2022 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[mistertim]

22 hours ago, PartyPosse said:

And i'd say the hit percentage on QBs in the first since then is 50% at best which is a pretty horrendous ratio considering the importance of the position, the resources spent on their development as well as the time spent in evaluation. When you have a team built to win now, you simply can't afford to take that kind of a chance. I mean you can, it's the kind of decision that ruins scouting and coaches careers.

 

That's true, but on the other hand the hit rate outside of the first round on QBs is stupendously bad.

 

I had (way way) too much time on my hands one a day while back and did some very rough calculations (of course, that was along with some subjective assessments of what constitutes a "hit" for a QB) and you're correct about the first round hit rate being around 50% or a little less, however the hit rate outside of the first round was something like 5% IIRC. And that's including a bell-curve shattering aberration in Brady.

 

There's a reason that NFL coaches keep drafting QBs in the first round over and over. They realize that not only is the position so important, but that while the first round hit rate isn't great, outside of the first you have a better chance of winning a Ferrari on a $1 lotto scratch off.

[PartyPosse]

3 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

That's true, but on the other hand the hit rate outside of the first round on QBs is stupendously bad.

 

I had (way way) too much time on my hands one a day while back and did some very rough calculations (of course, that was along with some subjective assessments of what constitutes a "hit" for a QB) and you're correct about the first round hit rate being around 50% or a little less, however the hit rate outside of the first round was something like 5% IIRC. And that's including a bell-curve shattering aberration in Brady.

 

There's a reason that NFL coaches keep drafting QBs in the first round over and over. They realize that not only is the position so important, but that while the first round hit rate isn't great, outside of the first you have a better chance of winning a Ferrari on a $1 lotto scratch off.

The problem is hitting on a QB isn't necessarily a win. There's, what, 6-7 franchise QBs in the NFL now? Mayfield and Murrary etc may be considered hits, but if they don't end up winning a SB  thent it's moot. I think building a SB winning team is easier than finding a SB-franchise QB. What I mean is i believe you have a better chance winning a superbowl with a complete team and a good QB than you do an elite QB and an average team. Everyone looks to Brady last year as why the Bucs won, but that team is absolutely stacked, At the same time KC lost even with Mahomes because the team isn't really great. I'd rather continually build a team with blue chip players in the first than take a risk on a real good college QB and invest all that time into seeing if they have what it takes. Unless you're getting a gem like Luck or Lawrence but that doesn't happen all too often. Darnold and Rosen were supposed to be studs, Tua... they can destroy a franchise's momentum. Grabbing someone later while continually plugging in experienced vets that ALWAYS are available to me is a better direction to take. 

[KDawg]

Ohio State is showing what Justin Fields meant to them with that loss to Oregon.

[Going Commando]

Verdell a Heisman candidate now?

 

His draft stock could explode similar to CEH from two years ago.

[PartyPosse]

5 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Ohio State is showing what Justin Fields meant to them with that loss to Oregon.

I really think this loss is on the defense, particularly the interior. Losing Borland, Werner, Browning, Togiai, Cooper et al. That and the OL was a mess, again it doesn't help when you lose your top two OL in Davis and Myers plus your top RB in Sermon.

1 minute ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

Verdell a Heisman candidate now?

 

His draft stock could explode similar to CEH from two years ago.

He was an expected day 2 pick last year before he decided to come back. 

[mistertim]

42 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

The problem is hitting on a QB isn't necessarily a win. There's, what, 6-7 franchise QBs in the NFL now? Mayfield and Murrary etc may be considered hits, but if they don't end up winning a SB  thent it's moot. I think building a SB winning team is easier than finding a SB-franchise QB. What I mean is i believe you have a better chance winning a superbowl with a complete team and a good QB than you do an elite QB and an average team. Everyone looks to Brady last year as why the Bucs won, but that team is absolutely stacked, At the same time KC lost even with Mahomes because the team isn't really great. I'd rather continually build a team with blue chip players in the first than take a risk on a real good college QB and invest all that time into seeing if they have what it takes. Unless you're getting a gem like Luck or Lawrence but that doesn't happen all too often. Darnold and Rosen were supposed to be studs, Tua... they can destroy a franchise's momentum. Grabbing someone later while continually plugging in experienced vets that ALWAYS are available to me is a better direction to take. 

 

I think this is a fair take. However, here's my thinking on the matter:

 

I think there's plenty of evidence that having a top tier QB is more likely to land you in the "perennial contender" category with a much longer window for SB wins than having a stacked team with mediocre QBs. Now, you're absolutely right that you still need a surrounding cast, and some teams have neglected certain areas of their rosters because they have an elite QB and it has cost them.

