Drafting a first round QB

[ABQCOWBOY]

Sure the results get skewed a little bit by what teams players are on. That goes for every single statistic in every single sport. So, based on your current description every stat in every sport is dubious, since none of them are acquired in a vacuum.

Most of us are able to evaluate based on more than just statistics. Most of us are able to evaluate while accounting for the difference in scenario.

If you care to list the QB’s who I currently stated as not being as good as Dak, that you think could have or would have been as good as Dak if put into the same situation, I encourage you to do so and then adjust the % accordingly.

in the meantime, I will maintain my argument that finding a QB as good as Dak has been, is a very tough challenge.

I also at no point argue against drafting more QB talent in my post. I am merely trying to gain a realistic viewpoint on what the difficulty of finding a better QB would be.

yes the team should be always trying to improve in every way possible. That honestly goes without saying.

where the disagreement can lie, is how best the team can use it’s limited resources. Would letting Dak walk and using a first rounder on a QB be a wise decision or not? What are the odds of such a move, working out and benefitting the cowboys? What are the risks?

That is the point of the post.


I don’t think it’s correct to call any stat or my percentages dubious. Because If you do it in the way you just did. Literally every stat in all of sports is dubious due to every player being in a different situation than other players. But again, I welcome you to name which QB’s you think I was wrong about and would have as much success as Dak has, in the same circumstance.

If you prefer to call this inferential stats, that's fine as well but either way, there is no standards or agreed upon index, with which to use as universally accepted measurement. If you wish to say that all stats are such, that's fine. I don't agree but it's not really important enough to argue over. Fact is that most of your percentages are made up of opinion, with no underlying structure. If you believe they are valid, that's OK with me. I do not. I believe the situation is too fluid.

You say you welcome me to disagree with you on your QB evaluation. Yet, at the outset, you said this is not intended to be a thread about how good Dak really is. Well, that is the only place such a discussion will lead so it's one or the other. In any case, my point was not about the validity of your QB evaluations. I think they are questionable at best, you think they are solid. Move on.

The real question is, do the Cowboys want to pay Dak that kind of contract or not? We can discuss this but ultimately, it's not a decision that is in our hands. They either do or they don't. Everybody has their own opinion on it but that's the real question. The answer to that question is, if you intend to pay Dak, then the team probably won't be considering the question you propose. If they don't, then they would be fools not to consider it. That's it in a nut shell.

You know what they say, "There are three types of lies, lies, damn lies, and statistics....”

 

[LandryFan]

Andy Reid definitely gets the nod in QB evaluation though I doubt he would have picked Dak any higher.

To your point, he could have, and didn't. That said, I'll bet if he knew then what he knows now, he would have picked him higher (as would have just about every other NFL team). We can all argue until we're blue in the face about Dak's talent, but nobody can argue one iota about his value relative to where he was drafted, IMO.

 

[OmerV]

That was response to post saying we haven't drafted QBs to replace Rush. I'm saying we did with Mike White.

And, again, White was taking a shot on a late round pick. It cannot fairly be said that a 5th round QB represents a miserable failure or that it proves a team is terrible at drafting QBs. A 5th round QB failing is much more normal than not.

 

[csirl]

There is one very important point that people dont consider when making the argument that we shouldnt draft a 1st round QB in case he is a bust. It is:

A high percentage of 1st round picks in ALL positions will be busts.

Its not the case that you're taking a chance with a QB instead of a sure thing at another position. This pushes the argument back in favour of drafting a QB if you need to upgrade the position.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

And, again, White was taking a shot on a late round pick. It cannot fairly be said that a 5th round QB represents a miserable failure or that it proves a team is terrible at drafting QBs. A 5th round QB failing is much more normal than not.

I agree with this. If there is issue to be placed, it's the team's willingness to invest significantly on the position itself. If you are drafting to find a Backup or more importantly, a starter, then you need to be shopping in the higher rounds because statistically, you are more likely to find a starter there. The entire business of finding a good starter is suspect to begin with so there is that as well but I don't think you can say that the team can't evaluate QBs based on White. You might be able to make that argument based on further analysis but I don't know.

 

[Nav22]

You have got to be the most immature little jerk that posts on this board. I should call your parents and have them ground you from using the family computer. On second thought, it is clear that they didn’t discipline you properly or you wouldn’t behave the way you do. You are just another spoiled brat that has the very worst of the traits that your generation has become known for. Now please move along to another thread before I hurt your feelings and you have to retreat to your safe space.

A whole paragraph about how you don’t like my behavior???

And I’m the one whose feelings are hurt???


“I will NEVER accept Dak as the Cowboys starting QB!”

