The Official QB Thread- JD5 taken #2. Randall 2.0 or Bayou Bob? Mariotta and Hartman forever. Fromm cut

[Skinsinparadise]

9 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

I'm so old I can't remember when I'm retreading an old argument. 

 

It's probably about two weeks ago.  We aren't going that far back. 😎

 

9 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

 historically, more bullets are always better than trusting that your magic GM will get that selection right because the GM is special or whatever.

 

Depends to me on context.  Let's say picking top 5 for example in arguably a top talent heavy draft versus trading down lets say from 16 to 22.  It's different.  When you are picking in the high 2nd like we are, often first round talent can fall to that spot.  So lets say trading down from that spot versus trading down from the mid 2nd rounds.  Feels different to me, too.

 

Also who is the player in mind?  If lets say the Seahawks think Lockett is a first round talent and he's shocking there in the third then go get him like they did.

 

If you got on the other hand 5 players rated in a similar fashion still available then trade down.

 

Your point seems to be GMs think they know talent but they are often wrong so you don't trust their instincts that they are right about a Demarcus Lawrence or Tyler Lockett so screw that and instead trade down and bet against your scouting's staff's ability to scope out top talent and bet in favor of the randomness of the draft instead.  I get the logic.  But my issue with anayltics is they don't tell the whole story.  It's a factor but sometimes context matters.  

Edited February 9 by Skinsinparadise

[profusion]

The old adage is that even the best scouts and GMs rarely hit on more than half of their picks. Thus, the more picks, the better.

[The Consigliere]

14 minutes ago, seantaylor=god said:

This is a really interesting point, and one I hadn’t considered.

 

However, I think we wont be screwed regardless of outcome- and here’s why:

 

Assuming DQ can build an above average to elite defense (fair assumption) and that our FO drafts and signs quality players, I don’t think we ever bottom out again. Even with a bust at QB. Hell, who’s to say if Daniels (or Maye) busts horrifically GMAP doesn’t have a solid backup option or vet that gives quality starts?

 

So I don’t see this as if Maye busts we are in QB purgatory and if Daniels busts we have an exit ramp via high draft pick. 
 

I don’t think we draft in the top 10 again for a long time, and I think the roster will be so good that we will be a borderline playoff team with average QB  play and a top team in the NFC with above average to Elite QB play.

 

And in your example, a Maye (playing at Derek Carr level) makes us a playoff team and threat to wins games in the playoffs in 2025.

I would say that depends upon how effectively he can address the absolute litany of holes there are on the roster. But if he has a league average starter in place, I would imagine the draft capital in '24 and '25, and two free agent hauls should be able to put us potentially at 7-9 wins by '25. 

[FootballZombie]

15 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

I would simply argue on this that generally speaking, historically, more bullets are always better than trusting that your magic GM will get that selection right because the GM is special or whatever.

 

What happened to your childlike sense of wonder?

I say if the man is magic let the man do magic.

 

[seantaylor=god]

8 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

I would say that depends upon how effectively he can address the absolute litany of holes there are on the roster. But if he has a league average starter in place, I would imagine the draft capital in '24 and '25, and two free agent hauls should be able to put us potentially at 7-9 wins by '25. 

I think the difference in scheme makes some of our holes disappear. I think we have miscast and poorly used some quality players. 

 

But it’s all conjecture- we will see.

[Ghost of]

38 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

I'm so old I can't remember when I'm retreading an old argument.  

 

Consigliere just days after having a debate in a well-worn thread because he posts so much text (more than me!):

[mistertim]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Daniels also need to learn how to throw off platform versus run so much whenever he's flushed out of the pocket.  Also learn how to throw with anticipation and in tight windows.

 

 

He's also going to need to work on going through progressions (unless whatever team drafts him is ok with him being more of a one-read-and-run QB). In the cutups I've watched I rarely see him get off his first read and unfortunately he also often stares him down, though I have seen him look off safeties before so it's not like he's incapable of it.

