bisonbrigade Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 Arron Rodgers. LOL. Otherwise trade down and collect picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 I don't particularly trust them those were just the numbers that I heard this morning. At the same time you showed their grades for 4 guys and they were drafted from highest to lowest. Whether we like the eventual results or not it was a pretty good predictor of which guys would be drafted when. That is right, but it does rather play in to one of Jeff's criticisms all off-season which has been that the NFL and NFL talent evaluators are stuck in "group think" mode looking for outdated traits and having inbuilt historic biases against (for example) Air Raid systems or Quarterbacks who work only from the shotgun. I think there is some of that.... but it is hard to say that is the reason they get it wrong when one of the guys they got so badly wrong was Manziel. I'd rather just say scouting for good pro Quarterbacks is notoriously difficult hence people tend to get as many wrong as right. And in all likelihood if there was any internet expert batting 100 on picking good NFL QBs then the NFL would cotton onto that individual pretty quickly and someone would hire him or her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 I've been on board trying to get a 2018 1st so that you can go from 10 to 3 or whatever to land one of those elite guys.I hate this idea. It has been tried many times and has literally never worked, although there is an outside chance that Philly may have a good QB in Wentz. Let the draft come to you, or trade down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
section122 Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 That is right, but it does rather play in to one of Jeff's criticisms all off-season which has been that the NFL and NFL talent evaluators are stuck in "group think" mode looking for outdated traits and having inbuilt historic biases against (for example) Air Raid systems or Quarterbacks who work only from the shotgun. I think there is some of that.... but it is hard to say that is the reason they get it wrong when one of the guys they got so badly wrong was Manziel. I'd rather just say scouting for good pro Quarterbacks is notoriously difficult hence people tend to get as many wrong as right. And in all likelihood if there was any internet expert batting 100 on picking good NFL QBs then the NFL would cotton onto that individual pretty quickly and someone would hire him or her. Agree with all of this but want to add: I think the biggest difficulty in evaluating college to pros and specifically with QBs is the mental make up. You are giving someone millions of dollars. Does that sap their motivation (Russell), lead to poor decision making off the field (Manziel), change their personality, will they be able to lead grown men, etc... Much like golf it is the 6 inches between their ears that makes a lot of the difference. It is next to impossible to predict and a big part (imo) of what makes projecting QBs so difficult. Another aspect is the QB position only has a few guys on each team so teams are taking a shot once every couple of years or so. Therefore failures stand out much more. Torell Troup was a bust but in the same draft the Bills got Kyle Williams. James Hardy was a bust but that draft gave us Stevie Johnson. The Redskins traded a ransom for RG3 and start Cousins from the same draft instead. I'm not a grab one every year person, the value has to match but I think teams should stop worrying about hurting their QBs feelings by taking competition. It is the hardest position to play and that to me makes it the hardest position to scout. I'm not convinced that Aaron Rodgers becomes who he is today if he doesn't sit for a few years and get developed by GB. Same with Brady. On the flip side look at Alex Smith. He didn't get quality development until Harbaugh and then took off. Long story short: there is so much more than just play that goes into evaluating and projecting a guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metzelaars_lives Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 (edited) Agreed with the people saying that you gotta trust your talent evaluators. I have said this time and time again lately but there are these narratives that take hold and everyone oversimplifies them and starts flinging them around and it drives me nuts. One is that the Bills offensive line always sucks and, this season for instance, RT is a pressing (top 2-3 round) draft need. It isn't. Our offensive line is one of the best in the league. They'll make do at RT. Few if any teams have guys as good as us at the other four positions. Number two, that you can just plug and play running backs and they're all the same/interchangeable. They're not. Lesean McCoy is a special player. Three is that trading down is always a good idea. It isn't. It's situational folks. There's going to be a COMPLETE STUD sitting there at 10. This is a very good top end draft. Losing to the Jets was a good thing. If your guy is there, you take him, if he's not, you don't. But trading down isn't always a no-brainer the way people make it out to be. I'm all about Corey Davis at 10. Would be the most exciting pick they could make in my opinion. Edited April 12, 2017 by metzelaars_lives Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent 91 Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 I myself, am not in a tizzy. I'm a Corey Davis guy. I heard one of the foremost national expert guys on the radio here in Denver and he was making kind of a big issue about it. Was the first and only time I had heard about it. The guy I heard said the only guy to throw under 55 was Prescott at 54 and he had a shoulder injury at the time so nobody cared. I guess Brees threw 55 and that was the slowest anyone had thrown since they'd been doing it. I dont even know this was a