Paxton Lynch with 4th overall

[Yakuza Rich]

The top guys, maybe. Not sure that holds true after that. Clausen, Rodgers, Lienart, Bridgewater, Geno, Quinn...I think they fall as often as they shoot up.

Lienart was still a 10th overall pick. And I think those guys the scouts soured on after their college games were over and their workouts didn't show them anything different or they were part of that weird period of time when the league was becoming more averse to drafting QB's because the price tag on a rookie QB was so high before the rookie cap.

Conversely, you take a guy like Tannehill...a talented athlete that could impress in workouts despite not having the college credentials and he shoots up the boards. Or a guy like Kyle Boller. I tend to think Lynch is more akin to these guys in terms of physical talents and he's got the college credentials.

Just my .02.



YR

 

[ConceptCoop]

Yes and know. Yes in that it was not entirely Quincy. It was the idea that you don't have to invest in the QB position and can find one later in the draft is what set us back 10 years.

This is all hindsight bias. If Quincy was Russell Wilson or Drew Henson was Kurt Warner - it would have been a brilliant move. How far back did it set the Seahawks? How far ahead are the Browns right now for drafting QBs every few years? How far back did passing on Vick for LT+Brees set the Chargers?

There are many ways to skin a cat. We don't need to pretend otherwise to justify our draft desires.

 

[ConceptCoop]

That's what happens when you argue in generalities, and not specifics.

There isn't a position in the NFL where the argument couldn't be made saying that you can find one of these in any round.

However, QB is the toughest and most critical position in the league to fill. If the team's scouts are on board with the selection, one shouldn't be afraid of taking a QB in the first round. Now, if the scouts graded a guy as being a third round talent, then that is a mistake. But, there are no sure things.

Out of the QBs enshrined in the Hall of Fame:

• 14 out of the 32 QBs were selected in the first round of the draft.
• 3 out of the 32 QBs were selected in the second round of the draft.
• 3 out of the 32 QBs were selected in the third round of the draft.
  
• 2 out of the 32 QBs were selected in the fourth round of the draft.
• 1 out of the 32 QBs was selected in the fifth round of the draft.
• 1 out of the 32 QBs was selected in the ninth round of the draft.
• 1 out of the 32 QBs was selected in the tenth round of the draft.
• 1 out of the 32 QBs was selected in the twelfth round of the draft.
• 1 out of the 32 QBs was selected in the seventeenth round of the draft.
  
• 4 entered the league when there wasn't a draft (pre-1937).
• 1 went undrafted (Warren Moon).

Of course, this doesn't include future HOF QBs such as Peyton Manning (1st Round), Tom Brady (6th Round) and Brett Favre (2nd Round).

Looking at the above though, statistics show that you have a far greater likelihood of finding your true franchise type QB in the first round.

I have good news for you: We get a first round pick every year. No need to force it if the value isn't there.

Post-Elway, only 2 QBs drafted in the top 5 won SBs for the teams who drafted them. (Mannings)

 

[Plankton]

I have good news for you: We get a first round pick every year. No need to force it if the value isn't there.

Post-Elway, only 2 QBs drafted in the top 5 won SBs for the teams who drafted them. (Mannings)

Here's the question - how do you ultimately know what the value is? Is this your own opinion, or what you read from someone else? Not asking with any snark - just honestly wondering.

 

[ConceptCoop]

I never said that we had to draft Lynch. I only said that passing on a QB you like, simply because you have to draft them in the 1st round, and thinking you can always find a guy later is what happened after Troy Retired and that's a true statement.

I don't think anyone disagrees with you here. I think Lynch is a top 25-35 prospect and would be happy to draft him with a pick in that range.

 

[BigStar]

You can't move up unilaterally. You need a willing trade partner.

True, but am sure TEN is open to offers as they haven't really set the first player selected in stone (almost purposefully) to allow the possibility of a trade down since they have their QB in Marriotta. They could potentially land the player they would've taken at 1 by sliding back to 4; bf a team hops CLE to their spot. 2 QBs, Tunsil/Ramsey while adding a 2nd and 3rd along with next year's 1st. They may be tempted by that proposal.

Really just want to reiterate the OP's theme in that if we want a QB, it is much easier to do that @ 4 then mid to late first round in terms of the compensation needed, etc.

 

[ConceptCoop]

Here's the question - how do you ultimately know what the value is? Is this your own opinion, or what you read from someone else? Not asking with any snark - just honestly wondering.

Mostly a consensus of what I hear and read from the paid analysts I respect. I certainly have my own opinion, but I also have a day job.

I'm on record as saying that if the Cowboys staff thinks a franchise QB is there at 4, they need to take him - be that Goff, Wentz, Lynch, Cook or anyone else. I just don't think Lynch is in that category. If the staff disagrees, of course I'll side with the pros who have a pretty dang good track record lately.

