers with tennis balls on the legs

Redskins Show Interest in QB Jerrod Johnson at East/West Shrine Game Practices - Hogs Haven

View Poll Results: What QB Do You Want at #10?
Jake Locker	44	34.38%
Ryan Mallett	18	14.06%
Cam Newton	23	17.97%
Other (who?)	19	14.84%
Blaine Gabbert	24	18.75%
Voters: 128. You may not vote on this poll

01-20-2011, 02:31 AM	#166
Bucket The Starter Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Martinsburg, WV Posts: 2,136	Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want? I'm actually wishing we would make a move for Flynn from GB

01-20-2011, 10:39 AM	#171
skinsfaninok Gamebreaker Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Norman, OK Age: 26 Posts: 12,992	Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want? Most of us havn't even thought about VY? What if he comes in? It could happen __________________ Robert Griffin III "if you're good at something, never do it for free"- The Joker

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?

NFL Draft Central