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

[illone]

48 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

But yeah, for the most part, I have some good humor with this, and admit that there's no way to nail this down, but there's also good process/best practices you can use that can help you...

 

 

Nine teams still passed on Mahomes...

 

Think about that for a moment.

 

Nine professional organizations with at least 7-10 scouts each, a Director of College Scouting, General Manager, QB Coach, Offensive Coordinator, Head Coach, and Im sure Im missing other highly paid role players involved in the process...

 

Thats millions of dollars in payroll that whiffed on the most important position in pro sports.

 

Multiplied nine times.

 

This is why I dont take my armchair GM job too seriously. 

 

Now when it comes to the regular season, and I start my (semi) professional sports betting operation up again, I will get very serious about my investment strategy.

 

But this time of year?

 

I basically do my best to project what I think a guy will become with proper coaching and the right scheme fit. 

 

Example:  JJ McCarthy. This is a guy that has the least amount of tape actually throwing the football. He gets an A+ for handing the ball off. However, you can see the talent bubbling beneath the surface, and he ran a pro style offense in school.  he was also coached by an NFL style head coach, and delivered on 3rd down in critical situations. I suspect he will interview well, and is one of the youngest QBs in the draft, so I am willing to bet he becomes something much greater than he has shown. If you drafted him based on what he has done, and not what you think he can do, he'd probably be a day 3 pick, aside from the winning record. But the positional value and winning percentage will get him into the top 15 picks most likely.

 

Are the other prospects better RIGHT NOW? Thats glaringly true and I wont debate that. But I will debate the risk reward of obtaining a player like that and getting him into the proper system, coaching him up, and letting his leadership and winning mentality shine. Certain players are GREAT college players, and do squat in the pros. Jayden Daniels strikes me as that type of player... I dont care if he is a blue chip this or that, or if the entire world thinks he is cant miss. You dont risk a high draft pick on a player that you dont believe translates to the pro game long term. My favorite team finally has an actual front office structure in place for the first time in over 20 years. I for one am willing to be patient and build this thing for long term success, not immediate quick fixes. I could care less if this team passes on the top 3 Qbs in this draft. I know many here would meltdown, but not me because that would signal a departure from conventional wisdom and making a tough decision despite how the media and fans would react. Thats true leadership and professionalism and takes more courage than most people are willing to admit.

 

The draft process is broken, but I think the more you can learn about the person the better chance you have of hiring the right player when you are on the clock. Another reason why this process is tough for armchair GMs. We dont get to hear the interviews and we are operating with limited data. I've actually looked around for All22 tape on college players, and that is apparently a dark market. The closest you can get is youtube channels like QB school and others who do use the All22 in some of their breakdowns.

 

With NFL Plus I can get the pro tape, but college tape is much harder to come by. I read somewhere that its traded on the underground via shared google drives and discreet back room handshakes. I suppose if I was a real scout I could get in on that, but alas my personal network doesnt extend to those areas so Im left making educated guesses based on 20+ years of watching college football and seeing what works in the pros and what doesnt. Im wrong alot, but I keep learning more each year and one thing Ive noticed is that mock draft consensus is a complete waste of time. This is why if I have McCarthy rated high, i just take him at #2 and throw double middle fingers to the league. Im gonna trust my own evaluation, not someone elses.  Media and pundits be damned.

 

 

 

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

14 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Keim who is actually a reporter believes their intention isn't to trade up and 95% chance or so they stay put at 2.  He's not alone on that.

I will say, if they are intending to make a move, probably the only people who know are Peters, Quinn and Harris.  And they’re certainly not telling any reporter.  So Keim, I’m sure is hearing from folks they’re intending to stay put.  Which is likely.  But if they weren’t, from this group, nobody would know until it was all over.

 

This is why the Schefter idiocracacy is so idiotic.  He says “Washington might jump in.”  Who told him to say that?  Cause it wasn’t one of the 3 people on the commanders who would know or want to do it.  It’s not how they operate.  
 

So it was Kirk’s agent. 

[illone]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

The safe thing is to trade back.  That's not really a debate. 

 

 

Safe for who?

 

The media, fans, and pundits who will criticize the move?

 

or safe for the organization that is probably miles apart on the actual evaluation of said players...

 

Id argue none of is it safe, therefore all of it is. In the end the only thing that matters is what Peters and Quinn think, not us, not the media, not the mock drafters and youtubers who will comment on said pick.

