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

[HTTRDynasty]

 

[Chump Bailey]

8 hours ago, NoCalMike said:

I feel like Daniels or Maye would be justifiable picks and each guy will come with their strengths & weaknesses. Both will need to be developed in different areas and it is still going to be very dependent on getting that roster built around them in order to expect early success.

 

[DiscoBob]

EVERYONE HERE IS WRONG

 

Spencer Rattlesnake Rattler is actually the #1 QB in this draft... if you disagree with me, you are a moron.  

 

He eats pieces of **** like Williams, Maye, Daniels, and pretty boy McCarthy for breakfast.

[FootballZombie]

Never would have thought height n weight would have less correlation to being a high QB draft pick than some of those athletic measurements.

 

Or maybe that is artificially inflated as most top QBs are athletic and would probably have better scores on average even if they are not tall/big and that skews the numbers.

 

 

There are absolutely prospects that suffer from a lack of height but that chart seems to push that problem far down the list.

 

Edited March 23 by FootballZombie

[mistertim]

49 minutes ago, DiscoBob said:

EVERYONE HERE IS WRONG

 

Spencer Rattlesnake Rattler is actually the #1 QB in this draft... if you disagree with me, you are a moron.  

 

He eats pieces of **** like Williams, Maye, Daniels, and pretty boy McCarthy for breakfast.

 

 

[tmandoug1]

 

 

33 minutes ago, FootballZombie said:

Never would have thought height n weight would have less correlation to being a high QB draft pick than some of those athletic measurements.

 

Or maybe that is artificially inflated as most top QBs are athletic and would probably have better scores on average even if they are not tall/big and that skews the numbers.

 

 

There are absolutely prospects that suffer from a lack of height but that chart seems to push that problem far down the list.

 

Just looked up how many successful (had a decent career) 6' or less QBs in the NFL over the years. There have been 10 since 1960's.

 

1. Fran Tarkenton, 6-0. This Hall of Famer was voted to nine Pro Bowls, played in three Super Bowls and is a former MVP. When he retired, he had every significant passing record. He won 124 games, which is tied for fifth most in NFL history even though he played the bulk of his career when the season was shorter than it is today. With his mobility, “The Mad Scrambler” probably would have fit in well in today’s game.

2. Drew Brees, 6-0. A six-time Pro Bowler, an offensive player of the year, a Super Bowl MVP and a comeback player of the year, Brees will likely be a first ballot Hall of Famer when he hangs up his cleats. His lack of height in the era of massive lineman means he needs to have a great idea of where the receivers and defensive backs are, even with obscured vision.

3. Russell Wilson, 5-11. The Seahawks signal caller has helped change the idea of what it means to be a quarterback in the NFL. He’s good from the pocket but his best strength comes from his elusiveness and making throws on the run. He was named to the Pro Bowl in four of his six seasons and led Seattle to one of the most lopsided Super Bowl victories when the Seahawks topped the Broncos 43-8 in Super Bowl XLVIII (48).

4. Sonny Jurgensen, 5-11. This great former Eagle and Redskin won three passing titles on his way to the Pro Football Hall of Fame, including one at the age of 40. Some thought he was the best passer of his era.

5. Len Dawson, 6-0. The MVP of Super Bowl IV and a Hall of Famer, Dawson was known for his accuracy and poise. He struggled early in his career with the Steelers and Browns before his career took off with the Dallas Texans, and then the Chiefs.

6. Joe Theismann, 6-0. He was NFL MVP in 1983, made it to two Pro Bowls and helped Joe Gibbs win a Super Bowl. He went 77-47 as a starter. Theismann was an athletic quarterback who could avoid pressure, but he wasn’t athletic enough to avoid Lawrence Taylor on the play that ended his career. (I’m not linking the play because everyone who has seen it has it permanently scarred in their memory.)

http://footballpost.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/USATSI_9782604-199x300.jpg

7. Michael Vick, 6-0. We think of Michael Vick as many things, but rarely do we think of him as a short quarterback. But he is. Vick gets away with being short because he is the greatest running quarterback ever. He has been invited to four Pro Bowls and won the NFL comeback player of the year award in 2010.

8. Eddie LeBaron, 5-7. The Little General is in the Redskins ring of fame and made it to four Pro Bowls. The Redskins listed him at 5-9, but LaBaron has fessed up to being 5-7. He was unprotected by the Redskins in the expansion draft in 1960, and the Cowboys claimed him, making him their first ever quarterback. The veteran of the Korean War never had a winning season, and he threw 37 more interceptions than touchdowns in his career.

