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

[The Consigliere]

21 hours ago, SoCalSkins said:

Bortles was third overall not 8. 
 

Here is a list of all QBs picked in top 5 picks since 2008 that I posted earlier:

 

Bryce Young

CJ Stroud

Anthony Richardson

Trevor Lawrence

Zach Wilson

Trey Lance

Joe Burrow

Tua

Kyler Murray

Baker Mayfield 

Sam Darnold

Mitch Trubisky

Jared Goff

Wentz

Jamies Winston

Marriotta 

Blake Bortles

Andrew Luck

RG3

Cam Newton

Sam Bradford

Matthew Stafford 

Matt Ryan

 

Around 60% complete busts. 15% slightly above bust (Tua, Trevor Lawrence, Kyler). 15% good players (Stafford, Ryan, Cam) and 10% elite (Burrow, Luck). I excluded last years picks from the percentages since not enough data. (Bryce young bust for sure though).

 

So 1 in 10 chance to get a great one, although both elite players were first pick overall, and 15% chance to get a very good one. So around 1 in 4 chance we end up in a good place with QB at 2 based on last 15 years. 

Don't agree w/your way of ranking them, at all, honestly. 

 

But part of this is probably based on simply what we consider busts. For me a bust of a QB in round 1 is a guy who literally flames out and cannot play in the league, period. That is a Zach Wilson, a Blaine Gabbert, a Jake Locker.

 

You classify Tua, Trevor and Kyler as a touch above a bust (so I guess, just bad?)

 

Tua was crap in '20 and largely crap in '21, and a top 15 starter or better in '22 and '23. That's definitely better than 15% above a bust.

Lawrence has basically been average for two seasons and crap as a rookie. That's Average.

 

Kyler was a monster, mega hit producer basically until '22. He was a flat out stud from '19-'21 before he got hurt, and his mental makeup personality concerns started to worry people. He was top 15 as a rook with the team that finished dead last in the NFL in '18. 14th in '20, top 7 in '21, before he got hurt and dropped into the teens in '22, and early 20's after missing a big chunk of '23. You just have him wrong, period. I don't know if he'll ever be the same post injury and with the mental make up concerns, but when healthy he was above average to superb in his first 3 years w/a team that was horrific when he came in. That's a hit, period, when it comes to the draft.

 

As for Stafford, Ryan, and Cam, well they're different sorts, age and injuries did to Cam, what has now happened to Russell, but in their primes, both were mega elite, not just good, and Stafford and Matt Ryan? There's noone on the planet that views them as just good. They were habitually top 6-10 guys, the blue chips of the blue chips. If you want to say, well, they weren't Tom Brady, or Mahomes. Well no, but then again 99.9% of all QB's ever failed to reach that level, that's not just very good, that is 1st ballot HOF good. 

 

So no, your 1 in 10 chance to get a great one isn't right, nor your 15% to get a very good one. Look at QBR's, rankings, surrounding talent etc.

 

There's the God Tier:

Tom Brady, Mahomes, Manning, Rodgers, Montana, Elway, these guys appear about once every 10-15 years. 

 

There's the HOF Tier:

Ben Roth, Drew Brees, Phillip Rivers, Matt Stafford, Matt Ryan etc: The guys that produce HOF #'s, and are legit pro bowl types of the old school '80's/'90's version, not the bull--- crap one, these guys are perenially top 4-8 in the league caliber.

 

There's the good tier:

These are the Kirk Cousins, Kyler ('19-'21) Prime Russell Wilson, Ken O'Brien in his prime, more recently a season like Love's in '23 is a "good tier" season but of course not a good career, yet.

 

There's the adequates:

The prime Dalton, the Tua's etc, the guys you view as barely above a bust, are the guys that hit well enough to keep the starting job, but don't convince you a super bowl is in your future. The best example from the last decade is probably Derek Carr, consistently inside the top 12-18 in the league, but almost never inside the top 10. 

 

There's the "I'm not giving this guy a 2nd contract, but he aint Zach Wilson" tier:

Ryan Tannehill's, and Just Fields, and Danny Nickels (normally) would fit here. They aren't Wilson/Gabbert/Bortles/Locker level busts, but they are clearly not hits.

 

There's the "Oh ---- we did a Gabbert/Bortles/Wilson".

 

I think that's the way to rank them. Or at least my way anyway.