 

Case in point, draft grades the day after it concludes are complete garbage and nothing more than commercial grade horse **** designed to generate clicks and attention.

 

Actual draft grades arent known for many years in most cases. Sometimes you know right away, like with Stroud, but most of the time its seasons down the road and in some cases a different scheme, head coach or new team. There is no proven formula for safe, but I guess it depends on which angle you are evaluating. 

 

Id argue none of this is about being safe, or whatever. Playing it safe for today has ended many careers in the NFL.

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

3 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

I will say, if they are intending to make a move, probably the only people who know are Peters, Quinn and Harris.  And they’re certainly not telling any reporter.  So Keim, I’m sure is hearing from folks they’re intending to stay put.  Which is likely.  But if they weren’t, from this group, nobody would know until it was all over.

 

This is why the Schefter idiocracacy is so idiotic.  He says “Washington might jump in.”  Who told him to say that?  Cause it wasn’t one of the 3 people on the commanders who would know or want to do it.  It’s not how they operate.  
 

So it was Kirk’s agent. 

 

Keim's points on this.

 

A.  They haven't decided

 

B.  He could see the pick go either way.  When pushed to pick one by Finlay he said Drake Maye

 

C.  He doesn't think they trade up for two reasons.  He knows they want to keep their picks, he's heard they think their draft capital is precious and his sources who cover the Bears tell him they strongly believe the Bears are holding on to their pick and will take Caleb

 

D.  Said more or less 95% chance he felt they are staying at #2 -- said that on the Junkies

[kingdaddy]

9 minutes ago, illone said:

Id argue none of this is about being safe, or whatever. Playing it safe for today has ended many careers in the NFL.

 

You're right, but so has blowing the pick cost jobs right? If you take the motherload of an offer you get more picks and chances that you'll hit. I remember wondering if we should trade back before we took Chase Young because of the injury factor. It's less likely 3 or 4 picks get injured vs 1 guy right? But a stud is a stud and you gotta take the stud right? Chase ended up missing about as many games as he played.

This is what sports is, making the best decision for your team. Some guys will be more aggressive and roll the dice while some guys will play it safer. It's all a mindset. For me, if Peters isn't convinced that Maye or Daniels aren't clearly better prospects than McCarthy, Penix, Nix, Rattler, etc. then he should move around while assuring he gets one of the QB's that he believes can play in the league. We need football players....period. Lots of them. We also need a QB. Peters needs to decide how to get them all and of course we'll all have our own opinions on how he should go about it. That's what makes this site fun.....the banter. 

[Skinsinparadise]

28 minutes ago, illone said:

 

 

Safe for who?

 

The media, fans, and pundits who will criticize the move?

 

or safe for the organization that is probably miles apart on the actual evaluation of said players...

 

Id argue none of is it safe, therefore all of it is. In the end the only thing that matters is what Peters and Quinn think, not us, not the media, not the mock drafters and youtubers who will comment on said pick.

 

Case in point, draft grades the day after it concludes are complete garbage and nothing more than commercial grade horse **** designed to generate clicks and attention.

 

Actual draft grades arent known for many years in most cases. Sometimes you know right away, like with Stroud, but most of the time its seasons down the road and in some cases a different scheme, head coach or new team. There is no proven formula for safe, but I guess it depends on which angle you are evaluating. 

 

Id argue none of this is about being safe, or whatever. Playing it safe for today has ended many careers in the NFL.

 

 

 

We are talking about trading down right?  That's what I was talking about.   As for doing what draftnik so and so thinks I don't think anyone gives a rats ass.  As to draft grades, ditto.

 

As for trading down being considered the safer bet.  The logic for doing it is consistent.  It's not some new fangled argument conjured up here.  It's as cliche of an argument in the draft process as it gets.

 

The idea is you trade down.  You get more picks.  You get more picks you have a better chance to hit on a pick.

 

Do I want to do it, in this case?  Nope.  But the logic for trading down isn't that deep.  It's discussed by every draftnik on the planet -- GMs who have done it talked plenty of times that the idea is you add more picks, you get more players.  

Edited March 8 by Skinsinparadise

[illone]

6 minutes ago, kingdaddy said:

You're right, but so has blowing the pick cost jobs right? If you take the motherload of an offer you get more picks and chances that you'll hit. I remember wondering if we should trade back before we took Chase Young because of the injury factor. It's less likely 3 or 4 picks get injured vs 1 guy right? But a stud is a stud and you gotta take the stud right? Chase ended up missing about as many games as he played.