9. Billy Kilmer, 6-0. He backed up both Jurgesen and Theisman at different points, but started 124 games himself and made it to the Pro Bowl in 1972. He is in the Redskins ring of honor.

10. Doug Flutie, 5-10. Flutie was a great college player, a great Canadian player, but an uneven NFL player. He had his moments over 12 NFL seasons for four teams (five if you count the Patriots twice), winning comeback player of the year and making the Pro Bowl in 1998, and winning 70 percent of his starts for the Bills over three years. His record as an NFL starter was 37-28, but he was 0-2 in the postseason. Flutie had exceptional movement skills, and ran for 1,634 yards in his career.

Knocking on the door….

Kyler Murray. (Not sure I agree with this though)

Edited March 23 by tmandoug1

[FootballZombie]

1 minute ago, tmandoug1 said:

Just looked up how many successful (had a decent career) 6' or less QBs in the NFL over the years. There have been 10 since 1960's.

 

That's what I mean.

 

The idea that you almost 100% need to be of a certain height to succeed in the NFL is well understood, but that chart seemed to indicate that height of a prospect had literal zero impact on whether you got drafted early.

 

That is weird.

[Scribble]

1 hour ago, DiscoBob said:

EVERYONE HERE IS WRONG

 

Spencer Rattlesnake Rattler is actually the #1 QB in this draft... if you disagree with me, you are a moron.  

 

He eats pieces of **** like Williams, Maye, Daniels, and pretty boy McCarthy for breakfast.

 

He eats pieces of ****?

 

[seantaylor=god]

Mark Bullock does some excellent film breakdowns of NFL and college players.

 

I highly recommend subscribing to his Substack to read his articles and watch his breakdown clips.

 

In a subscriber Q&A, he made this comment regarding his QB preference, as of now:

 

 

“I do keep going back and fourth on it. For maybe the last 10 days, I’ve been leaning more Maye over Daniels on the basis of worst case scenario. Maye’s biggest red flag is his frustrating misses/inconsistent accuracy. Having watched a bunch of Chargers film the past week to study Ekeler, I couldn’t help but notice Herbert having a lot of those misses too and the Chargers have managed to live with it just fine. So those inconsistencies can be worked around and he could still create enough good/explosive plays to make up for it (obviously not ideal, but it’s possible to overcome if he can’t fix it outright). 

Daniels biggest red flag is his lack of care for his own health. He willingly exposes himself to too many big hits on a consistent basis when he has the opportunity to slide or step out of bounds to protect himself better. So the worst case scenario for Daniels is he tries to pick up an extra 5 yards on a scramble in his rookie year, cuts inside and exposes himself to a huge hit from a bigger, stronger NFL player that leaves him with a bad injury and he can’t get back on the field. 

I do hate projecting injury concerns onto prospects, but Daniels is just so reckless when he runs it’s hard to not be concerned about it. In a best case scenario, both players become really really good QBs in the NFL and it’s tough to separate them. In a worst case scenario, Maye becomes frustratingly inconsistent and can’t fix the misses on layups underneath, but you can work around that while Daniels gets himself seriously hurt and can’t get back on the field. 

But I could easily change my mind on that multiple times before the draft. Ultimately I like all 3 of the top guys (I also really like McCarthy, for whatever it’s worth) and won’t be mad/upset if they draft any of them. The key is building out a system and supporting cast that plays to their strengths.“

[skinsfan66]

10 hours ago, wit33 said:

 

I've held a similar viewpoint for about 10 years, but I don't expect you to remember all the nuances I've shared, so I'll try to recap lol. 

 

I generally lean towards supreme athletes at the quarterback spot because I believe they tend to yield positive outcomes early in their rookie contracts more consistently than other quarterbacks. It doesn't necessarily require them to be elite processors or outsmart the established stars in the league. I'm aiming for a high floor and immediate ceiling, fully aware that someone like Daniel might not be playing in years 12-17 as much as Maye, and I'm fine with that.

 

That said, I'm not discounting Maye; I'm intrigued by his moxie and ability to play off schedule. I prefer a supreme athlete with clean throwing mechanics as a starting point , knowing that the run game will likely be top 5 and the offensive line will benefit greatly from his talent from day one as a starter. I'm a sucker for that while on a rookie deal. With Maye, there are more unknown variables; we'll have to hope he's super smart, maniacal about his process, an elite processor, and can become more accurate. 

 

I'm not sure where the narrative of Daniel not making throws off schedule has come from, as his highlights are filled with these throws. I do agree that he lacks the ability to throw from different platforms.

 

I'm not suggesting that it's right or wrong at this stage, but I continue to lean towards this preference in most years. I'll admit that I prefer Caleb Williams over Jaden Daniels, even though he's not as much of a rushing quarterback, but he’s extremely accurate. 

I am trying to think of a supreme QB athlete who has won a S.B. and that is the goal. I can think of many processors that are not super athletes. Brady, Stratford, Mahomes, Manning's, Foles, Rogers, Roethlisberger........ No winners that I can find?  He does not have to be a super athlete for me, and does not have to be a super runner. A RB has a short life in the NFL, why draft a hybird RB/QB? His career is going to be shorter most likely if you use him that way. 

  

Edited March 23 by skinsfan66

[spjunkies]

15 minutes ago, skinsfan66 said:

I am trying to think of a supreme QB athlete who has won a S.B. and that is the goal. I can think of many processors that are not super athletes. Brady, Stratford, Mahomes, Manning's, Foles, Rogers, Roethlisberger........ No winners that I can find?  He does not have to be a super athlete for me, and does not have to be a super runner. A RB has a short life in the NFL, why draft a hybird RB/QB? His career is going to be shorter most likely if you use him that way. 

  

 

Rodgers and Roethlisberger were supreme athletes. 

[Warhead36]

16 minutes ago, skinsfan66 said:

I am trying to think of a supreme QB athlete who has won a S.B. and that is the goal. I can think of many processors that are not super athletes. Brady, Stratford, Mahomes, Manning's, Foles, Rogers, Roethlisberger........ No winners that I can find?  He does not have to be a super athlete for me, and does have to be a super runner. A RB has a short life in the NFL, why draft a hybird RB/QB? His career is going to be shorter most likely if you use him that way. 

  

Only like 35 QBs have won Super Bowls. Thats a ridiculously high standard. 

[skinsfan66]

Just now, spjunkies said:

 

Rodgers and Roethlisberger were supreme athletes. 

I guess we need to define Supreme Athletes then. My opinion of them would be they are not at the moment. 

[redskinss]

23 minutes ago, skinsfan66 said:

I am trying to think of a supreme QB athlete who has won a S.B. and that is the goal. I can think of many processors that are not super athletes. Brady, Stratford, Mahomes, Manning's, Foles, Rogers, Roethlisberger........ No winners that I can find?  He does not have to be a super athlete for me, and does not have to be a super runner. A RB has a short life in the NFL, why draft a hybird RB/QB? His career is going to be shorter most likely if you use him that way. 

  

 

Not a lot of athleticism in this picture but there's a ****load of Lombardi's.

 

 

Edited March 23 by redskinss

[Koolblue13]

8 minutes ago, spjunkies said:

 

Rodgers and Roethlisberger were supreme athletes. 

Can you see an athletic difference between those two and Vick or Lamar?

 

I assume you can, because otherwise you are either being intentionally obtuse or every player in the NFL is a super athlete (which they are overall) and can't be differentiated in athletic prowess.   

[skinsfan66]

4 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

Only like 35 QBs have won Super Bowls. Thats a ridiculously high standard. 

But it is the goal everybody is shooting for, we want trophy's in the case. What type QB gets you there is the point? I could careless about the Super Athelete QB. Give me one that is a good athlete that can do all the other things. 

[DiscoBob]

If you are talking about a QB prospect and the first thing you mention is their athleticism, the likelihood that they work out is almost zero.

[Koolblue13]

It's a passing league!

 

Drafts a QB who primary weapon is to run.

[Warhead36]

4 minutes ago, skinsfan66 said:

But it is the goal everybody is shooting for, we want trophy's in the case. What type QB gets you there is the point? I could careless about the Super Athelete QB. Give me one that is a good athlete that can do all the other things. 

All three of the Big 3 in this year's class appear to fit this criteria then, albeit to varying degrees.

[FootballZombie]

Mahomes has like a 8.2 RAS score.

 

He is a very gifted athlete for the QB position.

[DogofWar1]

15 minutes ago, spjunkies said:

 

Rodgers and Roethlisberger were supreme athletes. 

I think they meant to use "supreme athlete" in the way we often use "dual threat."

 

If we put QBs on a sliding scale of:

Pocket Statue <---> Pocket Passer <----> Pocket Mobile <-----> Mobile Passer <------> Scramble Threat <-----> Running Threat <------> Michael Vick

 

you could probably make the argument that anyone from "scramble threat" and right is a "supreme athlete"

[Conn]

11 hours ago, wit33 said:

 

I've held a similar viewpoint for about 10 years, but I don't expect you to remember all the nuances I've shared, so I'll try to recap lol. 

 

I generally lean towards supreme athletes at the quarterback spot because I believe they tend to yield positive outcomes early in their rookie contracts more consistently than other quarterbacks. It doesn't necessarily require them to be elite processors or outsmart the established stars in the league. I'm aiming for a high floor and immediate ceiling, fully aware that someone like Daniel might not be playing in years 12-17 as much as Maye, and I'm fine with that.

 

That said, I'm not discounting Maye; I'm intrigued by his moxie and ability to play off schedule. I prefer a supreme athlete with clean throwing mechanics as a starting point , knowing that the run game will likely be top 5 and the offensive line will benefit greatly from his talent from day one as a starter. I'm a sucker for that while on a rookie deal. With Maye, there are more unknown variables; we'll have to hope he's super smart, maniacal about his process, an elite processor, and can become more accurate. 

 

I'm not sure where the narrative of Daniel not making throws off schedule has come from, as his highlights are filled with these throws. I do agree that he lacks the ability to throw from different platforms.

 

I'm not suggesting that it's right or wrong at this stage, but I continue to lean towards this preference in most years. I'll admit that I prefer Caleb Williams over Jaden Daniels, even though he's not as much of a rushing quarterback, but he’s extremely accurate. 

I think it’s fine that we all have our own ideas about what QB we’d build in the lab if we could—and it’s fine if those ideas are different. Your stance that rushing QB’s on rookie contracts are higher floor roster building advantages is imo correct as a general rule. 
 

I’m simply pointing out that the post I responded to from you was all about QB’s who extend the play behind the LOS in order to make plays downfield, like Mahomes and Rodgers—that describes Maye, not Daniels. So your inherent preference for a “freak” may be blinding you to actual skill-sets and how it all plays out on the field. 
 

As an aside, I don’t care about the highlights. I’ve watched enough Daniels after these many months to see that he doesn’t do that consistently. There was a point in the season where @Skinsinparadisestarted posting about Daniels as a high ceiling option if we were lucky enough to draft in the top 6-7. Which even then seemed unlikely, nevermind having a shot at Caleb or Maye. So I started watching a lot of Daniels. Of course the times he does it are present in his highlights—it’s an elite trait to showcase. The question is how common a part of a guys game is it? For Daniels, it’s just not. He looks to run as a general rule, he doesn’t look to extend the play and make defenses pay in the passing game like Caleb Williams does, like Drake Maye does. So if you want THAT trait to be part of a guy’s DNA, you’re looking at the wrong guy. That was my only point. I’m not here to tell you your athleticism preferences are wrong, even if I disagree on specifics. But when you’re talking about Mahomes and Rodgers and their skill-sets…that’s more likely Maye than Daniels. I just felt the need to point that out, because these guys’ games and skill-sets aren’t defined by their highlights. 

[DogofWar1]

So one problem I have with the "hits ceiling faster with somewhat lower but still good ceiling and higher floor" thing is that won't get you any discounts on the 2nd contract.

 

You see it all over the league, where teams have a perfectly GOOD QB, but also a guy who isn't putting the team on their back for 20 games a year.

 

I mean shoot, we had people in here a few weeks back going after Josh Allen bc he couldn't single handedly will the Bills to not miss a field goal wide right.

 

How much worse would it be if you have a guy like Derek Carr or Kyler Murray.   You gotta pay them BIG bucks or they will bail on you for someone who will pay them, but they also aren't winning you the SB on their own.  You need a team around them, but their 40M+/year contract is gonna kill your cap.

 

That's a no from me dawg, give me higher ceiling pick.  Obviously if you have to choose between *gestures at the disaster our QB position has been for 30 years* and say, Kyler Murray/Derek Carr/Trevor Lawrence, you take the latter.  But if you're consciously choosing the lower ceiling guy who might have a shorter career....I dunno man, I question that judgment pretty hard.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

Let’s not confuse physical fitness with athleticism.  

57 minutes ago, redskinss said:

 

Not a lot of athleticism in this picture but there's a ****load of Lombardi's.

 

 

 

[Conn]

2 hours ago, FootballZombie said:

 

That's what I mean.

 

The idea that you almost 100% need to be of a certain height to succeed in the NFL is well understood, but that chart seemed to indicate that height of a prospect had literal zero impact on whether you got drafted early.

 

That is weird.

Because it’s selection bias. Anyone short who goes high already has it graded in, the NFL just likes them anyways. They may still fail partly due to being short, but the guys who already selected out due to their height weighting against their talent enough to not be drafted highly—they aren’t in the sample size. Most of them get selected out before college even begins. So what you’re left with is a sample of players talented enough that they’ve already overcome the odds to the point where their height is not a determining factor (to draft pedigree, not NFL success obviously). Hence, no seeming pattern or method to the madness. 

Edited March 23 by Conn