Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: 02/06 GBN 2 Round mock draft « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3 4 5

acacius

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4986
Offline
#30 : February 06, 2007, 04:34:43 PM

i was just being facetious, acacius (whoah, almost rhymes) - know what you're saying with those figures and agree, the 6th-round wonderkid or the above-average QB surrounded by an awesome team are longer shots than a talented high-profile player with a history of leadership, physical talent, and winning

but it's a slippery issue. the stats you point to are the same reason that people sometimes reach on 1st-round QBs. people tend to fall into the trap of thinking that being drafted higher makes a QB better, instead of the reality that better QBs get drafted higher.

that's how talents that would warrant a #15 pick for any other position somehow ends up warranting a #3-7 pick for QBs.

still, if you look at the superbowl winners between elway and manning, you'll see kurt warner, trent dilfer, tom brady, brad johnson, and ben roethlisberger. only one 1st rounder, and his team arguably won in spite of him. recent history has to be considered.

I definitely don't disagree.    Overrating quarterbacks (or any other position really, qb is arguably the most dangerous though for salary reasons) is always a danger.  I'm really not terribly high on either of the big qb prospects in this coming draft.  But the scouts will certainly get a lot more exposure to them than I could ever hope to, so if one of the qbs is available at our pick and they really think he's a franchise sort of guy, well, having one of those REALLY helps out your team.

BayDay39

***
Second String

Posts : 205
Offline
#31 : February 06, 2007, 04:40:54 PM

I also dont understand how BUster Davis would fail to go in the top 2 rounds. I also dont understand why the Bucs would take this OT in round 2 over a guy like Buster. didnt we just draft a 2nd round OT to go along with the 3rd round OT we drafted in '04
Isn't Buster pegged to play middle, where the Bucs already drafted Ruud to play? Unless Ruud totally sucks, weakside is where the Bucs will one day have to replace Brooks.

Buster played a little OLB this year.

leeroybuc93

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 4438
Offline
#32 : February 06, 2007, 04:41:22 PM

I don't want to keep arguing this point, but you have to know this statement is just plain wrong. You mean, of course, R1 QBs and the list of teams that have won the Superbowl without one is long indeed.

You have better odds of winning with a top tier QB and your odds of getting one of those is better in R1.

Its hard to argue with that logic, however its not hard to argue that Brady Quinn is not a legitimate top 5 player in this or any other draft. The biggest things he has going for him is hype....and more hype, and oh btw he played at Notre Dame, that helped too.

I could live with us taking JaMarcus Russel at 3/4 if we felt that his work ethic red flags that have been mentioned were cleared as he doesnt lack much in the talent department.

Dou you honsetly believe that scouts, who get payed to do this for a living, even consider the fact that he played at Notre Dame?  Maybe from the standpoint that he knows how to handle media pressure, but from an absolute footbal point of view there is no way.

Pick6

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 5150
Offline
#33 : February 06, 2007, 04:52:40 PM

I definitely don't disagree.    Overrating quarterbacks (or any other position really, qb is arguably the most dangerous though for salary reasons) is always a danger.  I'm really not terribly high on either of the big qb prospects in this coming draft.  But the scouts will certainly get a lot more exposure to them than I could ever hope to, so if one of the qbs is available at our pick and they really think he's a franchise sort of guy, well, having one of those REALLY helps out your team.

i hear ya, i usually keep my mouth shut during the pre-draft chaos for those reasons. if NFL scouts and the Mel Kiper types, who can't get this stuff right despite having total access to the prospects and spending as much time analyzing these kids as i spend doing my real job (which, surprisingly, isn't posting on this board), i'm not gonna waste too much time weighing in on or falling in love with particular prospects with no NFL track record on the basis of third-hand opinions and youtube clips.

i'm not a big NCAA watcher to begin with, but even most diehards here probably can't say they've seen calvin johnson outside of sportscenter and maybe 3 games this year, and i can bet very few have watched amobi okoye or joe thomas for 4 quarters this year.

MiltonMack21

User is on moderator watch listWatched
******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 9288
Offline
#34 : February 06, 2007, 05:27:10 PM

I really don't want Quinn though... always seems to disappear in big games.


gharen

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1639
Offline
#35 : February 06, 2007, 06:04:03 PM

He played pretty damn good against USC his junior year!