Awww, this means that Dak is COMPLETELY ruining football for you. I can’t even imagine hating the starting QB of my favorite football team.

That would be AWFUL, and yet, it’s your reality.


He’s taken out the trash. You’re in the dump where you belong, you lowly, inferior little *****.

 

[Sully]

I wouldn’t even say Cam, Ryan and Luck are better. Not to me anyway. But I get your point. I like how people assume you can find another one when everyone else sucks at it except I guess the Pats. They seem to find them without a first.

Both Cam and Ryan have and did put their team on their backs to the team to a Superbowl. So until Dak can even get the Cowboys to a NFC title game, I say Cam and Ryan are better.
As far as the post to spark this, great post. Agree !

 

[HungryLion]

If you prefer to call this inferential stats, that's fine as well but either way, there is no standards or agreed upon index, with which to use as universally accepted measurement. If you wish to say that all stats are such, that's fine. I don't agree but it's not really important enough to argue over. Fact is that most of your percentages are made up of opinion, with no underlying structure. If you believe they are valid, that's OK with me. I do not. I believe the situation is too fluid.

You say you welcome me to disagree with you on your QB evaluation. Yet, at the outset, you said this is not intended to be a thread about how good Dak really is. Well, that is the only place such a discussion will lead so it's one or the other. In any case, my point was not about the validity of your QB evaluations. I think they are questionable at best, you think they are solid. Move on.

The real question is, do the Cowboys want to pay Dak that kind of contract or not? We can discuss this but ultimately, it's not a decision that is in our hands. They either do or they don't. Everybody has their own opinion on it but that's the real question. The answer to that question is, if you intend to pay Dak, then the team probably won't be considering the question you propose. If they don't, then they would be fools not to consider it. That's it in a nut shell.

You know what they say, "There are three types of lies, lies, damn lies, and statistics....”

I know in the OP I said it’s not intended to be an argument over which QB’s are or aren’t better.

at the same time, if you’re going to tell me my evaluations on that are questionable at best. I am willing to hear which ones you think are wrong and why.

Otherwise, bringing up the fact that you think the % are dubious at best is pointless. It only makes sense for you to say that, if a discussion about why the % is dubious is willing to be had.

If you want to tell me which one of those QB’s
You think is actually a better player than Dak, I would love to hear it. Rather than have my ideas questioned without actually hearing the argument about why they are questionable. I’m willing to hear that discussion. So I can understand where you’re coming from.

 

[LandryFan]

It may be hard to build a D after Dak's and Cooper's contracts

Just remember that the cap has been increasing yearly. Also, a new CBA is coming in a year, and one of the biggest sticking points will be (and always has been) players wanting a bigger slice of the money pie (which is another way of saying an even larger cap based on revenue). They will get more, we just don't know how much more. The bottom line, though, is that the cap is going to grow and what seems like a lot for a player now won't seem so much in a couple of years. I wouldn't be so worried about Dak (or any other player) ruining the team's ability to sign other players.

 

[817Gill]

Another "It's hard to find a great QB, so you have to settle" thread.

Cute. Dak is still middling.

It's funny how many of you think it's hard to find a great QB, but don't understand how hard it is to build and keep an elite defense together long enough to get a QB like Dak to a Super Bowl.

Good luck with that. It's easier to hit on a franchise QB these days than getting a 3-4 studs on your defense that take it over the top.

Hahahahahaha what?! We see teams like the jags, broncos, Vikings, Bears and countless other teams build up a defense quickly only to be derailed by having no real QB. Literally every year there’s a top 7 defense with a handicapped QB they are trying to pull to the promise land.

The hardest position in sports to find an elite talent at is quarterback. To argue that putting together a great defense is harder than finding an elite QB is asinine and poorly researched.

Not saying Dak is elite, but once you have a top 10 guy you’ve found someone who is capable of winning it all. How much you have to build around them is relative and everyone except for the top 3/4 guys needs a complete team to win.

Swinging for top 3 QB’s will have you striking out for years. Ask half the teams in this league

 

[817Gill]

Yeah it’s a dumb argument for multiple reasons we have been through before. very similar to the personnel that Romo had in 2014. The same Romo you claim never had help.


Thanks for stopping by though.

I guess we are foolish enough to believe that every team in the league doesn’t scout NFL players and a lot of these guys didnt get opportunities with multiple teams.

Lol and how many good teams get to pick in in the top 5, where there are greater chances to find an elite prospect. You literally outlined in your OP how we would have to tank or trade the house to get a CHANCE at a guy.

How posters still think we can draft a homerun prospect with the same quality team we have now is ridiculous.