This is what sports is, making the best decision for your team. Some guys will be more aggressive and roll the dice while some guys will play it safer. It's all a mindset. For me, if Peters isn't convinced that Maye or Daniels aren't clearly better prospects than McCarthy, Penix, Nix, Rattler, etc. then he should move around while assuring he gets one of the QB's that he believes can play in the league. We need football players....period. Lots of them. We also need a QB. Peters needs to decide how to get them all and of course we'll all have our own opinions on how he should go about it. That's what makes this site fun.....the banter. 

 

 

Exactly right. Blowing the pick is risky too. Hence my point about safety. Its baked into the cake that everyone sticks their grubby dirty fingers into trying to find the piece with the most icing.

 

You could trade back, gain 3-5 new picks, and ALL of those acquired picks could bust in year one 😂

 

I sense fan participation is much higher this off-season, probably for the same reason Im more engaged... Hope springs eternal.

 

 

5 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

We are talking about trading down right?  That's what I was talking about.   As for doing what draftnik so and so thinks I don't think anyone gives a rats ass.  As to draft grades, ditto.

 

As for trading down being considered the safer bet.  The logic for doing it is consistent.  It's some new fangled argument conjured up here.  It's as cliche of an argument in the draft process as it gets.

 

The idea is you trade down.  You get more picks.  You get more picks you have a better chance to hit on a pick.

 

Do I want to do it, in this case?  Nope.  But the logic for trading down isn't that deep.  It's discussed by every draftnik on the planet -- GMs who have done it talked plenty of times that the idea is you add more picks, you get more players.  

 

 

We're in agreement then.

 

You dont trade back because its safer.

 

You trade back because of how your draft board is rated, and which probably changes daily based on new information.

 

I dont think you trade down simply because of the perception of getting more bites at the apple, thus risk is decreased... In this case I think you trade back because you have multiple players ranked highly and the opportunity to hire those players exceeds the value of staying put.

 

Just my 2¢

[Skinsinparadise]

19 minutes ago, illone said:

 

 

We're in agreement then.

 

You dont trade back because its safer.

 

You trade back because of how your draft board is rated, and which probably changes daily based on new information.

 

I dont think you trade down simply because of the perception of getting more bites at the apple, thus risk is decreased... In this case I think you trade back because you have multiple players ranked highly and the opportunity to hire those players exceeds the value of staying put.

 

Just my 2¢

 

We agree and disagree.  It depends on context for me.

 

So lets say this team thinks Dotson is as good as Olave so they trade down a little and let the Saints get Olave and they get Dotson and change.  You get more players for the price of 1.

 

Now it might not be that cut and dry they may actually like Olave over Dotson.  Got that vibe from Keim back then.  But not by a big enough margin where they aren't good to risk it that Olave isn't much better than Dotson by a wide margin (which actually is the case right now)

 

But quaterbacks take the theory into a different orbit.

 

The difference between for example Patrick Mahomes and lets say Dak Prescott IMO can make the difference between being good and SB bound.  So clearly you don't trade down to get a QB you rate lower for extra picks.  So lets say the Olave Dotson drill isn't the be all and end all if you get it wrong.  But passing on an elite QB for a good QB, is a disaster.  So you got to be IMO much more careful about playing the game.

 

I'll add that if you as the GM as an example is convinced lets say that Bo Nix is as good as Daniels and Maye -- how do you know that some other GM isn't thinking the same thing?  What are you going to do just trust that Mel Kiper or Brugler or whomever who have Nix later in their mocks will telegraph what other teams do?  Clearly not.  So if you think another QB is equally special or better -- you better 1.  Get that QB target in the trade down.  2.  Better be right.

 

 

 

Edited March 8 by Skinsinparadise

[88Comrade2000]

7 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I saw that from Albright, the Justin Fields as a backup, that's intense.

He sucks, so backup would be right. Maybe a 5th rounder or later for the backup.

[kingdaddy]

18 minutes ago, illone said:

 

 

Exactly right. Blowing the pick is risky too. Hence my point about safety. Its baked into the cake that everyone sticks their grubby dirty fingers into trying to find the piece with the most icing.

 

You could trade back, gain 3-5 new picks, and ALL of those acquired picks could bust in year one 😂

 

I sense fan participation is much higher this off-season, probably for the same reason Im more engaged... Hope springs eternal.