 

To give an example from recent years:

 

2015:

Winston-Adequate

Mariota: No 2nd Contract

 

2016:

Goff: Adequate/Good Tweener

Wentz: No 2nd Contract

 

2017:

Trubisky: No 2nd Contract/Oh ---- Tweener

Mahomes: God Tier

Watson: God Tier/Pro Bowler before the masseuse Assaults came out

 

2018:

Baker: Adequates

Darnold: No 2nd Contract

Rosen: "Oh -----"

Allen: HOF

Lamar: HOF

 

2019: 

Kyler: Pro Bowl Good Cousins Pre Injury

Danny Nickels: No 2nd Contract/Oh ---- Tweener

Haskins: Oh ----

 

2020: 

Burrow: God Tier

Tua: Adequates

Herbert: HOF

 

2021: 

Lawrence: Adequates

Wilson: Oh -----

Lance: Oh ----/injury related

Fields: No 2nd Contract

Mac Jones: No 2nd Contract

 

2022:

Pickett: No 2nd Contract/Oh ---- tweener

 

2023:

Young: 1 Oh ---- season

Stroud: 1 God Tier season

Richardson: Injury Exemption

 

So just from the post Luck Era circa 2015 through 2023:

 

25 guys:

God Tier: 3.5 (Watson pre injury/masseuse was God Tier)/25

HOF Tier: 3/25

Pro Bowl Good Tier: 1/25

Average/Adequates: 5/25

No 2nd Contracts: 7/25

Oh ---- busts: 5-6

 

 

I think my own list kind of echoes are own intuitions and the draft history of the position: Historically 1st round QB's are viewed as busting eventually about half the time. That's basically what we have here, around 12 guys their draft teams had no interest in keeping beyond 1 contract and were generally speaking, right to think that way. There's about 12 hits, in terms of being able to play starting QB in the league at an adequate, Good/Pro Bowl, HOF and god tier level, and we have Richardson, who pre injuries, was viewed as a big hit by nearly everyone and especially the Colts last summer and fall before he got hurt a second time in the first six weeks or so of the season, making it 12.5 or 13 hits out of 25 guys, basically right around 50 to 50+%. The God Tier and HOF hit rate sits close 25% and add Pro Bowler/Cousins type guy, that pushes that rate to about 30% to me anyway. Adequates, the sort of Baker Mayfield line to Trevor Lawrence disappointing kind of level right now, is about 20%. 

 

So in general, I think we almost agree at the chances of hitting on a very good to mega elite QB, you see it as a 25% chance, I see it as historically the last 8 years as about 30%. Your mega bust rate is way higher than mine, and I do think I'm right in my view of it, because I think there's a genuine tangible difference between guys like Baker Mayfield, Jameis Winston, Rams and early Lions Goff, and guys like Trubisky and Zach Wilson. A guy like Mayfield and and a guy like Winston could and can play in the league, period, they can start. And they're fine, but they aren't special or above average to good and will never be. Is that a bust? No. To me honestly, at any given time, somewhere between 66-70% of the starting jobs in the league are manned by Jason Campbell, Baker Mayfield, Derek Carr's, Chad Pennington type adequates, or a bit worse QBs, or crazy ones like Winston. That is a better fate, in terms of talent and production, then Zach Wilson's, and Mitch Trubisky's and Josh Rosen's by a lot. Guys who flat out cannot play (even if its probably better to draft a Rosen, or Wilson rather than a Pennington, Carr or Campbell (in the former case, you know you ----ed up immediately, and have to try again, if you draft a Carr or Pennington, you rationalize their inadequacies and limitations, failing to ever come close to contending in the process). 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

2 minutes ago, Est.1974 said:

What’s clear is the opinion on these QBs is incredibly divided on all fronts. You stated people on here are prepared to settle for mediocre ? Why is that ? Because they don’t agree with you ?

 

The opinion is divided on who is the best among the top 3.  Maybe even top 4.  Different subject.

 

I am referring to the lets trade down group especially when the argument is couched in what if we are wrong. 

 

It's a mindset.  It's not something endemic to some quirky view that I and just a few stragglers share -- but its conventional talk that just about every mock draft geek type agrees on which is its worth the risk to shoot for the QB, when you need a QB, and you are picking high and its perceived to be a good draft for that spot.

