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



Guest
« #15 : February 06, 2007, 01:18:51 PM »

[banghead] As Far as GBN goes. They are not a good source considering they can't get even the rules of the draft right.
Hey GBN if you have Clevland picking 3rd in the first round then the Bucs get the 3rd pick in the second round [banghead]

Teams with the same record usually rotate picks each round.

Shag

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1295
Offline
« #16 : February 06, 2007, 01:20:00 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

Buster should get drafted in the 2nd. We need LB's that can cover though.

dalbuc

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 21581
Offline
« #17 : February 06, 2007, 01:41:31 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.

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

devasher

*
Starter
****
Posts : 828
Offline
« #18 : February 06, 2007, 02:01:59 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.

dalbuc

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 21581
Offline
« #19 : February 06, 2007, 02:05:06 PM »

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.

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

Booker Reese

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 8174
Offline
« #20 : February 06, 2007, 02:09:07 PM »

I think there's a lot of merit to Dalbuc's contention. Teams (e.g., the Bucs) have won with lesser names, and of course everybody loves to mention Tom Brady - a once-in-a-decade draft mistake - but the reality is nothing keeps a team in contention year after year than an elite QB, and they tend to be found early in round 1.

The problem for me is this - I've got big questions about Quinn (about the only thing that keeps me from totally ruling him out is the Weiss' recommendation and the stubborn praise by the draft gurus, who from what I've seen think the fans like us are missing the boat on Quinn). And Dalbuc, you say that bagging him is in, but I can't believe you don't have at least some worries about him.

While I'm more open to Russell, he's still pretty raw. If this was the 2004 draft or 2006 in terms of quality arms, then by all means a QB is the call at 3-4. But I think this is closer to 2005, and I didn't like us taking a QB that year either.

If the Bucs pass on Quinn or Russell just because they are QBs, then I think that's a mistake. If it's because their evaluation leaves them questioning the players, I don't have a lot of problems with it.

dalbuc

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 21581
Offline
« #21 : February 06, 2007, 02:12:46 PM »


And Dalbuc, you say that bagging him is in, but I can't believe you don't have at least some worries about him.



I fear all QB prospects. I don't like taking them at all but there's just no other way to get off the SoB, Jake the Fake, David Carr type bandwagon of misery for us.

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

Feel Real Good

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 27795
Offline
« #22 : February 06, 2007, 02:16:52 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.
I think the statistic is for #1 overall QBs, not necessarily round 1 guys. There are plenty of them.

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



Guest
« #23 : February 06, 2007, 03:42:13 PM »

GBN predicted Joseph, no?

acacius

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4983
Offline
« #24 : February 06, 2007, 03:51:21 PM »

I still don't know why folks fear the QB draft. You need one to win . . .

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.

The list of teams that have won Superbowls with round 1 qbs is approximately the same size as the list of teams that have won Superbowls with qbs from all other rounds combined.

To elucidate on my previous post, I tallied up all the quarterbacks who won superbowls.  My tally came up:

1st  round   22
2nd  round   2
3rd  round   5
4th  round   1
6th  round   4
9th  round   2
10th round   2
17th round   2
Undrafted   1

Total      41

Unique Superbowl winning qbs tallied up as follows:

1st round   14
2nd round   2
3rd round   2
4th round   1
6th round   2
9th round   2
10th round   1
17th round   1
Undrafted   1

Total      26

If you'd like to look at all qbs who started in the superbowl, I come up with:

1st  round   43
2nd  round   5
3rd  round   11
4th  round   4
6th  round   6
8th  round   1
9th  round   2
10th round    4
12th round   1
17th round   1
18th round   1
Undrafted   3

Total      82

I didn't do unique starters, but overall, the numbers come up as being remarkably consistant.  Yes, it's possible to find a Superbowl quarterback outside of round 1, but you seem to be about as likely to find one there as you are all other rounds combined.  That's quite a lot better a success rate for round 1 qbs.

Pick6

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 5150
Offline
« #25 : February 06, 2007, 03:58:42 PM »

next biggest pool of success comes from the 3rd round - i guess simms has history on his side in a very big reach of a way.

acacius

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4983
Offline
« #26 : February 06, 2007, 04:02:52 PM »

next biggest pool of success comes from the 3rd round - i guess simms has history on his side in a very big reach of a way.

Joe Montana was a third rounder.  That skews things a bit when not limiting yourself to unique quarterbacks.  Similarly, when looking at the nonunique results, it looks like the next biggest pool after that is the 6th round.  That's due to Brady's influence.  Of course, you also have your Bradshaws and Aikmans in the first, which is why the overall percentages work out fairly similarly whether or not you're looking at unique quarterbacks.  But the numbers for non-first round quarterbacks are so small for each round that it's easy for blips to be noticeable when looking at them from that point of view.

gone

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 9244
Offline
« #27 : February 06, 2007, 04:12:56 PM »

Run the numbers since salary cap era?

Pick6

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 5150
Offline
« #28 : February 06, 2007, 04:18:30 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.

acacius

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4983
Offline
« #29 : February 06, 2007, 04:30:51 PM »

Run the numbers since salary cap era?

From Superbowl XXIX on I get:

1st  round   12
2nd  round   2
3rd  round   2
4th  round   1
6th  round   5
9th  round   1
Undrafted   3
      26

For total Superbowl quarterbacks and:

1st round                 11
2nd round   1
3rd round    2
4th round                   1
6th round                   3
9th round    1
Undrafted    2
      21

For unique Superbowl quarterbacks.  I didn't really see much of a point to running the numbers for only the winning quarterbacks in the salary cap era.  The totals get so small as to really lose any semblance of significance.
  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