My argument isn't that Lynch is not the answer. (Though, I don't think he is.) Time will tell. Just that taking the next best QB on our board regardless of value is not the answer. It seems like a lot of the Lynch crowd seem to think it is.

 

[BigStar]

The Rams trade points out how some teams are so desperate to get a franchise QB that they end up doing stupid things. I would prefer my team not make an equally desperate move by overdrafting Lynch at 4.

Wertz/Goff @ 4 or trade down. Maybe trade back into late 1st w/picks couped to see if Lynch drops, etc. But 4 seems too high for Lynch.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I am unsure as to the "Didn't try at all" statement. I don't know what a reach is where Lynch is concerned. I would not take him at 4 but I would take him in the 1st round.

After Walsh was picked, they didn't draft a QB until Carter some 10 years later. Outside of Stephen McGee, they haven't since. Just because QBs are hard to find outside the first doesn't mean you don't try. UDFA camp fillers that you hope will play well don't count as serious investment in my book.

I think we should draft a QB every year now. Even if a mid-round pick can only develop into a backup quality it helps the team a lot.

 

[Irvin88_4life]

I have good news for you: We get a first round pick every year. No need to force it if the value isn't there.

Post-Elway, only 2 QBs drafted in the top 5 won SBs for the teams who drafted them. (Mannings)

Giants didn't draft Eli

 

[ConceptCoop]

Giants didn't draft Eli

Good catch. I think the deal was all but in place, however.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

This is all hindsight bias. If Quincy was Russell Wilson or Drew Henson was Kurt Warner - it would have been a brilliant move. How far back did it set the Seahawks? How far ahead are the Browns right now for drafting QBs every few years? How far back did passing on Vick for LT+Brees set the Chargers?

There are many ways to skin a cat. We don't need to pretend otherwise to justify our draft desires.

If my Mom was my Dad.....

Quincy was never going to be Russell Wilson and anybody who watched Wilson while at NCSt. or Wisconsin and watched Quincy at Georgia new this. Henson and Warner are better comparisons but the reality was that Parcells, by this time, new what he had in Romo and there just was not enough time or resources to try and develop Henson and Romo. He made a choice and that choice was Tony.

The Seahawks also had a boatload of picks and cap to work with for several years. Are you saying that the Cowboys will be fortunate enough to be in the same situation? Are you saying that you think the Cowboys are like the Browns? Part of this whole process is actually being able to identify the talent, it's not enough to just have the picks. The Browns drafted Johnny Football. That kinda tells you everything you need to know about the process that was going on then.

Trading the #1 by San Diego to Atlanta, not sure what significance that has here. It only has significance if you believed that Vick was a great QB prospect. I did not think he was that good. Lots of talent but not the guy I would want at QB if I were picking. However, the question of how far back that trade set the Chargers is interesting. How do we quantify success right? That trade was in 2001 I believe? How many Super Bowls did that get the Chargers? If you measure success by championships, the it didn't really do much for them at all and they are picking 3rd in this upcoming draft so at the very least, it is debatable.

 

[Irvin88_4life]

Good catch. I think the deal was all but in place, however.

Yes the deal was in place before they drafted Rivers

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

After Walsh was picked, they didn't draft a QB until Carter some 10 years later. Outside of Stephen McGee, they haven't since. Just because QBs are hard to find outside the first doesn't mean you don't try. UDFA camp fillers that you hope will play well don't count as serious investment in my book.

I think we should draft a QB every year now. Even if a mid-round pick can only develop into a backup quality it helps the team a lot.

Well, I agree with your take. We have not done a very good job of trying to develop a QB. That's just the simple truth of it.

I don't know that we should do it every year because the fact of the matter is that you just have so many resources that are available to you for QB development. I think that limits you in how many you can try and bring along at any given time. If you want to do it right IMO, you really only have time to develop one guy at a time. So much time is spent on getting the starter ready and then any leftover snaps go to the backup so if you are truly developing a young QB, there just isn't a lot of extra work or time and I think that you have to give your QBs a few seasons to see what you have. However, I do agree with you on the idea of taking them regularly and trying to develop quality QBs. Every other year or every third year is a really good idea IMO.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I don't think anyone disagrees with you here. I think Lynch is a top 25-35 prospect and would be happy to draft him with a pick in that range.

I think lynch is a 15 to 31 guy. If i had to slot him, strictly according to player rankings, he is probably sitting right around where you see him. However, because it is the QB position, it does get elevated and that's kinds just how it goes.

 

[ConceptCoop]

If my Mom was my Dad.....

Quincy was never going to be Russell Wilson and anybody who watched Wilson while at NCSt. or Wisconsin and watched Quincy at Georgia new this. Henson and Warner are better comparisons but the reality was that Parcells, by this time, new what he had in Romo and there just was not enough time or resources to try and develop Henson and Romo. He made a choice and that choice was Tony.