 

If you shoot and miss.  You likely might still suck.  If you trade down and miss you likely won't suck as much because you added to the roster.

 

No one wants mediocrity.  So I don't mean it that literally.  But IMHO reading so many of the explanations for why many of the small but vocal minority wants to trade down seems to centers on the risk.   It comes off that the risk is we suck.  Trading down would at least mitigate the possibility of sucking. 

 

[Est.1974]

1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

The opinion is divided on who is the best among the top 3.  Maybe even top 4.  Different subject.

 

I am referring to the lets trade down group especially when the argument is couched in what if we are wrong. 

 

It's a mindset.  It's not something endemic to some quirky view that I and just a few stragglers share -- but its conventional talk that just about every mock draft geek type agrees on which is its worth the risk to shoot for the QB, when you need a QB, and you are picking high and its perceived to be a good draft for that spot.

 

If you shoot and miss.  You likely might still suck.  If you trade down and miss you likely won't suck as much because you added to the roster.

 

No one wants mediocrity.  So I don't mean it that literally.  But IMHO reading so many of the explanations for why many of the small but vocal minority wants to trade down seems to centers on the risk.   It comes off that the risk is we suck.  Trading down would at least mitigate the possibility of sucking. 

 

I think we should keep a very open mind with regards to our approach at QB, there’s a long way to go yet….

[Voice_of_Reason]

3 hours ago, HigSkin said:

Hate to be a conspirator but screw it.  What if Chris Simms, son of Phil Simms who played for the Giants is out there slinging shade on Maye, in hopes he drops to NY?

You're over thinking it.

 

He's an attention seeking douchebag.

 

Sometimes the simplest answer is the best.  Occam's Razor.  

[mistertim]

13 minutes ago, Est.1974 said:

I think we should keep a very open mind with regards to our approach at QB, there’s a long way to go yet….

 

The saying "Be open minded, but not so open minded that your brain falls out" seems to apply here.

 

Sure, listen to trade offers, because there's nothing to lose by listening. Sure, do some due diligence on other options, including lower tier prospects or FAs.

 

But at the end of the day, if you have a top 2 pick in a top heavy QB class and you need a QB........you're probably best off picking a QB there.

[The Consigliere]

20 hours ago, clskinsfan said:

The pick wont do them any good if they player they pick refuses to play for them. They could do something like the Manning deal I guess. 

I think it would be for more than that, but I have to admit, just like with the chargers twenty years ago, I don't understand the thinking. Both the Bears and San Diego, historically have had crap owners, so there is that. But the Chargers have repeatedly produced good if not great teams, the Bears have been much worse, but there's the difference right here, and right now. The Bears build is similar to the Patriots, a good defense, barely adequate run game, but, unlike the patriots, they have some legit pass catchers, DJ Moore is an alpha, not tier 1, but he's a top 10 WR talent in the league pretty easily and Mooney as a rookie was a breakout stud before Fields killed his value and performance. The Bears as a landing spot, is landing with a good defense, a solid OL, genuine weapons at WR and TE, adequate RB talent kind of (none of their guys are elite, but Roschon is the rare bat that is an A+ pass blocker, an A+ pass catrcher, and a B+ runner with A- potential, their starter is less impressive but adequate). 

 

Why do you want to avoid Chicago for a Washington team where the OL is a horror show, the defense stinks, and the only assets for him on offense are underperforming WR's and an efficient (some would say unsustainably efficient considering his pass catching #'s at Alabama) but unathletic RB. Why prefer Washington? Or NE which is worse playmakers, but better D and slightly better OL?

 

It just is utterly bizarre, Chicago is a better landing spot by far right now. Period. I just refuse to believe it. I think he wants to declare himself a free agent and choose his team, but understands why thats impossible (or will understand). 

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

17 minutes ago, Est.1974 said:

I think we should keep a very open mind with regards to our approach at QB, there’s a long way to go yet….

 

That's dumb.

[Voice_of_Reason]

18 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

The opinion is divided on who is the best among the top 3.  Maybe even top 4.  Different subject.

I would just amend this to say the opinion is divided in the media/draftnik community.  

 

We have no idea what the actual decision makers think.  Because there's no way they're telling anybody.  It could be divided, or they could be pointing and laughing at all the fools with opinions and thinking they're, well, fools. 

[DogofWar1]

42 minutes ago, Est.1974 said:

Seattle after Penix says a lot. 
 