 

But if you nail an elite QB in the draft then you'll could easily have a good 10-15 year window to win one or more SBs with him. You can keep building up the team around him over and over again every few years or so during that long window. But if you have a stacked roster without a good QB then your window is probably 2-3 years before you have to do a rebuild, and even then it's really hard to build amazing rosters over and over again. You have to be incredibly successful in your draft picks at multiple positions.

 

Most stacked teams with studs at several positions just can't stay that way for very long due to cap issues. That's why those stacked teams with mediocre QBs that went to or won a SB are pretty much complete one-offs that never sniffed it again after that.

 

I'd rather have an elite QB that I can keep building around for 10-15 years than a stacked team and no QB where I likely only have a tiny window of opportunity to go all the way.

Edited September 11, 2021 by mistertim

[PartyPosse]

7 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

I think this is a fair take. However, here's my thinking on the matter:

 

I think there's plenty of evidence that having a top tier QB is more likely to land you in the "perennial contender" category with a much longer window for SB wins than having a stacked team with mediocre QBs. Now, you're absolutely right that you still need a surrounding cast, and some teams have neglected certain areas of their rosters because they have an elite QB and it has cost them.

 

But if you nail an elite QB in the draft then you'll could easily have a good 10-15 year window to win one or more SBs with him. You can keep building up the team around him over and over again every few years or so during that long window. But if you have a stacked roster without a good QB then your window is probably 2-3 years before you have to do a rebuild, and even then it's really hard to build amazing rosters over and over again. You have to be incredibly successful in your draft picks at multiple positions.

 

Most stacked teams with studs at several positions just can't stay that way for very long due to cap issues. That's why those stacked teams with mediocre QBs that went to or won a SB are pretty much complete one-offs that never sniffed it again after that.

 

I'd rather have an elite QB that I can keep building around for 10-15 years than a stacked team and no QB where I likely only have a tiny window of opportunity to go all the way.

Oh absolutely. Having an elite QB is a score and a half and if you have one it's IMMENSELY easier. But, it's also not that easy. First finding one takes luck, patience and the right system and even that's no guarantee. You look at someone like Lamar who most call an elite QB, my gut says he never wins a SB because he just doesn't seem like the guy who can adjust their game if needed. How long do you continue building a team around someone like him before you wonder if maybe it's him? Now, i'm not saying Baltimore is there in any way and he's still on an upwards trajectory, but the commitment you have to show a QB, for good and bad is insanely risky. 

[Going Commando]

56 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

I really think this loss is on the defense, particularly the interior. Losing Borland, Werner, Browning, Togiai, Cooper et al. That and the OL was a mess, again it doesn't help when you lose your top two OL in Davis and Myers plus your top RB in Sermon.

 

Me too.  Stroud has been impressive in the last two games.  He's got that skinny guy arm strength that belies his lanky build.  Ryan Day is proving to be a QB guru like Lincoln Riley and whoever has been working with the Alabama QBs because Stroud seems like he could be a future first rounder too.

 

The story of the day was how the Oregon O clowned that D.  CJ Verdell walking past the sticks out of bounds to convert a crucial 3rd and 6 near the red zone because the edge defender got blocked out of the play by the tiny slot receiver told you what kind of day it was.  That back of the defense really struggled and the front got dominated.  Ohio State is supposed to have a stud edge prospect in the tradition of the Bosas and Chase Young this year, but he was a nonfactor today.  I'm not even sure they got a pressure on Brown.

[clskinsfan]

Stroud getting some hype in here. But that was a pretty ugly INT from Stroud towards the end of the game. He has quite a bit of growing to do IMO. 

[KDawg]

I’m not at all impressed with Stroud yet.

[PartyPosse]

This is quite an ugly performance from Brock Purdy

[Ball Security]

23 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

This is quite an ugly performance from Brock Purdy

Got him benched.

 

Did I hear that the Iowa coach say Linderbaum is the best lineman he’s ever coached?👀 Hear that Scherff?

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

3 hours ago, Ball Security said:

Got him benched.

 

Did I hear that the Iowa coach say Linderbaum is the best lineman he’s ever coached?👀 Hear that Scherff?

 

LT or another spot?

[mistertim]

3 hours ago, Ball Security said:

Got him benched.

 

Did I hear that the Iowa coach say Linderbaum is the best lineman he’s ever coached?👀Hear that Scherff?

 

I don't think he can hear you over the sound of a waterfall made entirely of 100 dollar bills.

[Fresh8686]

 

Edited September 12, 2021 by Fresh8686

[Going Commando]

They spanked South Florida.  Was kind of flipping back to that game during the downtime in the thrilling Oregon--Ohio State game, but now I wish I had just watched it to see Richardson's full performance.  It's a weird system they've got going right now, and you have to wonder if/when Mullen will give up on it and just make Richardson the full time starter.  Especially if he keeps playing like that.  Maybe it will keep working though.  Kind of reminds me of when Florida streamed Chris Leak and Tim Tebow and won the National Championship doing it.