 

The process often seems to be:

 

1) Is Nabers or Thomas in a 1 on 1?

 

if yes then

 

2) Throw to the guy with the 1 on 1

 

if no then

 

3) Run

 

It doesn't always happen that way, but it does very often from what I've seen.

[wit33]

Dual threat QBs drafted in round 1 rarely bust and have the highest floors. Higher ceiling and longevity there’s more of an argument. 20 years from now over 60% of the QBs will run 4.4, so there’s still time to get in again while rest of the NFL trots out average athletes at QB. 
 

NFL has this wrong. 

 

 

 

Edited February 9 by wit33

[The Consigliere]

53 minutes ago, Est.1974 said:

I think from #2 to #1 we aren’t sure on this, never been done before I don’t think.

 

However, the fanbase in general seems obsessed on the draft cost. Yet, Harris, Peters, Quinn are talking about building a legacy to look back on in 20 years,

 

I don’t know how we go, but losing sleep over a 2025 first might not matter in 5 years…..if you hit pay dirt….

 

But we really don’t know, do we……. 
 

Is Williams more elite than Maye, or Daniels,  ? No idea how that goes.

 

I’d go **** or bust personally.

I really like Maye, so I'm disinclined to pay up to move up a spot when I think we can land a franchise guy at 2 anyway. I would consider moving up if the price didn't involve a future first but I can't see how the Bears would move down without getting that. To me, I expect us to be 5-12 or 6-11 next year, and I am not trading a top 8 first to move up 1 freaking pick, in addition to other pick(s) and players. No chance. It's way, way, way too much when I'm not even sold he'll be a better pro than Maye. I have him above Maye to be sure, but multiple picks including probably one of our seconds and a future top 10 pick (in my view?) no chance. Straight pass. If this was luck back in 2012? Yes, I would have, because I was more sure of Luck hitting than any QB I'd ever seen since I'd been watching the draft (1988), I liked Luck more than Manning. I don't view Williams that way. I don't know what Williams will be and he doesn't have the same clean mental make up check that Luck had. So, no. I'd trade a DT, our first, and probably 40 to move up for #1, but that's it. I don't care about losing the DT because they'll age out before we're good again, I'd even throw in a day 3 pick if they wanted it, but I'm not moving day 1 or day 2 assets from 2025 for him. Zero chance of that. I expect our draft capital in 2025 to basically be two picks inside the top 42. Too damn valuable. 

[The Consigliere]

55 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

It's probably about two weeks ago.  We aren't going that far back. 😎

 

 

Depends to me on context.  Let's say picking top 5 for example in arguably a top talent heavy draft versus trading down lets say from 16 to 22.  It's different.  When you are picking in the high 2nd like we are, often first round talent can fall to that spot.  So lets say trading down from that spot versus trading down from the mid 2nd rounds.  Feels different to me, too.

 

Also who is the player in mind?  If lets say the Seahawks think Lockett is a first round talent and he's shocking there in the third then go get him like they did.

 

If you got on the other hand 5 players rated in a similar fashion still available then trade down.

 

Your point seems to be GMs think they know talent but they are often wrong so you don't trust their instincts that they are right about a Demarcus Lawrence or Tyler Lockett so screw that and instead trade down and bet against your scouting's staff's ability to scope out top talent and bet in favor of the randomness of the draft instead.  I get the logic.  But my issue with anayltics is they don't tell the whole story.  It's a factor but sometimes context matters.  

Nah, I actually agree with you I think about what you're implying which is tiering. The only reason I ever believe you should trade down is if you're moving within a tier. If you move outside of a tier, you ------ up. So for instance if we had Lockett and Crowder in different tiers, and we wanted a WR? That was a mistake. 

 

Another example would be this: lets say we had another first that was top 5 or 6 or whatever, and our tier 1 of WR's was:

1.MHJR

2. Malik Nabers

 

If we trade down to the Odunze, Brian Thomas etc zone, we screwed up. 