Teams think these ‘lower tier/mediocre’ prospects are worth a shot. 

 

Meh it says they're picking 16 and know they can't get an elite guy so if they want a QB it's 16 or they maybe get Rattler in the 3rd (they don't have a 2nd).  If you think all 6 top QBs are going in the first and lack a 2nd to maneuver you take who you gotta take where you are.

 

Seattle is living thru the Geno Smith late bloomer tour, but at 1.33 TDs a game last year they can still upgrade and even if he gave them 2022 numbers he's still likely only got a few more years of this before age catches him.

 

Penix makes sense for them bc they can hopefully ride Geno for a bit and build an offense to Penix's strengths, which is being a pure pocket passer (aka statue) with very high efficiency, and get him ready by year 2 or so.

 

But let's not get carried away here.  Penix can't extend plays like Maye/Williams/JJ.  He is not a threat to get a 1st down with his legs on 3rd down like Williams/Maye/Daniels.  Mid-1st to a team with somewhat of a base built around him sounds about right.

[The Consigliere]

20 hours ago, illone said:

 

 

Keep in mind Chrissy Simms has access to worlds finest marijuana, and he doesnt shy from consuming said stash.

 

Nothing against a little whacky tobacky, but it's worth noting when he puts Bo Nix ahead of Maye and JJ.

 

That's some goood shiz. 

In fairness to him:

In '17, it was 2 and 3 that hit, not 1.

In '18, the consensus (and admittedly there wasn't broad consenus ended up playing like this)

1. Baker (3 in actuality)

2. Darnold (4 in actuality)

3. Rosen (5th in actuality)

4. Allen (1st or 2nd in actuality)

5. Lamar (1st or 2nd in Actuality)

 

In '19 they were right: they had Kyler as the only top end QB and he was the only guy with top end potential.

 

In '20:

1st was Burrow and he's god tier (1st)

2nd was Tua and he's (3rd)

3rd was herbert (2), two tiers below and he's damn close to burrow in God tier (but just HOF for now)

 

'21 was a total s show.

1. Lawrence: God Tier, he's been average and #1 in the class

 

Tier 2:

Lance, Wilson

I dont think there's consensus, but those guys were clearly now the worst of the 5.

 

Tier 3:

Fields: looking like 2nd best

 

Tier 4:

Mac Jones: looking like 3rd despite going 5th

 

2023:

Now we know the debate between Stroud and Young (and there was no consensus beyond alarm at Strouds bad S2 score), shouldn't have been 1, with Stroud, a slight 2nd, clearly being #1, and Richardson being #2 way ahead of Young for now.

 

 

It's not easy to do this. There's basically never been a draft the past decade where the consensus and performance matched, and often, its been crazy, like '22, '21, '18 in particular where they got it totally wrong.

 

So would I be shocked if 5 years from now people are shocked Penix didn't go higher and one of the big 3 didn't go way lower? No, I kinda expect it. I don't expect Nix to make us all look stupid, but Im pretty sure either JJ or Penix, 2-4 years from now will be locked in, as one of the best 3 QB's in this draft, while one of the big 3 will fall from grace, or just be #4. 

 

The only thing that really gives me pause is that for the most part, I have a hard time feeling any of the big 3 are liable to end up like Lance and Wilson, and only Daniels and Williams give me any concerns at all in that area: for Williams its mental make up, and for Daniels, its his frame, and the lack of production the first several years (someone today made a good argument that his ASU team was absolutely loaded, and it was idiot Hue Jackson, wasting the talent there during Daniels time w/the team), mixed with the throw/anticipation/center of the field concern, desire to run instead of throw people open etc. I have minor concerns, which would not surprise me, if they end up explaining why he might bust or just be disappointing, so there's that, but I also think chances are, all four of those guys (including penix) are good, and the only major concern is health rather than performance (or mental make up with Williams). 

But anyway, I think Simms rankings just remind us of the hubris we can all have with our preferences and rankings especially at QB, where things are almost never as good as they seem ahead of time (you'd have to go back to '04 to find a class where noone disappointed significantly and in that case, even, it would be fair to say that Eli, was the worst of the 3 and basically just an average starter with playoff gumption). 

