A new strategy, trade down!

Discussion in 'NFL Draft' started by RollTide, Feb 11, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. RollTide

    RollTide All-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2002
    Messages:
    20,245
    2008......big titan

    2008, What if could if. What if john elway had decided to not go to stanford and play in canada. What does that matter?

    If there are 3 QBs worth drafting high history shows us that 2 would suck.

    Why are you guys so hung up on this second QB thing? That's not the only point i made. I just gave you a list of ALL QBs taken with the 2nd, 3rd or 4th pick whether they were drafted first or not. Look at those 10 players. These are insanely high draft picks and it looks like a lineup of losers.

    Bigtitan, you are right. Any QB who starts 39 of 39 games definitely has a durability problem. A QB who doesn't miss a single college start in 3 seasons and plays at a heisman level every year is someone with durability issues. Yes i see the light now.
  2. RollTide

    RollTide All-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2002
    Messages:
    20,245
    Prag...

    No i understand completely. Aside from the fact you didn't seem to understand why anyone was comparing pennington to lienart and you don't apparently know what a passing rating is..

    You don't believe in statistically comparing two players from different teams. So according to you i would evaluate john elway's career not by comparing him to his fellow hall of famers like montana or marino. No rather you would have me comparing elway to gary kubiack or bubby brister. The measure of a great player is how superior he is to his backup?

    What is this fair and balanced measure you talked about? Sounds good but give me an example. What is a fair and balanced measure? I asked you to come up with a better formula. I'm still waiting.

    You have no formula and by eliminating stats from an argument you have only made evaluating a player less scientific, less clear and more muddled than ever.

    You like jay cutler more than lienart, young or jacobs. Can you tell us why beyond saying you watched him play on tv a few times and he looks pretty good? I don't think you can. What you will do is come up with some vague non measurables like his strong arm and keadership abilities.
  3. Fry

    Fry Hatin' is what I do.

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2004
    Messages:
    25,926
    im just saying i would not spend a top 5 pick on someone with two surgeries on their throwing arm in a 3 year span.
  4. Soxcat

    Soxcat Starter

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    8,485
    If you "understand completely" then why are you not able to comprehend what posters write? Prag never said he liked Culter more than Leinart. What he said was "So all we can do is make subjective guesses. Cutler's arm is stonger or weaker than Leinarts, whose is stronger or weaker than Young's. Thats all we can really do. I hope this is clearer for you."

    Also, make your point. Do you think we should draft Young or not? If Leinart is there should we draft him? Your whole argument goes down the toilet if Young gets drafted before Leinart doesn't it? Again, as I and others have tried to convey, your logic basically puts the future of the QB we draft in the hands of Houston or NO. If they take one and we take the other the second guy taken is doomed to eternal damnation based on what? Because that has been the statistical probability in the past? So if we dig in and find out that statistically the 2nd and 3rd RBs drafted each year have been less productive than the 4th (again I said if) RB drafted Reese should use that as a means for deciding who he drafts?

    The bottom line is if after evaluating Young, Cutler, Leinart and Jacobs the FO determines that Jacobs is only slightly lower rated than the other 3 then maybe you take a guy like Ferguson and hope Jacobs is there. The only logic to what you are saying seems to be that teams put too much stock in rankings of postion. Just because a guy is the 2nd or 3rd best QB in the draft doesn't mean he is any good.
  5. TitanJeff

    TitanJeff Kahuna Grande Staff

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Messages:
    23,235
    We pick third. If your goal is to show stats that taking any QB beyond the first chosen is risky, then you have to only use QBs taken within the first three picks to prove your point which is what I did. Three QBs isn't enough to show a pattern. Therefore, busted.

    And I focus on the second QB taken because that is likely the situation we're in this draft. Wasn't the premise of your argument to show taking the #2 QB in THIS draft to be a risky venture? You can't ignore the realities that we pick #3 and that we'll likely have Leinart or Young to choose from.

    As Prag said so well, stats can only prove something if taken in context. They rarely, in themselves, prove it all. You always need to look at the big picture.

    I commented in another thread on taking a QB early that you have to consider the team who chooses the player in the first place. Most of the time, they were franchises who struggled for multiple seasons. This points to the QB probably being over-rated to begin with, going to a team with little talent, having to step in and play immediately and not having strong coaching around them as they develop.

    I think these factors have much more influence than whether or not they were the first or second QB taken within the first three picks of the draft.
  6. Vigsted

    Vigsted Starter

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Messages:
    4,304
    I never claimed to use Scientific reasoning, but Prag is and doing a good job of it.

    Sidestepping the fact you keep contradicting yourself on the importance of stats, can we at least agree that the passer rating is a combination of the QB skills, the receivers skills, the opponents skills and quite possibly also the skill of O-line and coaches?

    Who will have a better passer rating, Peyton Manning with a paraplegic, blind receiver or Joe Schmoe with Marvin Harrison? But which one of them is the better passer?

    So you're saying the passer rating is the best mathematical measure we have, which is probably true, but it's nowhere near good enough to accurately predict a future NFL career. Nor can you base a players success on awards, trophies or bowl games won.

    The problem is you're hellbent on finding a surefire formula to predict who take in the draft, but unfortunately there isn't one. Which is why Jeff's or anyone elses opinion is just as valid as yours.

    If you ever find a scientific formula that acurrately predict the success or failure of prospect, you will indeed be a rich man.
  7. Titans2008

    Titans2008 Camp Fodder

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Messages:
    1,525
    If the statistics determined the odds of a qb being a bust or pro bowler, then outside factors (that have nothing to do with that player) wouldn't change that. The fact that if Brady Quinn had entered this draft, he probably would be taken ahead of all of the qb's would, by your logic, change the odds of one of the other two qb's. That's insane.
  8. Soxcat

    Soxcat Starter

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    8,485
    I could imagine a press conference with Reese after the 1st day of the draft.

    Reporter: "Mr. Reese, why did you decide to pass on Vince Young when all the speculation was the Titans would get a QB with the #3 pick?"

    Reese: "Well we had Vince rated as the highest player in the draft and if we were picking #1 we would definately have taken him however after crunching some numbers we noticed that the QBs taken 2nd, 3rd and 4th in previous drafts have terrible probabilities of success so we went with the probability that Young would be a bust."
  9. maximus

    maximus Camp Fodder

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2004
    Messages:
    3,429
    :ha: :ha: :ha:
  10. TitanJeff

    TitanJeff Kahuna Grande Staff

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Messages:
    23,235
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.