 

If you want a WR, and you have the guys set up like that, you can't afford to move down w/o acknowledging the genuine loss you will have in the moving, Odunze and Ladd and the Oregon dude etc are simply not close to MHJR and Nabers.

 

So I don't think we really entirely disagree much. If I am targeting guys, I work my tiers. I do this in my own drafts every year, and after decades of this, lol, and I'm only playing with RB, QB, TE, WR variables, but even so, I've gotten bitten whenever I've gotten stupid and greedy with trade downs. The most painful one in recent years was getting greedy in round 6 of a 2020 start up, assuming the guys picking between my current 6th and where I was targeting in a down move would not go WR as they were already carrying 3 or had urgent needs elsewhere, so I thought I could move from 6.02 to 6.07 and not risking losing out on Cee Dee Lamb. That idiotic decision on my part, getting just movement in some later rounds for a 5 slot move down, moved me from having Lamb as my WR2 to freaking Jerry Jeudy. A total disaster. It's the only superflex league I'm in where my build is screwed and that horrible decision is part of it. I moved a giant tier drop just for a teeny bit of draft capital.

 

I tend to think we're not that far off one another because that's kind of exactly what you're talking about. You dont want to make trades for trades sake, you have to stick to your tiers above all (especially if your tiers aren't crap), if you have crap tiering and scouting in general, it just compounds the error (and I think that was one of the problems involved in what your saying). I will say, I'm not interested in moving down at all this year with the 2, or with our 1st next year if its super high, as I assume, otherwise, it would just be tier reading for me. If we're in our tier with or without the trade, I'm game to move, but it's got to be a move like switching off a MHJR for a Nabers, not MHJR for a McConkey. 

[clskinsfan]

21 minutes ago, wit33 said:

Dual threat QBs drafted in round 1 rarely bust and have the highest floors. Higher ceiling and longevity there’s more of an argument. 20 years from now over 60% of the QBs will run 4.4, so there’s still time to get in again while rest of the NFL trots out average athletes at QB. 
 

NFL has this wrong. 

 

 

 

All 3 of the top guys are dual threats this draft. 

[HTTRDynasty]

 

[Ghost of]

PSU is when he hurt his leg.  That's why they did that.  

 

And Roman Wilson and Johnson are good players but they're not Ohio State elite level.  We should get Roman if we get a chance, though. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

13 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said:

 

I watched JJ McCarthy struggle to throw a deep out in the Ohio game and discarded him from my “likely to be an NFL starter” list. 
 

I could be wrong but I was super unimpressed with his arm talent and I see that as table stakes.  You’ve got to have it or nothing else matters. 

[Commander20180]

I think Drake is the clear choice here. Let's not overthink this. The Bears are gonna take Caleb, and we're setting up a nice offensive staff to work with him. 

[HTTRDynasty]

 

[Skinsinparadise]

12 hours ago, The Consigliere said:

Nah, I actually agree with you I think about what you're implying which is tiering. The only reason I ever believe you should trade down is if you're moving within a tier. If you move outside of a tier, you ------ up. So for instance if we had Lockett and Crowder in different tiers, and we wanted a WR? That was a mistake. 

 

 

OK.  And apparently this FO likes Lockett.   Jay admitted this in a recent podcast.  But not sure how they had them tiered.

 

12 hours ago, The Consigliere said:

 

 

I tend to think we're not that far off one another because that's kind of exactly what you're talking about. You dont want to make trades for trades sake, you have to stick to your tiers above all (especially if your tiers aren't crap), if you have crap tiering and scouting in general, it just compounds the error (and I think that was one of the problems involved in what your saying). I will say, I'm not interested in moving down at all this year with the 2, or with our 1st next year if its super high, as I assume, otherwise, it would just be tier reading for me. If we're in our tier with or without the trade, I'm game to move, but it's got to be a move like switching off a MHJR for a Nabers, not MHJR for a McConkey. 

 

OK, yeah that's pretty how I look at it.  Don't jump down a tier but if you have multiple targets close, trade down.