[The Consigliere]

16 hours ago, kingdaddy said:

These QB's are a crapshoot, history shows most of them will bust. We can't afford a bust at #2 overall like what's happening in Carolina. Trade back and take the risk later in the draft, get the motherload offer and draft more players! Ask the Jets....Panthers....Niners.....Falcons.....NYG........Patriots. Learn from history.

History does not show most of them will bust. Flat out busts/wash outs, are pretty rare, generally speaking around half hit as legit starters, period, and then of the other half, about 15-30% end up washouts depending upon which time frame your looking at, and about 20-35% end up being part time starters, losing their job, or not getting a 2nd contract, and looking for new opportunities (basically, Winston, Tannehill, and Dalton types). 

16 hours ago, kingdaddy said:

Living in fear vs living in analytics and percentages. Last two #2 overall picks for Washington: RGlll, Chase Young. We'll see how this goes. Faith in our staff.

Tremendous sample size you're looking at there. 

[Warhead36]

If you're not sold on any of the Big 3 then you'll never be happy with any QB prospect. They're as good as you're realistically gonna get.

4 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

History does not show most of them will bust. Flat out busts/wash outs, are pretty rare, generally speaking around half hit as legit starters, period, and then of the other half, about 15-30% end up washouts depending upon which time frame your looking at, and about 20-35% end up being part time starters, losing their job, or not getting a 2nd contract, and looking for new opportunities (basically, Winston, Tannehill, and Dalton types). 

Tremendous sample size you're looking at there. 

It really depends on the QB class you're drafting from. When you take QBs in perceived strong classes, you have a very good chance of getting at least a solid starter.

 

The numbers skew downwards because of expansion teams and teams reaching for mediocrity(your Kenny Picketts, EJ Maneuls etc.).

 

Perceived blue chippers in strong classes hit pretty frequently.

[The Consigliere]

5 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

He said the first time he talked about at the combine, no chance NFL teams won't see it the same way as him.  In yesterday's segment he said it again.  As a contrast for example Trice who is a borderline zealot for Drake Maye doesn't go there is no chance the NFL doesn't see it the way he does.  Draftniks typically don't take it that far.  But Simms did.

 

All these guys or most of these guys will get some wrong, and some right as we all do even as amateurs on the draft thread.  Heck for me as an amateur, I had my share of picks that look great including Terry McLaurin and had to defend the pick here among others.   You pick enough players you'll get some right.  Just how it works.  If we cherry pick the best evaluations we've all had -- amateur or draftnik or whatever, we'd all look like geniuses.

 

Chris Simms is entertaining and is as good and as bad as an evaluator I've watched over the years.  I do like watching-listening to most of these guys but I don't take any of them uber seriously.  But I do prefer some humility.  Kiper for example gets some grief for his arrogance when he was younger but now he goofs on some of his bad picks and doesn't seem to take himself ultra seriously -- and for my taste, I like that.

As an example of that, I nailed AJ Brown in that class, missed McLaurin entirely, and nailed DK, and missed on N'Keal Harry. Harry's data coming in was flat out ridiculous, the only concern, and everyone had it, was target separation, but he timed fine in the 40, and he was solid with contested catch rate. Didn't matter, in the NFL his play speed was crap, and he failed, horribly. Brown and Metcalf, who the dynasty community mostly worshipped, inexplicably fell into round 2, the dynasty community had them at the same or similar levels to guys like Lamb a year later, and hated Jeudy and Ruggs in comparison who went dozens of picks earlier the following year. We were right, the NFL were dumber than -----. But Denzel Mims, everyones favorite Senior Bowl WR flamed out horribly, so we were wrong there.

 

You just never know and your reasoning for hits can be both wrong and right on separate individual players in the same freaking class.

 

It's hard, but you should be able to develop thresholds, and tools to help, but it won't perfect any system, or free you up from the possibilities of outliers hitting, and seemingly guaranteed grand slam prospects busting (see Charles Rogers from decades ago). These are people, and not just machines, these prospects, and there are a manifold of factors playing in a roll in all aspects of succes and failure, the best we can do is develop models to help us reduce mistakes, not avoid them entirely or even most of the time, just some of the time. 