 

 

 

 

We're in agreement then.

 

You dont trade back because its safer.

 

You trade back because of how your draft board is rated, and which probably changes daily based on new information.

 

I dont think you trade down simply because of the perception of getting more bites at the apple, thus risk is decreased... In this case I think you trade back because you have multiple players ranked highly and the opportunity to hire those players exceeds the value of staying put.

 

Just my 2¢

I concur with this. 

[illone]

3 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

We agree and disagree.  It depends on context for me.

 

So lets say this team thinks Dotson is as good as Olave so they trade down a little and let the Saints get Olave and they get Dotson and change.  You get more players for the price of 1.

 

Now it might not be that cut and dry they may actually like Olave over Dotson.  Got that vibe from Keim back then.  But not by a big enough margin where they aren't good to risk it that Olave isn't much better than Dotson by a wide margin (which actually is the case right now)

 

But quaterbacks take the theory into a different orbit.

 

The difference between for example Patrick Mahomes and lets say Dak Prescott IMO can make the difference between being good and SB bound.   So the Olave Dotson drill isn't the be all and end all if you get it wrong.  But passing on an elite QB for a good QB, is a disaster.  So you get to me IMO much more careful about playing the game.

 

I'll add that if you as the GM as an example is convinced lets say that Bo Nix is as good as Daniels and Maye -- how do you know that some other GM isn't thinking the same thing?  What are you going to do just trust that Mel Kiper or Brugler or whomever who have Nix later in their mocks will telegraph what other teams do?  Clearly not.  So if you think another QB is equally special or better -- you better 1.  Get that QB target in the trade down.  2.  Better be right.

 

 

I'm NEVER going to trust Mel Kiper, let's just get that out of the way...

 

My only point was that there is risk on all sides.

 

Your example is an astute one for multiple reasons.  You have no idea how the teams between your original pick and new pick are going to behave. You might have a decent idea, but there is risk, hence why I said above this isnt about being safe. In your example its safer to stay put and make a pick...

 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

5 minutes ago, illone said:

 

 

I'm NEVER going to trust Mel Kiper, let's just get that out of the way...

 

My only point was that there is risk on all sides.

 

Your example is an astute one for multiple reasons.  You have no idea how the teams between your original pick and new pick are going to behave. You might have a decent idea, but there is risk, hence why I said above this isnt about being safe. In your example its safer to stay put and make a pick...

 

 

 

 

I get the logic and agree especially in the context of QB.  If you have conviction take that dude, don't trade down.   That's my position here.  Take the QB you like the most. 

 

What some would counter that point though is there is a randomness to the draft that supersedes your own evaluations so adding picks increases the odds of success.

[Conn]

Lot of people here need to read this re: drafting the QB in a strong QB class naturally in the top 3 at no extra cost vs putting it off and having to trade up later in a mystery QB class:
 

 

Edited March 8 by Conn

[clskinsfan]

Trevor Lawrence teaches YOU how to be a QB with Colt: This vid is SICK for all 22 guys.

 

 

 

[Est.1974]

8 hours ago, Conn said:

Side note—the continual flippant framing of a “50/50” shot at a franchise QB, by you and others, as an implied bad bet or a low percentage play is baffling. If that percentage were real, it would be a miraculously high chance to change this franchise. 

Fair point, I agree that 50/50 is nonsense.

 

I also admit my take is vastly different to the majority.

 

Swinging for the fences = trading up for Caleb

Taking a risk on the very high ceiling boom or bust = taking Daniels

Playing safe and being conservative = taking Maye

Playing the real long game = trading back

 

Edited March 8 by Est.1974

[Est.1974]

10 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

The safe thing is to trade back.  That's not really a debate. 

I’d disagree.

 

The safest thing Peters can do in his first draft is just sit there at #2 and take a QB. That is clearly the safe option.

 

If he wants to back himself and take a risk, he’ll either

 

- throw draft picks at Chicago and back himself that Caleb is a significant step up on the rest

 

- trade back and accumulate picks, take a perceived ‘lower grade’ QB, and back himself that the combination of ‘lower grade’ QB plus other players from those extra picks is greater value than ‘just’ a QB at #2

 

Therefore, Peters sitting at #2 is beyond debate as being the obvious safe option.

[kingdaddy]

4 hours ago, Est.1974 said:

I’d disagree.

