Thanking Rams, Eagles

[Stash]

I can't imagine that the league hasn't strongly considered such a system in the past. My guess is that the owners didn't see profitability in such a venture so they opted not to go there. Admittedly, pure speculation on my part.

If they don't, I think they're greedy fools who can't see the positives to be gained.

 

[Stash]

If you are focused on defensive players then you are not necessarily drafting the BPA. I do understand the desire to have an Elite defense, I want one too.

That said, lets be realistic about the QBs, neither you nor I know for sure that either will "probably bust". To pretend otherwise is either naïve or grandstanding.

That's not the M.O. There's not that large amount of thinking behind it. The kids just want what they want, even if they don't know why.

And they'll invent things in a vain attempt to support it.

 

[LandryFan]

If they don't, I think they're greedy fools who can't see the positives to be gained.

You might have hit on something there...

 

[Denim Chicken]

If you are focused on defensive players then you are not necessarily drafting the BPA. I do understand the desire to have an Elite defense, I want one too.

That said, lets be realistic about the QBs, neither you nor I know for sure that either will "probably bust". To pretend otherwise is either naïve or grandstanding.

BPA doesn't work if you give up picks to move up like some in this thread are advocating. It's best player available. The QBs are not available at #4.

And yes, the recent statistical likelihood trends on the side of of a QB not working out. Especially the 2nd one taken.

 

[MrPhil]

And yes, the recent statistical likelihood trends on the side of of a QB not working out. Especially the 2nd one taken.

As with most statistics there is a certain amount of interpretation required. My interpretation of the stats for QBs drafted #2 overall leads me to a different conclusion than yours.

There have been 4 QBs drafted at #2 overall in the past 20 years, which is as I admitted previously, a somewhat arbitrary range based on a previous conversation with another poster but that is what I have stats for so.

That said, those 4 QBS are: Marcus Mariota, Robert Griffin, Donovan McNabb and Ryan Leaf. I think we can all agree that McNabb's career, statistically, should be considered a success and conversely Leaf's career was an unmitigated failure. That leaves us with Mariota and Griffin. My personal opinion based on what I saw this year is that Mariota seems headed in the right direction so for the sake of argument I will put him in the successful category. Griffin is the wildcard. He certainly has the talent and has shown he can be successful. The question is whether or not he can rekindle that with Hue Jackson and Cleveland. If I had to guess, I would say that he will be successful enough to reach the average statistical range for a Top 5 QBs which is about 20,000 yards passing. He currently sits at 8,000.

So, out of those 4 QBs drafted #2 overall, here is how I see them based on their stats:

TD INT Yards RTG
Marcus Mariota 19 10 2,818 91.5 = Successful projection
Robert Griffin 40 23 8,097 90.6 = Average projection
Donovan McNabb 234 117 37,276 85.6 = Successful
Ryan Leaf 14 36 3,666 50.0 = Failure

So, I guess it depends on how you define "working out" as you phrased it but I would say that the stats suggest that the QBs drafted #2 overall have a little more success that you seem to believe.

 

[Denim Chicken]

As with most statistics there is a certain amount of interpretation required. My interpretation of the stats for QBs drafted #2 overall leads me to a different conclusion than yours.

There have been 4 QBs drafted at #2 overall in the past 20 years, which is as I admitted previously, a somewhat arbitrary range based on a previous conversation with another poster but that is what I have stats for so.

That said, those 4 QBS are: Marcus Mariota, Robert Griffin, Donovan McNabb and Ryan Leaf. I think we can all agree that McNabb's career, statistically, should be considered a success and conversely Leaf's career was an unmitigated failure. That leaves us with Mariota and Griffin. My personal opinion based on what I saw this year is that Mariota seems headed in the right direction so for the sake of argument I will put him in the successful category. Griffin is the wildcard. He certainly has the talent and has shown he can be successful. The question is whether or not he can rekindle that with Hue Jackson and Cleveland. If I had to guess, I would say that he will be successful enough to reach the average statistical range for a Top 5 QBs which is about 20,000 yards passing. He currently sits at 8,000.

So, out of those 4 QBs drafted #2 overall, here is how I see them based on their stats:

TD INT Yards RTG
Marcus Mariota 19 10 2,818 91.5 = Successful projection
Robert Griffin 40 23 8,097 90.6 = Average projection
Donovan McNabb 234 117 37,276 85.6 = Successful
Ryan Leaf 14 36 3,666 50.0 = Failure

So, I guess it depends on how you define "working out" as you phrased it but I would say that the stats suggest that the QBs drafted #2 overall have a little more success that you seem to believe.