[FrFan]

https://nfltraderumors.co/nfc-rumors-saquon-barkley-dak-prescott-drake-maye-sam-howell-commanders-cowboys-eagles-giants/

 

[mh86]

42 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

I think it would be for more than that, but I have to admit, just like with the chargers twenty years ago, I don't understand the thinking. Both the Bears and San Diego, historically have had crap owners, so there is that. But the Chargers have repeatedly produced good if not great teams, the Bears have been much worse, but there's the difference right here, and right now. The Bears build is similar to the Patriots, a good defense, barely adequate run game, but, unlike the patriots, they have some legit pass catchers, DJ Moore is an alpha, not tier 1, but he's a top 10 WR talent in the league pretty easily and Mooney as a rookie was a breakout stud before Fields killed his value and performance. The Bears as a landing spot, is landing with a good defense, a solid OL, genuine weapons at WR and TE, adequate RB talent kind of (none of their guys are elite, but Roschon is the rare bat that is an A+ pass blocker, an A+ pass catrcher, and a B+ runner with A- potential, their starter is less impressive but adequate). 

 

Why do you want to avoid Chicago for a Washington team where the OL is a horror show, the defense stinks, and the only assets for him on offense are underperforming WR's and an efficient (some would say unsustainably efficient considering his pass catching #'s at Alabama) but unathletic RB. Why prefer Washington? Or NE which is worse playmakers, but better D and slightly better OL?

 

It just is utterly bizarre, Chicago is a better landing spot by far right now. Period. I just refuse to believe it. I think he wants to declare himself a free agent and choose his team, but understands why thats impossible (or will understand). 

I agree with you, but I can also see the other point of view - Because Chicago is likely one bad season or two mediocre from a head coach change. Then you end up in a situation that many young QBs fail in, a revolving door of coaches, schemes, and players. We were considered to be in a good spot after Ron’s first season and look where that got us. A lot can change really quickly in one offseason.

 

On the other hand we are in a better position for the future. New and highly regarded front office and coaches that will be given a longer leash. All unknowns at this point, sure. Of course, if the QB turns out to be Jesus reincarnated then it doesn’t matter and he’d be saving everyone’s job, at least for a bit longer than a season.

Edited March 7 by mh86

[Llevron]

43 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

You're over thinking it.

 

He's an attention seeking douchebag.

 

Sometimes the simplest answer is the best.  Occam's Razor.  

 

You know - the day before he dropped this list.....he was all over twitter making videos about how crazy his list would be tomorrow and how he has already said too much but you have to tune in cause he is only gonna give you the top 2 now and you have to wait to see who is three...!!!

 

He is so transparent in his intentions its almost funny. 

[The Consigliere]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

The Maye dislike as a prospect on this thread is intense with a few.   I know some say they don't dislike him as a prospect but rooting for him to go to a division rival for me is a 10 out of 10 level disliking the dude as a prospect.

 

It feels like i did when I pumped my fist in celebration when the Giants took Daniel Jones in the draft years ago.  Why?  Because i thought Daniel would be a bust.  No way I buy anyone rooting for Maye to end up in NY as being cool with him as the pick here, it makes no sense for me to root for ANY player to go to a divison rival if they think they are good.

Yep. I hated the Scherff pick in '15, I wanted Leonard Williams, but the one piece of the Scherff pick I liked (beyond acknowledging that we got an above average to pro bowl level Guard) was that the Giants were so fixated on him, that they just took the next guy at the position with their next pick (Flowers, RT), kinda like how we took Payne after TB took our target a few years later. When '19 came around, I barely even cared about the Haskins stupidity because I was infinitely more scared we'd trade away '20 picks to move up for Danny Nickels since we knew the Giants wanted him too. When the Giants took him, and we kept our '20 picks instead, the Haskins pick was gravy to me, because I knew the '20 class was loaded at QB. Alas, the dream ended there, until now. 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, Est.1974 said:

I think we should keep a very open mind with regards to our approach at QB, there’s a long way to go yet….

 

 

If its who are the top 4 and who should they take among those?  You bet.  I trust Peters to give it the best stab.  Open minded.  And to that point I am not rooting for any of that top 4 Qbs to play against us in the division -- to me that feels arrogant, like I personally can call who is the bust among them.

 

But as you and I have discussed multiple times, trading out of a top 2 pick when you are a team lacking arguably a potential young franchise QB on your roster let alone in a touted draft for QBs happens VERY rarely.  