 

12 hours ago, wit33 said:

Dual threat QBs drafted in round 1 rarely bust and have the highest floors. Higher ceiling and longevity there’s more of an argument. 20 years from now over 60% of the QBs will run 4.4, so there’s still time to get in again while rest of the NFL trots out average athletes at QB. 
 

NFL has this wrong. 

 

 

 

 

Daniels could work.  But he's thin and looks breakable.  

 

I prefer Maye for multiple reasons.  And the dude is mobile too -- not to the extent of Daniels but he's more in that Daniel Jones-Josh Allen category of mobility.

Edited February 10 by Skinsinparadise

[Ghost of]

2 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

I watched JJ McCarthy struggle to throw a deep out in the Ohio game and discarded him from my “likely to be an NFL starter” list. 
 

I could be wrong but I was super unimpressed with his arm talent and I see that as table stakes.  You’ve got to have it or nothing else matters. 

He was injured in lower leg since Penn State and could not fully drive on his throws until Alabama. Take this from someone who actually watched him since his backup reps in 2021, his arm is fine. His injury has been known and reported on. That's why they didn't pass in 2nd half of PSU and why his numbers dipped. That and he played 2 top 10 defenses and then Alabama in Rose Bowl.

 

His throw to Wilson in Ohio game was excellent, an NFL type throw. 

Here he is in healthy portion of season. Note a deep out (in terms of ball to location, I didn't look at the route) early in the video. 

https://www.si.com/college/michigan/football/michigan-football-wolverines-jj-mccarthy-heisman-jim-harbaugh-big-ten-college-playoff-national-championship

 

And 2022 on the road at Ohio State:

 

 

12 of 24 but several big plays, and a few darts. If I have a critique it's that he seems to get passes batted more than I'd like.  All QBs get a few, even tall ones, but it may be something about release, I'd need to study it more. 

 

He climbs pocket really well,  has some zip on short passes for first downs, and casually threw a ball (didn't see a wind up) from his 35 down to the 7 yard line from the pocket.  Ended up a PI but he didn't seem to put his whole body into the throw.  

 

Edited February 10 by Ghost of

[The Consigliere]

3 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

I watched JJ McCarthy struggle to throw a deep out in the Ohio game and discarded him from my “likely to be an NFL starter” list. 
 

I could be wrong but I was super unimpressed with his arm talent and I see that as table stakes.  You’ve got to have it or nothing else matters. 

You must have seen a bad game or something because I haven't heard any scout quoted on him, anyone agree w/the take that his arm sucks/can't make all the throws, whatever. Most seem to rate it above average or better, no one seems to call it a concern. It's not gonna matter to us because we aren't drafting him anyway. But I don't think arm strength is a concern for him, either that's true or every scout I have seen discuss it is lying, and I tend to doubt that. Most outright just say strong arm. Only thing I can imagine is maybe he was carrying an injury that day that effected his throwing, only explanation that makes sense to me. 

Edited February 10 by The Consigliere

[RandyHolt]

Bears with Calebitis - it sure seems like Fields will be ripe for the taking on the cheap. Hoge makes note how he's had 3 OCs in 3 years (cough same as Sam) so he's not a write off. I feel like Chicagos terrible OCs and injuries have held him back most. He abused our D maybe better than any QB we faced.

 

The key to nabbing Fields is not having to grossly overpay him in his next contract.

[mistertim]

5 hours ago, clskinsfan said:

All 3 of the top guys are dual threats this draft. 

 

This is where @wit33and I have had debates before. He seems to lump all QBs who have the ability to run into one category: "dual threat QB". But I have two categories: "dual threat QB" and "running QB"

 

A dual threat QB is a guy who's first weapon is his arm, but who has the ability to extend plays and make you pay with his legs if you let him or try to take away the passing game. That's guys like Mahomes, Allen, Dak, Wilson, Tua, Stroud, Rodgers in his prime, and to a certain extent Burrow.