That's fair, but I would by no means try to pass RG3 off as successful-especially considering his cost.

But let's call it a 50/50 chance, basically a coin flip.

I'm not willing to give away valuable picks for a coin flip. At least not yet.

 

[DogFace]

For the sake of truth, I never made any claim of the Cowboys being "fools for passing on them". That was an out-and-out lie.

I was paraphrasing.

Just to be clear. What were you trying to say if not that?

 

[MrPhil]

That's fair, but I would by no means try to pass RG3 off as successful-especially considering his cost.

But let's call it a 50/50 chance, basically a coin flip.

I'm not willing to give away valuable picks for a coin flip. At least not yet.

Fair enough, I cannot argue with that at all. Although to be clear, I did characterize RG3 as being average, not successful.

 

[Stash]

I was paraphrasing.

Then do me a favor and don't "paraphrase" my comments into completely misrepresenting them.

Just to be clear. What were you trying to say if not that?

That it's lamentable and unfortunate that we won't have the chance to draft either guy, that it's not somehow a 'good thing', despite what some people are trying and failing to sell.

 

[gimmesix]

I have a question, and an issue:

Why is this at all limited to the Top 5?

That's a ridiculous qualifier that renders everything else useless.

Because we're drafting in the top five and in the 30s?

However, if you want to expand it out over the first round, the numbers don't get any better from what I've read elsewhere.

I'm not jury-rigging the evidence. I went into it to honestly assess if it is better to take a quarterback at our first-round pick or at our second-round pick.

The numbers show they are about even, but a whole lot more QBs have been selected over the years in the top five. I guess that shows that not a lot of QBs worth taking have been available in the 30s, so when one is worth taking there, he has just as much of a chance to succeed as the more ample amount taken in the top five.

Now, what you wrote earlier about the chances decreasing in the later rounds is correct. I believe I've read there's a 30 percent chance of finding a starting QB there and it keeps declining from there. Again, I don't think that's a reason to not take a QB after the second. You're likely to end up with a Stephen McGee, but if you trust your process, you could uncover a gem.

 

[DFWJC]

As with most statistics there is a certain amount of interpretation required. My interpretation of the stats for QBs drafted #2 overall leads me to a different conclusion than yours.

There have been 4 QBs drafted at #2 overall in the past 20 years, which is as I admitted previously, a somewhat arbitrary range based on a previous conversation with another poster but that is what I have stats for so.

That said, those 4 QBS are: Marcus Mariota, Robert Griffin, Donovan McNabb and Ryan Leaf. I think we can all agree that McNabb's career, statistically, should be considered a success and conversely Leaf's career was an unmitigated failure. That leaves us with Mariota and Griffin. My personal opinion based on what I saw this year is that Mariota seems headed in the right direction so for the sake of argument I will put him in the successful category. Griffin is the wildcard. He certainly has the talent and has shown he can be successful. The question is whether or not he can rekindle that with Hue Jackson and Cleveland. If I had to guess, I would say that he will be successful enough to reach the average statistical range for a Top 5 QBs which is about 20,000 yards passing. He currently sits at 8,000.

So, out of those 4 QBs drafted #2 overall, here is how I see them based on their stats:

TD INT Yards RTG
Marcus Mariota 19 10 2,818 91.5 = Successful projection
Robert Griffin 40 23 8,097 90.6 = Average projection
Donovan McNabb 234 117 37,276 85.6 = Successful
Ryan Leaf 14 36 3,666 50.0 = Failure

So, I guess it depends on how you define "working out" as you phrased it but I would say that the stats suggest that the QBs drafted #2 overall have a little more success that you seem to believe.

1993..so almost 20 years would give you the famous Rick Mirer at #2.
just some trivia

 

[gimmesix]

I think it's a reach to call Kap a success at this point (especially when apparently you list Palmer as "tentatively" a success, which was funny). Yeah, he had a nice two year run there but I don't think any team considers him a franchise level QB like others on your list. The 49ers quietly shopped him and no one would touch him.

So the hit rate for QBs in the 30s could be more like 33% than 50%.

Well, it's tough to qualify success. The general criteria I used is someone who became a starter for his team and earned a second contract.

Tentative probably shouldn't be placed next to either Palmer or Lomax.

Like I said, I tried to be fair in the process.

 

[Stash]

Because we're drafting in the top five and in the 30s?

Who cares? If we're drafting a quarterback in the first round, use the numbers on quarterbacks in the first round. It will give you a more thorough and comprehensive, and more worthwhile analysis.

