Not bad KM.
Johnson's always racking up numbers, and a BIG part of they're team. Westbrook is nearly a lock for the top three RB's in the NFL when healthy. And Fitz doesn't seem to rack up TD's like alot of WR's, but does get the ball thrown to him all the time. I like the pick with Warner. He should do well with Fitz & Boldin (as any QB should). He had less elsewhere, and did well with it. It'll be interesting to see how he produces. The articles I've read all clam that he's been throwing really well. Pretty obvious, when they bench they're golden-boy for him.
I myself wouldn't mind a QB in the first two rounds though.
Reasons..
1. QB's get the most amount of time with the ball. Even IF they suck, they still have more opportunities to do something with the ball than a WR, RB, TE and so forth. He will make up the majority of the points for a team.
2. IF the QB has been on that team for awhile (and it's been productive), it's usually worth the sacrifice for the big numbers.
3. If the focial point is supposed to be the passing game. In otherwords, don't get any QB's from Washington, Tampa, Minnie, etc. because they are a run-heavy off.
4. The team you're QB is on, has a great defense. Gives them better field position for that easy TD. <This works better if you are in later rounds and need a backup... or have ignored the QB postion altogether for RB's or WR's lol.ÂÂ
5. Look at the teams they play before the draft... If they have poor defensive teams to play against, you can assume that they will do better than their average. You want your QB to be on a team that is unlikely to have that "end of the year flop" when they don't get into Playoffs.
Don't get me wrong, with my first pick, the majority of the time, I do go with RB.
Depending on where you sit on the draftboards, QB at 2 isn't bad at all. If you are last in the first round, it's probably better to get the QB. I wouldn't wait past the third though, otherwise you'll be left with Kitna, Rodgers, Pennington, etc. An no one wants to see that.