 

A running QB is a guy who's first weapon is his legs and second is his arm. These QBs are usually only mediocre passers and tend to struggle when a defense schemes to take away or limit their running ability. That's guys like Lamar, Cam, RG3, and now Richardson. Obviously with Richardson we have next to no sample size, but we saw with the other three guys that without the threat of their legs, their passing didn't really scare anyone.

 

The big hope for running QBs is that they actually evolve into dual threat QBs, but it rarely happens. Allen was closer to a running QB at first but then did manage to evolve. He's really the only one though. Wilson maybe as well.

 

So IMO his whole "dual threat QBs drafted in round 1 rarely bust and have the highest floors" argument is very disingenuous, because while dual threat QBs do fit that narrative, the jury is still very much out on running QBs. Lamar isn't a bust, neither was Cam (though I think they're both a bit overrated), RG3 was a bust. Richardson we won't know for another year or two.

[Est.1974]

11 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

John Schneider who is one of the better GMs in the league wanted Lockett.  He called this team, gave us an extra pick to get him.  Lockett has been a first team All Pro.  How about that?  We had one All Pro Player in the last 20 years or so aside from our punter.  And Seattle finds one in the third round sitting right at our pick.   Will McClay one of the better personnel guys i'd presume was the one who drove the idea of wanting Demarcus Lawrence.  So we traded with Dallas to give them their guy.  We got Trent Murphy and Spencer Long -- awesome.  Dallas got a 4 time pro bowler and All Pro Player.  In our division, we did this.  

 

Yes we passed over JJ Watt.  Legend.  Hall of Famer.  But heck we at least didn't strike out with Kerrigan and got Jarvis Jenkins too, cool, in that trade down. 

 

Even the 2022 trade down which looked like yeah we finally nailed one.  Chris Olave looks like the dude we were hoping Dotson would be -- Terry Part 2.  We passed over Hamilton who is an All Pro and one of the best players in the league.  Robinson is a good player.  Howell might be trending to be a backup.  Cole Turner looks like a bust.  So it doesn't feel like we won that one either.  But will see.

 

Look in real time trading down is a ton of fun.  When Shanny kepy trading down in 2011 I was giddy.  We brought so many toys home in that draft and it looked good for about half of a season until it became clear we just loaded up on a bunch of guys.  Heck even when Vinny did it so we can get M. Kelly, D. Thomas and Fred Davis felt exciting.  But that draft also ended up bad.

That’s a very sorry tale isn’t it. So many screw ups.

[Est.1974]

Sports Illustrated stole my trade suggestion 😂 :
 

Washington Gets 

- QB Justin Fields

- 2024 NFL Draft: No. 9 and No. 110 Overall Picks

- 2025 NFL Draft: 2nd Round Pick (Carolina Panthers)

 

Chicago Gets

- 2024 NFL Draft: No. 2 Overall

[mistertim]

1 hour ago, Est.1974 said:

Sports Illustrated stole my trade suggestion 😂 :
 

Washington Gets 

- QB Justin Fields

- 2024 NFL Draft: No. 9 and No. 110 Overall Picks

- 2025 NFL Draft: 2nd Round Pick (Carolina Panthers)

 

Chicago Gets

- 2024 NFL Draft: No. 2 Overall

 

[KDawg]

2 hours ago, Est.1974 said:

Sports Illustrated stole my trade suggestion 😂 :
 

Washington Gets 

- QB Justin Fields

- 2024 NFL Draft: No. 9 and No. 110 Overall Picks

- 2025 NFL Draft: 2nd Round Pick (Carolina Panthers)

 

Chicago Gets

- 2024 NFL Draft: No. 2 Overall

This would be really, really bad. Going from 2 to 9 drops you out of the bluest of blue chip talents. And takes you out of the QB game… and potentially MHJ/Nabers/Bowers.

 

And maybe even Fashanu/Alt. 
 

And leaves you with Justin Fields in the final year of his contract.

 

I’m not as down on Fields as many here. He’s gotten better every year and I think he’d fit with Kingsbury. 
 

Buuuuuuutttttttttt…

 

#2 overall.

 

Take the QB.