However, if you want to expand it out over the first round, the numbers don't get any better from what I've read elsewhere.

I'm not jury-rigging the evidence. I went into it to honestly assess if it is better to take a quarterback at our first-round pick or at our second-round pick.

I don't mean to knock you or anything and while I can appreciate the work you put into it, I don't see much value in it compared to more through analysis.

The numbers show they are about even, but a whole lot more QBs have been selected over the years in the top five. I guess that shows that not a lot of QBs worth taking have been available in the 30s, so when one is worth taking there, he has just as much of a chance to succeed as the more ample amount taken in the top five.

Now, what you wrote earlier about the chances decreasing in the later rounds is correct. I believe I've read there's a 30 percent chance of finding a starting QB there and it keeps declining from there. Again, I don't think that's a reason to not take a QB after the second. You're likely to end up with a Stephen McGee, but if you trust your process, you could uncover a gem.

Again, my overall position is that it's much wiser to make the decision that gives you the highest probability for success.

Everyone here knows that there's no such thing as a sure thing with any players, so that doesn't need to be said and usually is by the lesser informed looking to distract from the facts. They'll pull out a 'Joey Harrington' or 'RG3' and point to it like they've discovered something. It's both cute and sad.

And again, I appreciate the work you put into it, even if I don't place much stock in the results.

But what I absolutely do not agree with is any notion of the top two quarterbacks being unavailable to the Cowboys as any sort of 'favor'.

 

[Joe Realist]

Says a Melvin who will be crying like a baby when the crippled QB can't play anymore. Whoever they draft at 4? They don't matter without the QB. Completely and totally irrelevant.

Here's the deal, Bathe in this truth while fantasy land is all around you. We have a triple whammy at play here and watch and see if I'm not right as rain.

1) We had a real opportunity to turn the abortion of the 2015 season it's an actual positive with the QB of the future. We've now lost that opportunity. Either the idiots who compose our front office don't believe there's a franchise QB in this draft or they just think it's too soon. Romo can play until it hurts to pee. Either way, I would trust your Mom's opinion on this over those two wastes of space. There is a very good chance we will all look back on this decision with serious regret.

2) Not taking the QB now leaves the Cowboys in familiar territory. Their safe space. Their binky. They will more than likely waste the 4th overall pick on a player who will provide zero impact on this team, CB Jalen Ramsey. Literally the least pay out you can drum up from 4-12 and the 4th pick in the draft. It will be a decision that's celebrated around the Romper Room, but will prove to be just as horrific as the Newman, Carr and Claiborne decisions. Irrelevant players. They win you nothing. They should never command a top of the draft selection or a mega FA deal.

3) Not taking the QB at 4 will also probably lead to another disastrous decision. Burning a pick quite possibly as high as 34, and a lot of time, on a complete bum athlete type QB that Wade Wilson can coach up in the decade and a half or whatever it is our lunatic of an owner has Romo pegged for. Hey, we're addressing QB. See? It's just kind of half ***ed. Did you meet Jalen yet?

Same old, same old. Tick tock. How old is he today? How old tomorrow? We're making progress.

I would have rolled the dice and went with Wentz. Look everyone, we are not winning anything with Romo anymore. I really think this is his last season.

 

[L-O-Jete]

Iggles just bailed on Bradford, possibly fleeced themselves out of two Drafts and set back ala' RG3 Skins - to move up 6 spots. Eagles Nation is blithering, lol - today was a good day.

The thing is, it may have been a bad day for the eagles, but it also was a bad day for the cowboys. Regardless what career the 2 QB's have in LA and PHI, Dallas was in prime position to get the QB of the future and into a position to succeed with that OL and some time to sit and learn.
Now that is gone and in very short time Dallas will be without a QB which is step 1, 1A all the way to 10 for winning in the NFL

 

[DogFace]

Then do me a favor and don't "paraphrase" my comments into completely misrepresenting them.



That it's lamentable and unfortunate that we won't have the chance to draft either guy, that it's not somehow a 'good thing', despite what some people are trying and failing to sell.

I'll quote you then: you used the phrase: "The term you're looking for is 'idiots" and also "internet morons" when describing anyone who thought the Cowboys should draft them and anyone who agreed with that position from the Cowboys as incompetent. You implied you felt they were incompetent by saying they failed for 20 years etc etc( the normal stuff you say) as well as your ever popular boycott threat.

You hailed the teams that moved up to get them as Nfl minds or some simailar to that. You repeatedly said they must know what they were doing and others who disagreed were "internet morons".