Mellow

****
Starter

Posts : 850
Offline
#36 : February 06, 2007, 06:12:32 PM

I don't want to keep arguing this point, but you have to know this statement is just plain wrong. You mean, of course, R1 QBs and the list of teams that have won the Superbowl without one is long indeed.

You have better odds of winning with a top tier QB and your odds of getting one of those is better in R1.

The same could be said of centers!  C'mon Dal, you can do better than this . . .

dalbuc

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 21603
Offline
#37 : February 06, 2007, 07:14:33 PM

The same could be said of centers!  C'mon Dal, you can do better than this . . .

Actually it can't.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2006/04/24/ramblings/nfl-draft/3828/

"“Top Heavy” are those positions which are almost entirely addressed in the early portion of the draft, mostly via the first round. The inference is that these are positions that need to be addressed very early in the draft. This group includes quarterback, running back, #1 wide receiver, defensive tackle, and offensive tackle.

Essentially what we see encompassed here are high-profile skill position players (QB, RB, and WR) and guys with exceptional athletic ability for their size (DT, OT). These are the types of players that are hard to miss when evaluating talent.....The QB position is by far the toughest to fill, and most teams are (and should be) willing to fill it by any means necessary. First round QBs are no sure thing, but anyone picked after the first round appears to be a very long shot that will require several years of development. And even those late round guys that do work out will probably have to move to a new team to be successful. The bottom line here is that until you’ve found your guy you should jump at any opportunity to acquire a quality starter, be it early in the draft, late in the draft, via trade, or through free agency. Don’t pass on a QB early in the draft because you also like a guy that could be had later. If you are really in need of a QB you should probably draft them both....“Early Round Peak” includes only safeties and centers. In both cases the number of starters is at a peak after the first round (2nd round for safeties, 3rd for centers) and then reverts to a fairly normal distribution."

All posts are opinions in case you are too stupid to figure that out on your own without me saying it over and over.

Skull and Bones

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 23415
Offline
#38 : February 06, 2007, 09:44:21 PM

I still don't know why folks fear the QB draft. You need one to win, Rex Grossman and Jake Plummer types can only get your so far. Ugoh has abig upside and Crowder is an effective DE. That's not the worst draft I've ever seen.

I'd be ok with it.  I've seen both the 2nd rounders going in the first on other mocks and it adresses needs.


devasher

*
Starter
****
Posts : 828
Offline
#39 : February 07, 2007, 12:17:16 AM

Bagging on Quinn is very "in" right now but almost no one who scouts things seems to view him as not an elite prospect based on what we know.

I've been critical of Quinn for quite some time, in fact if you bother to use the search posts feature on the message board (type Quinn, then use my name as poster) you can read what I thought about him a few weeks before the 'spectacular' Sugar Bowl performance he had against LSU. At that time I believe he had thrown something like 8 TD's to 1 INT in his past few games (against lesser opponents) so I wasnt bandwagoning then or now.

Similarly I've long hated Eli Manning, I said when he was drafted as I do now that he's a bust because everyone wanted him to be like his brother and/or father but didnt seem to understand that he is his own person, who coincidently is not the type of person that has ever been or will be a franchise QB.

I dont mean to talk in absolutes because anything is possible, however some Quarterbacks fail time and time again in college and the pro's, but because of some stupid ideals (like arm strength or the school they attended) the media overlooks these deficiencies and continues to tout the 'potential' card. Brady Quinn is a 4 year starter in a pro-style offense with a first round talent at WR and he was nothing short of average when he played the big boys in college.

For those that believe tools make the QB I'm pretty sure Kyle Boller can still throw a football through the goalpost from the 50 yard line on one knee like he did for scouts before the draft.............and he's still a pretty crappy NFL QB.

dalbuc

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 21603
Offline
#40 : February 07, 2007, 09:11:52 AM


I dont mean to talk in absolutes because anything is possible, however some Quarterbacks fail time and time again in college and the pro's, but because of some stupid ideals (like arm strength or the school they attended) the media overlooks these deficiencies and continues to tout the 'potential' card. Brady Quinn is a 4 year starter in a pro-style offense with a first round talent at WR and he was nothing short of average when he played the big boys in college.