“Draft a guy to win now”. If this was so easy wouldn’t every team do it? How many rookies can come in year 1 and win it all? By the time the kid is up to speed personnel will change, it won’t just stand still until he’s ready

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I know in the OP I said it’s not intended to be an argument over which QB’s are or aren’t better.

at the same time, if you’re going to tell me my evaluations on that are questionable at best. I am willing to hear which ones you think are wrong and why.

Otherwise, bringing up the fact that you think the % are dubious at best is pointless. It only makes sense for you to say that, if a discussion about why the % is dubious is willing to be had.

If you want to tell me which one of those QB’s
You think is actually a better player than Dak, I would love to hear it. Rather than have my ideas questioned without actually hearing the argument about why they are questionable. I’m willing to hear that discussion. So I can understand where you’re coming from.

What would be the point in me giving my opinions on that either? I mean, for all you know, mine don't differ from yours but that's not the point. The point is that I don't have any quantitative measure either so my opinions would be just as suspect as yours are. That would not serve to validate anything. What's the point? Full disclosure, our opinions don't match in terms of QB evaluations but the point I make is still valid.

If you have something more substantive that you've used to measure your evaluations, then apply them statistically, show us. I suspect you do not and there is nothing wrong with that. As has been the position of this board for it's entire existence, opinions are welcome and encouraged but I think it's important to understand that everybody has them. That's totally OK with me.

If you want to know where I am coming from, I've told you already. The point is not how many QBs in the first round or in any round for that matter, are successful. The point is, if the team has decided to pay Dak or not. If they are willing to Pay Dak, then they are not going to invest in a QB in the first round. If they do not intend to pay Dak what he has asked for, then they better be considering taking a QB in the first round if the opportunity is there to do so.

 

[atlantacowboy]

Cowboys went from a UDFA to a 4th Rd pick

Dallas has done decent ove4 that same span

Wer're #16! We're #16!! We're #16! GOOOOOOOO Cowboys!!

 

[Flamma]

I have said in the past, that I would not necessarily just be opposed to letting Dak walk. But as the history shows, replacing Dak could be much much more difficult than just throwing a first round pick at the QB position. There are a ton of QB’s taken high, who never amount to anything.

That's what I was trying to say in another thread. Chances are we won't even get his level of talent. We could always revisit this at the end of the year. I'm really looking forward to this stretch after the Giants game.

 

[Mr_437]

DAL should draft a QB in the 2nd or 3rd round of this upcoming draft because the position seems to be pretty deep so identifying a guy they like in those would be cool.

 

[HungryLion]

What would be the point in me giving my opinions on that either? I mean, for all you know, mine don't differ from yours but that's not the point. The point is that I don't have any quantitative measure either so my opinions would be just as suspect as yours are. That would not serve to validate anything. What's the point? Full disclosure, our opinions don't match in terms of QB evaluations but the point I make is still valid.

If you have something more substantive that you've used to measure your evaluations, then apply them statistically, show us. I suspect you do not and there is nothing wrong with that. As has been the position of this board for it's entire existence, opinions are welcome and encouraged but I think it's important to understand that everybody has them. That's totally OK with me.

If you want to know where I am coming from, I've told you already. The point is not how many QBs in the first round or in any round for that matter, are successful. The point is, if the team has decided to pay Dak or not. If they are willing to Pay Dak, then they are not going to invest in a QB in the first round. If they do not intend to pay Dak what he has asked for, then they better be considering taking a QB in the first round if the opportunity is there to do so.

So your point doesn’t have to do with how easy or hard it is to replace Dak, but that if they let Dak go. They better have a plan to replace him.

I would argue it’s rather obvious a team needs to have plans on how they are going to replace their starting QB, if they choose to do so.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

So your point doesn’t have to do with how easy or hard it is to replace Dak, but that if they let Dak go. They better have a plan to replace him.

I would argue it’s rather obvious a team needs to have plans on how they are going to replace their starting QB, if they choose to do so.

I thought so too, which is why I saw no need to respond to the statistical discussion directly. To me, it's irrelevant.

 

[Zman5]

And, again, White was taking a shot on a late round pick. It cannot fairly be said that a 5th round QB represents a miserable failure or that it proves a team is terrible at drafting QBs. A 5th round QB failing is much more normal than not.

And once again I was responding to a post that said we didn't try to replace Rush by drafting a QB. We did with White.

 

[Philmonroe]

Lol and how many good teams get to pick in in the top 5, where there are greater chances to find an elite prospect. You literally outlined in your OP how we would have to tank or trade the house to get a CHANCE at a guy.

How posters still think we can draft a homerun prospect with the same quality team we have now is ridiculous.