You also alluded to a "consensus" that these Qb's were top prospects. I asked for links stating that because I've heard many analysts take shots at them in some ways to make me leary, and possibly the Cowboys too, of drafting them that high. I asked for proof and you sarcastically responding I should Google.

So taken from all that I deduced you agreed with your consensus and they were cant miss prospects and the Cowboys were fools if they had passed on them.

My point always was with so many top Qbs failing in the nfl that a more consensus safe pick would be better for our team.

 

[gimmesix]

Who cares? If we're drafting a quarterback in the first round, use the numbers on quarterbacks in the first round. It will give you a more thorough and comprehensive, and more worthwhile analysis.

There are plenty of studies of that, including this one from Cleveland.com. The numbers pretty much correlate with what I showed for the top five.

CLEVELAND, Ohio - Two things are true about finding a so-called franchise quarterback in the NFL Draft.

Nearly all the good ones are picked in the first round.

But even those chosen near the very top of the first round carry a less than 50-50 chance of turning out to be winners. This is the difficulty NFL teams face in trying to fill what arguably is the most important position in all of pro team sports.

What are to odds of success?

To get an idea, we looked back at the 45 quarterbacks chosen in the first round over the previous 16 drafts - starting with the return of the Cleveland Browns in 1999.

• 17 of these quarterbacks (38 percent) have won a playoff game.
• 16 of the 45 (36 percent) have winning records as starters during the regular season.
• The career passer ratings for only a half-dozen of these quarterbacks is high enough to be ranked in the top half of the league last year.
• Eleven out of the last 16 drafts, a quarterback has gone first overall. These QBs are a combined 445-475-4 as NFL starters in the regular season and 15-17 in the playoffs. Eight of the 15 playoff wins, however, are by Eli Manning.
• http://www.cleveland.com/datacentral/index.ssf/2015/04/success_for_quarterbacks_picke.html

 

[Kaiser]

That said, those 4 QBS are: Marcus Mariota, Robert Griffin, Donovan McNabb and Ryan Leaf. I think we can all agree that McNabb's career, statistically, should be considered a success and conversely Leaf's career was an unmitigated failure. That leaves us with Mariota and Griffin. My personal opinion based on what I saw this year is that Mariota seems headed in the right direction so for the sake of argument I will put him in the successful category. Griffin is the wildcard. He certainly has the talent and has shown he can be successful. The question is whether or not he can rekindle that with Hue Jackson and Cleveland. If I had to guess, I would say that he will be successful enough to reach the average statistical range for a Top 5 QBs which is about 20,000 yards passing. He currently sits at 8,000.

Another great post, but the point I would make on RGIII is that the Commanders gave a package to get him that was worth a HOF type of QB, not a good but not great type. Even if Griffin stayed completely healthy the Commanders overpaid badly in that trade.

 

[gimmesix]

There are plenty of studies of that, including this one from Cleveland.com. The numbers pretty much correlate with what I showed for the top five.

CLEVELAND, Ohio - Two things are true about finding a so-called franchise quarterback in the NFL Draft.

Nearly all the good ones are picked in the first round.

But even those chosen near the very top of the first round carry a less than 50-50 chance of turning out to be winners. This is the difficulty NFL teams face in trying to fill what arguably is the most important position in all of pro team sports.

What are to odds of success?

To get an idea, we looked back at the 45 quarterbacks chosen in the first round over the previous 16 drafts - starting with the return of the Cleveland Browns in 1999.

• 17 of these quarterbacks (38 percent) have won a playoff game.
• 16 of the 45 (36 percent) have winning records as starters during the regular season.
• The career passer ratings for only a half-dozen of these quarterbacks is high enough to be ranked in the top half of the league last year.
• Eleven out of the last 16 drafts, a quarterback has gone first overall. These QBs are a combined 445-475-4 as NFL starters in the regular season and 15-17 in the playoffs. Eight of the 15 playoff wins, however, are by Eli Manning.

I think what we see at the top of the second (picks 30-39 is just an extension of the first round, since the success rates are similar. It would probably be safe to say that the success rate for drafting QBs in the first 40 picks is 50 percent, whether they are taken in the top five or the 30s.

 

[MrPhil]

Another great post, but the point I would make on RGIII is that the Commanders gave a package to get him that was worth a HOF type of QB, not a good but not great type. Even if Griffin stayed completely healthy the Commanders overpaid badly in that trade.

Based on the performance thus far in his career, I agree the Commanders overpaid for sure.