 

The safest thing Peters can do in his first draft is just sit there at #2 and take a QB. That is clearly the safe option.

 

If he wants to back himself and take a risk, he’ll either

 

- throw draft picks at Chicago and back himself that Caleb is a significant step up on the rest

 

- trade back and accumulate picks, take a perceived ‘lower grade’ QB, and back himself that the combination of ‘lower grade’ QB plus other players from those extra picks is greater value than ‘just’ a QB at #2

 

Therefore, Peters sitting at #2 is beyond debate as being the obvious safe option.

Well said, I agree. 

[HTTRDynasty]

 

 

[mac8887]

12 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Keim's points on this.

 

A.  They haven't decided

 

B.  He could see the pick go either way.  When pushed to pick one by Finlay he said Drake Maye

 

C.  He doesn't think they trade up for two reasons.  He knows they want to keep their picks, he's heard they think their draft capital is precious and his sources who cover the Bears tell him they strongly believe the Bears are holding on to their pick and will take Caleb

 

D.  Said more or less 95% chance he felt they are staying at #2 -- said that on the Junkies

It’s the time of year when every team is really quiet, and really focusing on keeping their thoughts in the war room. It’s really hard for these reporters to get actual stories and end up having to throw poop at the wall just to get the clicks and views these media markets need to pay the bills.

 

Even Kiem, as great as he is, will have a hard time getting enough facts to report on to fulfill his obligations, and even he, must resort to more rumor/opinion stuff, in order to get the clicks and views to pay the bills. The sad part is, you can tell he doesn’t like to do it because he takes so much pride in his reporting.

 

Point being, I wouldn’t trust any reporter, not even someone as factual, plugged in, and trustworthy as Kiem as gospel right now when it comes to what we may do in the draft. I don’t distrust his trustworthiness, it’s just that it’s lying season in the NFL, and with the competent people we have running the organization, leaks should and will be few and far between, if any at all.

 

I do believe he will definitely have more facts to deliver closer to the draft, and will be extremely plugged in when it comes to free agency, and who we might be looking at. 

[MartinC]

35 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said:

 

 

One thing I will say about Mayes footwork is he tends to drift to his right in his drop. That needs to be fixed, he creates his own pressure by drifting towards the rush on occasions. That will piss off his O’Line who are expecting him to be setting up behind the center not off the right guards outside shoulder. 

[Warhead36]

Maye is not some super raw project that needs multiple years to develop. He can come in day 1 and be at least around the 20th or so best QB in the league while growing. You get better by playing and you only sit a guy if you have a a high quality starter in place already.

[mistertim]

19 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

Maye is not some super raw project that needs multiple years to develop. He can come in day 1 and be at least around the 20th or so best QB in the league while growing. You get better by playing and you only sit a guy if you have a a high quality starter in place already.

 

The people who don't like Maye can't seem to make up their minds. On one hand some of them say "He's too raw, footwork is bad, he needs to sit for a while" and on the other some say "He's too much of a safe pick", implying that he's ready to play now but doesn't have much upside (which is hilariously weird considering his physical gifts).

 

Which one is it?

[seantaylor=god]

6 minutes ago, mistertim said:

Which one is it?

I think they mean “safe” as in “conventional” he looks the part of an NFL QB but actually isn’t that good.

 

I don’t agree, I think he looks the part because he is a young, NFL QB with potential all pro upside.

 

 

[skinsfan66]

14 hours ago, illone said:

 

 

Exactly right. Blowing the pick is risky too. Hence my point about safety. Its baked into the cake that everyone sticks their grubby dirty fingers into trying to find the piece with the most icing.

 

You could trade back, gain 3-5 new picks, and ALL of those acquired picks could bust in year one 😂

 

I sense fan participation is much higher this off-season, probably for the same reason Im more engaged... Hope springs eternal.

 

 

 

 

We're in agreement then.

 

You dont trade back because its safer.

 

You trade back because of how your draft board is rated, and which probably changes daily based on new information.

 

I dont think you trade down simply because of the perception of getting more bites at the apple, thus risk is decreased... In this case I think you trade back because you have multiple players ranked highly and the opportunity to hire those players exceeds the value of staying put.

 

Just my 2¢

A+++posts   

[WashingtonRedWolves]

On the restaurant topic, you haven't spent top dollar until you go to the inn at little washington. Granted the last time I went it was probably the best food I've ever had