Manning never played well in big games either if you want to go there. What was Spurrier's old joke, you can't spell Citrus without UT? Roth didn't play well vs Iowa in his only big game tilt in college. Quinn is sort of like Cutler last year...the best part of a not very good team. The only difference is that Vandy has a little V on their gold helmet that negates the magic force powers that helmet exerts on folks. ND was certainly overrated, it doesn't follow that Brady wasn't good but simply that whatever good was going on there was really all about him. People are holding the bad decisions voters made to rank ND in the top 10 all year against Brady. If that ND team was rated where it should have been, in the low 20's and played a Texas Tech or Minnesota type team he'd have all the hype still.

All posts are opinions in case you are too stupid to figure that out on your own without me saying it over and over.

Mellow

****
Starter

Posts : 850
Offline
#41 : February 07, 2007, 09:17:14 AM

Dal,

First, I don't want to get into a pissing match.  Ultimately we can agree to disagree.

Second, I stand my my statement that for centers, like all positions (including QB), ". . . you have better odds of winning with a top tier [one], " . . . and your odds of getting one of those is better in R1."  Since you obviously can't be arguing against the first statement, are you actually saying your odds of getting a a quality center are better outside of R1?  I think we both agree it is wasteful to take a center in R1 (since good ones can often be found later) but it's hard to argue that your chances actually improve when you wait.

As for the article, thanks for posting it again.  My issue has always been that it undervalues the opportunity cost of drafting a bust in R1--which is high.  I simply disagree with the contention that, "The QB position is by far the toughest to fill, and most teams are (and should be) willing to fill it by any means necessary."  Any time I read "by any means necessary" I get a little uneasy.  I agree QB is important (but more important than LT?), and agree a team should work extra hard to get one, but you also have to recognize that because the development time for QBs in the NFL is long relative to their contracts they are ALWAYS available in FA (or trades).  I've posted elsewhere a summary of Superbowl QBs for the past 10 years (post salary-cap era) and nearly 50% of them entered the NFL for some other team.  IMO that's the best, safest route to go for getting one of those elusive quality QBs.

Feel Real Good

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 27809
Offline
#42 : February 07, 2007, 09:21:42 AM

I've enjoyed laughing at Quinn throughout his college career, but I really think the book's not finished on him. You just have to consider how many players on Notre Dame would start for LSU, USC, Michigan, Ohio State, etc. At most five, in some cases one or two.

FRG is the most logical poster on this board.  You guys just don\'t like where the logical conclusions take you.

alldaway

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 37373
Offline
#43 : February 07, 2007, 09:35:13 AM

BucsCaddy80

I have the same concerns about Quinn as you do.  Russell has a higher completion percentage and YPA than Quinn if you look at the stats recently and I would argue Russell faced a larger number of quality defenses than Quinn.  Yes the Notre Dame defense is not as talented as the LSU defense.  But there is talent on the Notre Dame offense and why people say Quinn has no one to work with him suprises me becuase he does.

It would be nice to obtain a QB that could be at least consistently above average and Quinn seems to be at least (bare minimum) fill that role.  But is Quinn worth a high draft pick and $20+ in signing bonus to be above average?  What if Simms/Gradkowski show they eventually could be consistently average/above average?

Now if the coaching staff feels that Quinn can be more than average/above average then I do not think they pass him up.  I personally do not want to see a QB drafted day one at all but if the coaching staff and the Glazers (they are always forgotten in discussions when pertaining to situations like this it seems) are okay with the idea I can live with it and understand the decision.

With the way mock drafts are unfolding (with CJ and JT gone) it looks like Quinn/Russell will be the BAP left on the board when the Bucs are on the clock.



acacius

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4986
Offline
#44 : February 07, 2007, 09:36:53 AM

Second, I stand my my statement that for centers, like all positions (including QB), ". . . you have better odds of winning with a top tier [one], " . . . and your odds of getting one of those is better in R1."  Since you obviously can't be arguing against the first statement, are you actually saying your odds of getting a a quality center are better outside of R1?  I think we both agree it is wasteful to take a center in R1 (since good ones can often be found later) but it's hard to argue that your chances actually improve when you wait.

Dal can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think anyone is suggesting that your chances of getting a good center improve when you wait.  I think the idea is just that they don't get much worse either.  The curve on centers is very flat, whereas it's really quite pronounced and peaks strongly in round 1 for quarterbacks.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: 02/06 GBN 2 Round mock draft « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools