The Mid Round QB fallacy

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Hey, I did watch it, but they had all 11 coaches on in a half hour, there want much philosophy talked about. The TE coach interview was [paraphrased] its great to coach 2 top tight ends like cooley and davis right? Yes I have watched cooley a lot because tony gonzalez would always watch him. Cool to know but not very substantive. They all were one to two sentence clips. I think haslett and shanahan said more but still nothing substantive.

now that's a compliment if I've ever seen one

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by 53Fan

2000-2010 SB QB's with round selected in nfl draft:

2000
W- K.Warner-UDFA---L-S.McNair-1
2001
W-T.Dilfer-1---L-K.Collins-1
2002
W-T.Brady-6---L-K.Warner-UDFA
2003
W-B.Johnson-9---L-R.Gannon-4
2004
W-T. Brady-6---L-J.Delhomme-UDFA
2005
W-T. Brady-6---L-D.McNabb-1
2006
W-B.Roethlisberger-1---L-M.Hasslebeck-6
2007
W-P.Manning-1---L-R.Grossman-1
2008
W-E.Manning-1---L-T.Brady-6
2009
W-B.Roethlisberger-1---K.Warner-UDFA
2010
W-D.Brees-2---L-P.Manning-1

Out of the last 11 SB's, 6 times the winning QB was not drafted in the first round.

and in 8 there was a 1st round QB in the game

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

...

When you consider that our needs between the positions are certainly NOT equal, the confidence level in the QB has to be extremely high to justify the pick. There are people here who believe Clausen is the best QB, and those who believe Bradford is the best. The point is, if it's not really, really, REALLY obvious to the front office who the best of the two is, (and if it is, that's a very easy BPA pick), then this is without a doubt the wrong course of action.

good perspective Tripp, at least if it's that clear cut

it also says that you can probably pick up a decent tackle nearly every year I think though

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

But still, sack up and put the chips on the table, I'm tired of being a fringe playoff team every single year. Nothing transforms your franchise like an elite QB.

another great post itt

[dmek25]

gtripp, if your running the show, who do YOU draft?

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

and in 8 there was a 1st round QB in the game

And of the 22 QB's involved in the 11 games, 12 times the QB wasn't drafted in the first round. I'm not sure how much any of this matters, not much probably, but I think it shows you don't have to draft a QB in the first round to go, or even win the Super Bowl.

To tell you the truth I'm just enjoying the discussion. Either QB could turn out to be busts or maybe just one...OR they could turn out to be the Manning/Brady combo of the next generation. I like Bradford, others such as Sammy like Clausen. Sammy may be right. And just as Schneed said he wouldn't be upset if we took Okung, I wouldn't be upset with one of the QB's, especially Bradford.

I think my argument for Okung is sound, but I agree with SmootSmack who originally got this whole thing going by saying we shouldn't reach for a LT just for the sake of taking one. It's JMO that we need a LT more than we need a QB to win at this point in time. That combined with the frustration of trying to fix our o-line anyway possible except drafting them high puts me on the side of drafting o-line first.

Last year I wanted Alex Mack and thought we could trade down, pick up another pick, and have our replacement for Rabach. Now I'm certainly not disappointed with Orakpo. I love the guy and I'm glad we have him, but we still haven't REALLY addressed the Center position yet and another year has gone by. Still....not getting the guy you want is not the end of the world and in some cases it works out better that you didn't.

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by PHazard

lol i dont think you understand. the whole fake argument of my point was SO we could draft Tebow. All you basically did was agree that we should take an LT in the 1st round haha. I dont think i meant the pick seriously but there are some good points in taking him.

An additional point/bonus to taking Tebow, with all the shitty seasons we've been having since 1990, this year we could USE god on our side LMAO

You'll get no argument from me there. LOL. But with so many needs and the chance to get another good tackle, center, or RB in the second, I sure don't want to use it on Tebow. We have enough TE's.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

But what if they believe the current guy is a franchise guy AND that Clausen is also a franchise guy. Then what is the proper course of action if Clausen slips to No. 4?

And if we have the No. 4 pick in a year where the Quarterbacks are mid-round guys...tough crap, I guess. Go get something useful with the pick. You're probably right when you say we won't be picking top five again, but the NFL Draft appears to have slowed if not stopped producing elite NFL quarterbacks. I think we're in an age where you pretty much have to make one (from raw tools).

If the braintrust believes Campbell is a franchise guy they should have their heads examined.

That being said, if they feel he's a franchise guy, sign him to a long term deal and be done with it, then draft the LT. If they don't feel either Clausen/Bradford is a franchise guy, but rather mid-rounders, then you're absolutely right...tough crap, get something useful (LT).

I disagree about the draft producing elite QBs, we may have had a lull for a few years but I think Clausen, Luck, possibly Locker have the tools to be elite QBs. I think the prevalence of the spread offense in college has something to do with it too.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

If the braintrust believes Campbell is a franchise guy they should have their heads examined.

That being said, if they feel he's a franchise guy, sign him to a long term deal and be done with it, then draft the LT. If they don't feel either Clausen/Bradford is a franchise guy, but rather mid-rounders, then you're absolutely right...tough crap, get something useful (LT).

I disagree about the draft producing elite QBs, we may have had a lull for a few years but I think Clausen, Luck, possibly Locker have the tools to be elite QBs. I think the prevalence of the spread offense in college has something to do with it too.

I don't think anyone thinks that Campbell is a franchise QB, I mean he could prove us wrong, but so far he's just a serviceable QB that could allow us to focus on the offensive line in the first round, rather than a QB. I think my opinion of getting a first-round QB would be different if we had Collins at QB right now or some other old veteran.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

I disagree about the draft producing elite QBs, we may have had a lull for a few years but I think Clausen, Luck, possibly Locker have the tools to be elite QBs. I think the prevalence of the spread offense in college has something to do with it too.

I think the spread has a lot to do with it. There are hundreds of competent college QBs out there but NFL teams, on the whole, want to take these guys to the next level and make them do something completely foreign. That's going to eliminate a lot of potentially great players. And so there are like 10 colleges who, in any given year, might send a quarterback to the NFL draft who gets taken highly.

And because of the market conditions (spread quarterbacks undervalued, or not valued at all), guys are coming out earlier and earlier, which is of course, a negative indicator of potential. But it's worth a lot of cash, because the guys who are waiting around are getting picked apart as prospects.

And so the NFL draft isn't producing anymore Mannings, or Rivers', or Carson Palmers anymore...I think the polished, can't miss quarterback prospect is probably a thing of the past. Maybe once every three years, you'll get a Matt Ryan. Christian Ponder could be that guy next year, as they are incredibly similar. And I like Jacory Harris in a year or two.

But I think: if you're going to have to culture a successful environment anyway, why spend the top five pick on a quarterback? Why inflate the price of an asset beyond what it's actually worth--if you're the one going to be paying the bill anyway?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

I don't think anyone thinks that Campbell is a franchise QB, I mean he could prove us wrong, but so far he's just a serviceable QB that could allow us to focus on the offensive line in the first round, rather than a QB. I think my opinion of getting a first-round QB would be different if we had Collins at QB right now or some other old veteran.

Then again, if everyone shared my definition of franchise QB (and there's no reason anyone else should, except for clarity), I think everyone would agree that Jason Campbell is a franchise QB.

[Ruhskins]

Speaking of Campbell, here's a good take on the QB situation by Matt Williamson from Scouts, Inc.

Should the Redskins keep Jason Campbell?

For the most part, the answer is yes. I would tender him the highest offer with every intention of making him new coach Mike Shanahan's next quarterback project. But I would also listen to offers and would do diligent scouting on Sam Bradford and Jimmy Clausen in case an offer for Campbell was too good to pass up. I would prefer to add a franchise-caliber left tackle with that fourth overall draft pick, because I think the Redskins can get where they want to go with Campbell. The catch: They need to be patient with him and surround him with a vastly improved running game and offensive line. Campbell has gone through offensive system after offensive system at a remarkable rate, but he still shows glimpses of being a very solid NFL starting quarterback.

With Shanahan on board, Campbell finally would be fortunate enough to have some offensive stability in terms of the system, expectations and play-calling on a year-to-year basis. For once he wouldn't have to pick up a new language every offseason. Physically, Campbell has what it takes. He can move well enough to execute Shanahan's scheme, has a big strong arm to drive the ball down the field and is accurate enough. The tools are there, and he just had his best year as a starter. I contend that he could use a real confidence boost and some of the responsibility off his plate; he was simply asked to do way too much last year as nearly every aspect of the Redskins' offense crumbled around him. He was also sacked 43 times and was constantly under siege. But the beauty of sticking with Campbell is that the Redskins could then use the resources on building a quick zone-blocking offensive line and finding a ball carrier they can trust. Shanahan does have an impressive history of getting first-round production from mid-round running backs. I can live with the receiving corps that is in place and the defense.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

There's no way you can simply count on getting a QB in the middle rounds to be your franchise player eventually. You would take a QB first to be the back-up, and only to play if he performed above expectation or the starter got hurt.

Not talking specifically about the Skins....

I don't think that teams with a decent starting QB in place at need to draft their QB top 5-10-15. (or teams with QB guru's).
I think the safer way to find a QB is to draft one after the 1st round every year; (plenty of team do this and try to groom a QB) or to nab a QB via FA or trade after the team is built.
Finding a QB via draft imo is a crap shoot no matter where you draft.
You just can't know.
Imo most QBs that are draft worthy are different by large %.
QBs like Heath Shuler fail unknown cast-offs like Kurt Warner succeed.
Because the QB is such a crap shoot taking one with a top pick 5 scares the heck out of me.
The lower you draft your QB the less investment there is and therefore more objective decisions can be made and if the QB isn't picking up the system (see JaMarcus Russell). Teams aren't worried about sunken cost because there isn't any and you have a good QB starting and you know you're gonna bring in another QB next year anyway.

I wish we would just drop the 'franchise' label.

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

I disagree about the draft producing elite QBs, we may have had a lull for a few years but I think Clausen, Luck, possibly Locker have the tools to be elite QBs. I think the prevalence of the spread offense in college has something to do with it too.

I think there is no such thing as an elite QB until they become one.
Imo there is no such thing as an eilte QB prospect independent of the team and situation around them.

I think the physical differences between most NFL caliber QB prospect is mere %.

I think in a raw skills competition like the combine or an arm strength throwing/accuracy/ touch contest some will do better in different areas but at the end of the day most will be in the same ballpark. And even the ones the are the tops in every category like Shuler or Leaf still aren't locks to become good QBs much less elite.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Without picking sides in the Bradford/Clausen vs. Okung at #4 pick, it bugs me when I see people say to 'just pick up a QB in the mid rounds' like that's a recipe for success in the league.. Doing a little research (very little) it's pretty clear that it's not.. Of the playoff teams the past 5 years, the QB breakdown is (non first round QB in parenthesis):

2009, 7-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Brees, Warner, Brady, Romo, Favre)
2008, 9-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Warner, T. Jackson, Delhomme)
2007, 5-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Favre, T. Collins, Brady, Garrard, Romo, Garcia, Hasselbeck)
2006, 7-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Brady, Brees, Romo, Hasselbeck, T. Green)
2005, 6-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Brady, Plummer, Brunell, Hasselbeck, Garcia, Delhomme)

So nearly 60% of the playoff QB over the past 5 years have been 1st round picks. The exceptions have been the greatest 6th round pick in league history (Brady) 4 undrafted FA (Romo, Delhomme, Garcia, Warner)-including perhaps one of the most unlikely stories of all time in Warner. Three second round picks (Brees, Favre & Jackson) and 5 late round picks who eventually became something after playing behind established QB for years (Garrard, T. Green, Collins, Brunell, Hasselbeck).

So unless we're hoping for another miracle (Brady, Warner, Romo, Delhomme) or a slightly undervalued gem (Favre, Brees) or are hoping to find an undiscovered star (Hasselbeck, etc) then 'picking up a QB in the mid rounds' is likely not going to yield us anything beyond mediocre football in the future.

You're famous "Paint Rain"!

The folks at TheWarpath.net, for example, have an interesting conversation going about the potential for drafting a successful QB in the later rounds. Someone posting there as Paintrain (a name that I found intriguing when I was reading it as "paint rain," and a bit less so as "pain train," which I'm guessing it actually is) has broken down the playoff QBs from the last five years, and his numbers seem revealing (the names in parentheses are that year's non-first-round QBs):

A Whole Mess Of Links, Many Dealing With Quarterbacks

[skinster]

Yo we need a first round qb, no question. To bank on finding one in the late round/free agency is ludacris. To find a qb in the late rounds that can win is just dumb luck, which we cannot rely on. If someone thinks that qb can win they will take him early. We can't just hope to luck out on some guy that the other teams keep passing on. The QB is too important, and we have to get it while we have the opportunity to. If we get another position now, it might be too late to get a qb next year if we do better. QB is the one position that we cannot pass up if we have a guy to get, no matter what.