 

So am not that open minded to trading down because its unusual.  But even with that said, I am to an extent as I've said many times on that thread.  If they did it, you never know Peters might nail it, lets say where lets say Daniels is the next Malik Willis and Maye is the next Daniel Jones and they take Bo Nix who ends up the next Purdy.  I'd let it play out.  But if it doesn't go well and lets say in that scenario, Nix is another in a series of 2nd tier losers and Maye or Daniels ends up good -- Peters deserves IMO to be fired.

 

But I got zero fear that this theory play out. 

 

As @The Consigliere would in particular talk about for years, we never suck at the right time to get that QB, pick high in a touted QB draft, it doesn't happen.  I've mentioned for years Portis once when cornered about why this team for eons can't get over the hump -- said the same thing.  Even the buffoon Cerrato in an interview had that same excuse.  Jay more or less has said similar things.  Now we are here.  Carpe Diem.

 

So yeah i don't think most believe trading down is the way to go.  You see it in fan polls put on by both radio stations.  I agree that anyone of course is entitled not to go against the grain and think differently.  But speaking for myself, i am not that open minded about trading down.  If feels to me too much like punting our situation back right squarely where we typically shop, that is picking through the 2nd tier QBs and hope to get lucky.

 

Brugler talking about this team recently and was amazed going through the data that as bad as Washington has been they've only taken a QB in the top 10 once in the last 30 years.  IMO and plenty of others its way past due to take another early swing.  This isn't a playground we typically play in.  Trading down would put us back to the playground we are used to.  Could this finally be the charm shopping in that next tier?  Sure, you never know.  But I'd rather go with the better odds.

 

Edited March 7 by Skinsinparadise

[woodpecker]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Granted its just a small number of people.  But I am surprised how many are good with mediocrity as an option.    We've had two regimes (Bruce and Ron) which seemed to embrace that mindset.  I got a strong vibe that Peters does not. 

I don’t think anybody is embracing mediocrity. I agree we should take the swing at a QB, but I don’t agree that cashing in for the draft capital haul is a one-way ticket to mediocrity. If you want to judge it against the clown show we’ve had here the last 25 years, then sure. But there are many ways to skin a cat, and with a great GM like an Adam Peters and no more Snyder to meddle, it is possible to find that franchise QB another way. I think we need to get out of the mode of thinking our team is too dysfunctional to keep all options open. Again, I’m all for staying at 2 and taking a QB, but at some point there is a price where I would trade down. I don’t see it as embracing mediocrity, I see it as embracing a properly run organization. But just to flip it around, could one not argue that not going all in on a trade up for Caleb is embracing mediocrity?

[clskinsfan]

1 hour ago, Est.1974 said:

I think we should keep a very open mind with regards to our approach at QB, there’s a long way to go yet….

Open minded about one of the top 3? Sure. But not open minded about trading away the second pick when you literally are going to have a blue chip QB fall into your lap. We have to pick a QB. Anything else is stupidity.

[clskinsfan]

58 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

I think it would be for more than that, but I have to admit, just like with the chargers twenty years ago, I don't understand the thinking. Both the Bears and San Diego, historically have had crap owners, so there is that. But the Chargers have repeatedly produced good if not great teams, the Bears have been much worse, but there's the difference right here, and right now. The Bears build is similar to the Patriots, a good defense, barely adequate run game, but, unlike the patriots, they have some legit pass catchers, DJ Moore is an alpha, not tier 1, but he's a top 10 WR talent in the league pretty easily and Mooney as a rookie was a breakout stud before Fields killed his value and performance. The Bears as a landing spot, is landing with a good defense, a solid OL, genuine weapons at WR and TE, adequate RB talent kind of (none of their guys are elite, but Roschon is the rare bat that is an A+ pass blocker, an A+ pass catrcher, and a B+ runner with A- potential, their starter is less impressive but adequate). 

 

Why do you want to avoid Chicago for a Washington team where the OL is a horror show, the defense stinks, and the only assets for him on offense are underperforming WR's and an efficient (some would say unsustainably efficient considering his pass catching #'s at Alabama) but unathletic RB. Why prefer Washington? Or NE which is worse playmakers, but better D and slightly better OL?

 

It just is utterly bizarre, Chicago is a better landing spot by far right now. Period. I just refuse to believe it. I think he wants to declare himself a free agent and choose his team, but understands why thats impossible (or will understand). 

I am with you. Unless being "home" means everything to him. Chicago is a better spot right now for sure. And I think DJ Moore might be a top 5 WR in this league. He put up great numbers with a horrible passing QB. The guy is uncoverable. 