“Draft a guy to win now”. If this was so easy wouldn’t every team do it? How many rookies can come in year 1 and win it all? By the time the kid is up to speed personnel will change, it won’t just stand still until he’s ready

How many posters have said “draft a guy to win now”? Seems like a bogus argument using a very slim or non existent poster base that said such. I see when people want to prove a point they get real disingenuous just to do so when imo if your logic is sound you don’t have to do such.

 

[bsbellomy]

As everyone knows there has been much debate over whether the Cowboys should extend Dak’s contract.

some believe the cowboys should let Dak walk and select a QB in the first round.

this thread is not intended to be a debate over how good Dak ultimately is. I just want to explore the history of drafting QB’s in the first round and see how often QB’s selected in the first round end up being better than Dak has been thus far.

I made a post on this previously in another thread a while back, but feel like it could be its own thread and is worth discussing more.

So, I am going to break down QB’s drafted in the first round from 2007 until 2017. That is 11 drafts total. I am not including QB’s from the two most recent drafts, because I feel it is too soon to make an accurate judgment on how good those QB’s are.

I am going to list every QB taken in the first round and also mark if they were top 5 or not.

2017-
Trubisky (top 5), Mahomes, Deshaun Watson.

2016- Goff (top 5), Wentz (top 5), Paxton Lynch

2015- Jameis Winston (top 5). Mariota (top 5).

2014- Blake Bortles (top 5), Manziel, Bridgewater

2013- Ej Manuel

2012- Luck (top 5), Griffin III (top 5), Tannehill, Weeden

2011- Cam Newton (top 5), Locker, Gabbert, Ponder

2010- Bradford (top 5), Tebow

2009- Stafford (top 5), Sanchez (top 5), Freeman

2008- Matt Ryan (top 5), Joe Flacco

2007- JaMarcus Russel (top 5), Brady Quinn


That is 29 total QB’s taken.

Now I realize that which of those QB’s is better than Dak and which ones aren’t, is open for some debate. I would list it like this:

QB’s better than Dak:
Mahomes, Deshaun Watson, Andrew Luck, Cam Newton, Matt Ryan

that is 5 of the last 29 that have been better than Dak.

QB’s in the same tier as Dak:
Goff, Wentz, Stafford, Flacco

That is 4 QB’s who are around the same tier as Dak overall.

Again, this is open for debate. But I think it’s a pretty fair list. There are a few you could argue if you want.


So of 29 QB’s taken, 5 have been clearly better. That is 17%

4 have been about the same as Dak. That is 14%

So you have a 17% chance of getting a QB better than Dak. And a 14% chance of getting one just as good.

That means you have a 69% chance of ending up with a QB that is not even as good as Dak has been.

Broken down further. 3 of the ones who have been better, were top 5 picks.

3 of the ones on the same level as Dak were top 5 picks.

15 of the 29 QB’s first round were drafted outside of the Top 5 picks. Only 3 of those 15 have been as good or better than Dak. That’s 20%

Only 20% of the QB’s drafted beyond top 5 has been as good or better than Dak.


What does this all mean?

In my opinion, what this means is, even though Dak is not an elite QB. Replacing him and getting an elite QB, or one better than him is FAR from a guaranteed thing. You have an 69% chance of drafting a QB who ends up not being even as good as Dak is.

The chances of getting a QB better than Dak plummets even further If you are taking one outside of the top 5. As we all know, high end QB prospects get taken very early in the draft.

So in my opinion, if the Cowboys do try and replace Dak with a first round QB. We have to remember that the chances are very good, that the QB won’t even be as good as Dak has been.

It’s not just about “let’s take a 1st round QB”. It has to be the RIGHT prospect.

We must also remember that to get a top 5 pick to have the best odds of landing a QB better than Dak. The Cowboys would have to either tank a season, or trade MULTIPLE first round picks, to move up into the top 5.

And even after all that, If that top 5 pick busts or isn’t any better than Dak. You have wasted a bunch of draft capital, and are no better off at the position than you currently are. Or even worse, your QB sucks and you have to draft another QB a few years later again, all the while having a team that can’t win.

I have said in the past, that I would not necessarily just be opposed to letting Dak walk. But as the history shows, replacing Dak could be much much more difficult than just throwing a first round pick at the QB position. There are a ton of QB’s taken high, who never amount to anything.

So you draft one in the 1st every year by the third year you've got one at least as good as Dak and a chance to be better.

I'd be someone who drafted a crapton of QBs until I found one. Similar to how the Seahawks did after Carroll took over pre-Russell Wilson.

And as an aside Brady is leaving NE next year lol