The Seahawks also had a boatload of picks and cap to work with for several years. Are you saying that the Cowboys will be fortunate enough to be in the same situation? Are you saying that you think the Cowboys are like the Browns? Part of this whole process is actually being able to identify the talent, it's not enough to just have the picks. The Browns drafted Johnny Football. That kinda tells you everything you need to know about the process that was going on then.

Trading the #1 by San Diego to Atlanta, not sure what significance that has here. It only has significance if you believed that Vick was a great QB prospect. I did not think he was that good. Lots of talent but not the guy I would want at QB if I were picking. However, the question of how far back that trade set the Chargers is interesting. How do we quantify success right? That trade was in 2001 I believe? How many Super Bowls did that get the Chargers? If you measure success by championships, the it didn't really do much for them at all and they are picking 3rd in this upcoming draft so at the very least, it is debatable.

You're using hindsight again. You claiming to have known that one consensus 3rd round prospect was markedly better than another consensus 3rd round prospect does nothing for me. I also don't buy that you saw Michael Vick busting.

You realize that the Browns only drafted Johnny Football because Stephen Jones physically kept Jerry Jones from doing so, right? And their owner doesn't have a weekly radio show where he steps on his head coaches toes.

You're seriously arguing that the Chargers weren't better off for getting LT and Drew Brees for the rights to draft Michael Vick? Dude.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

You're using hindsight again. You claiming to have known that one consensus 3rd round prospect was markedly better than another consensus 3rd round prospect does nothing for me. I also don't buy that you saw Michael Vick busting.

You realize that the Browns only drafted Johnny Football because Stephen Jones physically kept Jerry Jones from doing so, right? And their owner doesn't have a weekly radio show where he steps on his head coaches toes.

You're seriously arguing that the Chargers weren't better off for getting LT and Drew Brees for the rights to draft Michael Vick? Dude.

No, that's not the case. I watched both of those guys play. Quincy was not a 3rd round talent. He was maybe a 4th round talent imo. He was never accurate and his game needed a lot of work for the NFL. You didn't need to be a pro scout to see that. On the other hand, Wilson was very accurate and you could see that he could make all the throws and he could command the game. He could lead and again, it was not hard to see that he could play. He was downgraded because of his size. If he had been 6-2 like Carter, he would have been a top 10 pick IMO. It was easy to see. I'm on record on this board as saying that I really liked Wilson and I did not like Carter. I'm also on record as having said that I didn't like Vick either. I don't believe in QBs running the ball in the NFL as a staple. The game is just too physical for that and it will tear you down. You can believe what you want, doesn't matter to me but I have been very consistent over the years about this stuff.

As far as the Chargers go, I didn't say they were or were not better off. I said it depends on what you use as criteria. Championships are how I measure success. Not playoffs, not winning seasons, not Pro Bowls or All Pro players. For me, it's really all about Championships.

 

[Nova]

So why put ourselves in a position in the future to have to make trades like this. Lynch is a first round talent, an above average prospect.

Without Romo we will be picking this high or higher. We'll find a QB then. Unless Goff or Wentz fell into our laps (and I lean more toward Goff) then fine. But I wouldn't rach for Paxton who I don't think is worthy of the 4th overall pick.

It would just be a huge waste, IMO. I don't think he'll ever pan out to be anything than a marginal QB.

 

[4lifecowboy]

Without Romo we will be picking this high or higher. We'll find a QB then. Unless Goff or Wentz fell into our laps (and I lean more toward Goff) then fine. But I wouldn't rach for Paxton who I don't think is worthy of the 4th overall pick.

It would just be a huge waste, IMO. I don't think he'll ever pan out to be anything than a marginal QB.

In hindsight was Derrick Carr worthy of the 4th overall pick? Meaning if you knew he would turn out to be as good as he is who would complain about where he was picked? My point is in the grand scheme of things where a player is taking is not what determine his value, but rather they are successful or not. It is all a risk, who is going to complain if we take Lynch at 4 and he is our QB for the next 12 years? I don't get the trade down to 7, 15 and take him thinking. If you like him take him why risk someone else snatching him up.

 

[Nova]

In hindsight was Derrick Carr worthy of the 4th overall pick? Meaning if you knew he would turn out to be as good as he is who would complain about where he was picked? My point is in the grand scheme of things where a player is taking is not what determine his value, but rather they are successful or not. It is all a risk, who is going to complain if we take Lynch at 4 and he is our QB for the next 12 years? I don't get the trade down to 7, 15 and take him thinking. If you like him take him why risk someone else snatching him up.

I agree. I have the same outlook on Elliot. I think Elliot is worth the 4th overall.

I just don't think Paxton Lynch is going to be anything special. The premise of this thread seems to be "this is how much a QB costs, so you have to overspend".

Yes QBs are expensive. Some are worth the pick. But just because Lynch is the next best QB after goff/Wentz, doesn't mean we should take him at 4.