[NOLA2DC]

15 minutes ago, mh86 said:

I agree with you, but I can also see the other point of view - Because Chicago is likely one bad season or two mediocre from a head coach change. Then you end up in a situation that many young QBs fail in, a revolving door of coaches, schemes, and players. We were considered to be in a good spot after Ron’s first season and look where that got us. A lot can change really quickly in one offseason.

 

On the other hand we are in a better position for the future. New and highly regarded front office and coaches that will be given a longer leash. All unknowns at this point, sure. Of course, if the QB turns out to be Jesus reincarnated then it doesn’t matter and he’d be saving everyone’s job, at least for a bit longer than a season.

If you had asked anyone what they thought about Houston as an organization before last year, most people would have said it was a terrible organization. A year later, they look like they're set for another 5-10 years. Poles was part of the team that identified Mahomes and helped build the current KC regime, so we don't know what will happen in Chicago. Peters comes from the Niners and the regime that has identified several blue-chip players and Purdy, so we'llll see what happens with us.     

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, woodpecker said:

I don’t think anybody is embracing mediocrity. I agree we should take the swing at a QB, but I don’t agree that cashing in for the draft capital haul is a one-way ticket to mediocrity. If you want to judge it against the clown show we’ve had here the last 25 years, then sure. But there are many ways to skin a cat, and with a great GM like an Adam Peters and no more Snyder to meddle, it is possible to find that franchise QB another way. I think we need to get out of the mode of thinking our team is too dysfunctional to keep all options open. Again, I’m all for staying at 2 and taking a QB, but at some point there is a price where I would trade down. I don’t see it as embracing mediocrity, I see it as embracing a properly run organization. But just to flip it around, could one not argue that not going all in on a trade up for Caleb is embracing mediocrity?

 

It's all about playing odds.  

 

A.  There is no counter argument to its better to pick a QB later in the draft.  The odds don't back up that its better to pick one later.

 

B.  The odds of a stacked roster winning without a good QB is low.  The odds back up that argument, too.

 

C.  There isn't a single GM who has a formula to shop in that 2nd tier of QBs and beat the first tier.  If that formula existed it would change the game forever and basically make the draft a joke.  It happens from time to time and even the GMs speaking about it (including Peters) say they didn't expect it otherwise they'd have take the QB earlier.

 

D.  I was high on Peters well before we hired him.  But the dude isn't Superman. 

 

I am not going out on a limb with any of this.  It's conventional, yawn level, stuff that draftniks, scouts, anayltics types talk about all the time.  When you got a shot at that QB picking high and you need one take that shot. 

 

The Caleb point has zero to do with this point.  If anything it helps make my point.  We'd have to trade up major draft capital to get Caleb.  We don't have to trade a cent to get a QB in this draft picking #2 and in a draft with two other QBs with major hype including from scouts-personnel guys judging by leaks.  Why do we keep hearing the Raiders, or the Giants or all these teams want to trade in the top 3.  It's not because they are idiots but they know if they don't have a QB they have nothing.

 

Edited March 7 by Skinsinparadise

[illone]

1 hour ago, The Consigliere said:

But anyway, I think Simms rankings just remind us of the hubris we can all have with our preferences and rankings especially at QB, where things are almost never as good as they seem ahead of time (you'd have to go back to '04 to find a class where noone disappointed significantly and in that case, even, it would be fair to say that Eli, was the worst of the 3 and basically just an average starter with playoff gumption). 

 

Agreed.

 

I'm just giving him a hard time. I'd roast bowls with him anytime while discussing the humor of his rankings and how funny it will be when he accidentaly hits on half of them.

 

Chrissy sounds confident, but I dont think he takes himself too seriously.

 

Point being, any stoner with good or bad weed can get lucky this time of year and Im certain if pressed, he would admit as much.

 

Afterall, none of us are getting paid to make these picks and my kids eating isnt dependent on the pick working out. Same goes for the entire Simms clan, since I noticed his brother has a podcast as well. Matt Simms was on Finlay and BMitch the other day...

 

For the record, I dont take myself too seriously either. I mentioned this previously, but I was a HUGE colt brennan guy... Not a full fledged cult member, but he was so electric in college I really thought he was going to be special in the NFL...

[Est.1974]

1 hour ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

That's dumb.

Sure seems that way