 

That lockdown corner they have is legit too.  Looked like they used him in press man coverage and South Florida was terrified to go at him.  Never even looked at who he was covering.

 

Florida has something cooking thus season.  They've looked way better than A&M and Notre Dame, Clemson, Ohio State, and Oklahoma.  I would put them third behind Georgia next week.

[Fresh8686]

Yup, the Gators play Alabama next and I hope he’s ready to go after that cramp or muscle pull he had at the end. I’d love to see him get the majority of the playing time, but we’ll see what happens. 

[Darrell Green Fan]

19 hours ago, mistertim said:

 

I think this is a fair take. However, here's my thinking on the matter:

 

I think there's plenty of evidence that having a top tier QB is more likely to land you in the "perennial contender" category with a much longer window for SB wins than having a stacked team with mediocre QBs. Now, you're absolutely right that you still need a surrounding cast, and some teams have neglected certain areas of their rosters because they have an elite QB and it has cost them.

 

But if you nail an elite QB in the draft then you'll could easily have a good 10-15 year window to win one or more SBs with him. You can keep building up the team around him over and over again every few years or so during that long window. But if you have a stacked roster without a good QB then your window is probably 2-3 years before you have to do a rebuild, and even then it's really hard to build amazing rosters over and over again. You have to be incredibly successful in your draft picks at multiple positions.

 

Most stacked teams with studs at several positions just can't stay that way for very long due to cap issues. That's why those stacked teams with mediocre QBs that went to or won a SB are pretty much complete one-offs that never sniffed it again after that.

 

I'd rather have an elite QB that I can keep building around for 10-15 years than a stacked team and no QB where I likely only have a tiny window of opportunity to go all the way.

 

This is exactly right and I can't believe we are still having this conversation. We've seen with top guys they can elevate their team to levels they would never achieve with an average QB. We have seen these average QBs with teams that were also "stacked" such as the Bengals with Dalton, the Niners with Alex, the Chiefs with Alex for that matter. And the QB nearly always holds them back come January.

 

The teams who are contenders for years have an established franchise QBs. The teams who are playing at the end in the majority of seasons do too, and considering there are only 8-10 out of 32 teams that is even more evidence of the power of the franchise QB.

Edited September 12, 2021 by Darrell Green Fan

[mistertim]

11 hours ago, Fresh8686 said:

 

 

 

 

Richardson is fun to watch but this grading is silly. He threw 3 passes. That's hardly even playing QB. He's mostly a running back who had a couple of nice throws.

[DiscoBob]

So what are we doing with the #1 overall pick next year.... 😜

[Going Commando]

Well we all knew it, but it's impossible to ignore now.  We've got to get a quarterback this year or the Rivera/Hurney/Mayhew regime is not going to make it.

 

These threads always get spicey in quarterback years, and it should be interesting in this year when there is no pre-existing consensus on the QB order.

 

I'm going to have fun watching QBs this year because I am going to assume the relevant offensive coaches are going to get shown the door well before they can get their hands on whoever we draft.

[KDawg]

Right now, if we had our pick of the litter I'd still go Rattler despite his less than satisfying performance this past weekend. There are a few QBs I like, though. But none of them feel like pure franchise guys beyond Rattler to me... right now. Howell is excellent but I need to see how his season goes. He was virtually under duress for four quarters but he didn't respond when he DID have chances in that situation. 

[Going Commando]

Anyone else just ****in tired of watching QB prospects and debating and evaluating them and the outcomes are that we're either going to pass on them or we take one with no good plan for how to develop him or build around him, and instead we undermine and mishandle him, and then either alienate him and run him out of town or scapegoat him when we fail?

 

I was so badly hoping that we would escape that hampster wheel with either Fitzy or Heinicke.  Or even better, Watson, Wilson, or Rodgers.  It's hard to keep summoning the energy to care about these college QBs.

[Rogue Jedi]

It hard for me to get excited about QB prospects now, because we inevitably take the wrong one seemingly every time.

 

Ramsey, Campbell, RG3, Haskins… am I missing someone?

[OtisDriftwood25]

1 minute ago, Rogue Jedi said:

It hard for me to get excited about QB prospects now, because we inevitably take the wrong one seemingly every time.

 

Ramsey, Campbell, RG3, Haskins… am I missing someone?

Funny thing is there is a theme. All big strong arms that can’t read a defense. Quarterback classes I believe are getting stronger. Takes good coaching and scheme to unlock them. If we drafted Josh Allen we would have killed his career. Haven’t given up on Turner but there is great offensive minds out there.