thing. Let's ask this though. What was EJs speed? Vick? JP Losman. I would rather have a Davis Webb or something later but what the heck do those metrics really mean. It doesn't bother me. What was fitz ball speed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffismagic Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 I dont even know this was a thing. Let's ask this though. What was EJs speed? Vick? JP Losman. I would rather have a Davis Webb or something later but what the heck do those metrics really mean. It doesn't bother me. What was fitz ball speed? EJ threw 54 MPH which to some means do not draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 EJ threw 54 MPH which to some means do not draft. Sorry if I missed it (or forgot), but what did Watson throw? Wasn't that an issue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LABILLBACKER Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 For me it would be Hooker or Adams. I think that they would represent good value at a position of need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 Sorry if I missed it (or forgot), but what did Watson throw? Wasn't that an issue? I believe it was 49. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 I believe it was 49. That's what I thought. Hmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 EJ threw 54 MPH which to some means do not draft. But EJ didn't fail on arm strength. We can all agree his failure was due to other factors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LABILLBACKER Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 Exactly...Adams, Hooker or Garrett are all top 3 picks to me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffismagic Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 But EJ didn't fail on arm strength. We can all agree his failure was due to other factors. Yes, I'll give you that. EJ just didn't deal well with pressure or games. The more coaching he got, the more he learned, the worse he got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 (edited) There's going to be a COMPLETE STUD sitting there at 10. This is a very good top end draft. Losing to the Jets was a good thing. If your guy is there, you take him, if he's not, you don't. But trading down isn't always a no-brainer the way people make it out to be. I'm all about Corey Davis at 10. Would be the most exciting pick they could make in my opinion. Hey metz, how many "complete studs" have the Bills drafted at, or even before #10? Please, ya know? And as for "exciting" picks, that got us the big time stud CJ Spiller. You remember the 2,000 yard man, and how excited he was going to make us? Wrt the OL, we can just agree to disagree. I think Tyrod saves them from looking a lot worse, and even at that they are very thin. I will grant you that there is no totally horrible player such as Greg Jerman or Terrance Pennington on this OL, but aside from Glenn none are all that good, and Mills is pretty bad. EJ threw 54 MPH which to some means do not draft. Do you happen to know how Trent Edwards scored? Edited April 12, 2017 by Bill from NYC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffismagic Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 Hey metz, how many "complete studs" have the Bills drafted at, or even before #10? Please, ya know? And as for "exciting" picks, that got us the big time stud CJ Spiller. You remember the 2,000 yard man, and how excited he was going to make us? Wrt the OL, we can just agree to disagree. I think Tyrod saves them from looking a lot worse, and even at that they are very thin. I will grant you that there is no totally horrible player such as Greg Jerman or Terrance Pennington on this OL, but aside from Glenn none are all that good, and Mills is pretty bad. Do you happen to know how Trent Edwards scored? Ball velocity just started to get measured in 2008. So no. Here is a spreadsheet that has every year but I can't vouch for the accuracy of it all. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_-SienfT3umX0HKxRyQqyXM9BqHrotdcQA6W-V_pDiY/htmlview?usp=drive_web&usp=sheets_home&ths=true&sle=true# Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 Ball velocity just started to get measured in 2008. So no. Here is a spreadsheet that has every year but I can't vouch for the accuracy of it all. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_-SienfT3umX0HKxRyQqyXM9BqHrotdcQA6W-V_pDiY/htmlview?usp=drive_web&usp=sheets_home&ths=true&sle=true# Just from looking at the data, and taking into account the heuristic that one year guys are a no no, Mahomes is the top guy and not Trubisky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffismagic Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 Just from looking at the data, and taking into account the heuristic that one year guys are a no no, Mahomes is the top guy and not Trubisky. That's the great thing about the draft. Everyone has rules and some work and some don't. The NFL also changes and many of the rules that used to work (like the Parcells rules for QB) also seem a bit dated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 Ball velocity just started to get measured in 2008. So no. Here is a spreadsheet that has every year but I can't vouch for the accuracy of it all. That spread sheet just absolutely proves my point. There is nobody on it who looked a likely franchise Quarterback but just didn't have sufficient velocity. Those guys failed because they were bad Quarterbacks. There is absolutely no proven causal link at this stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffismagic Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 That spread sheet just absolutely proves my point. There is nobody on it who looked a likely franchise Quarterback but just didn't have sufficient velocity. Those guys failed because they were bad Quarterbacks. There is absolutely no proven causal link at this stage. That's pretty subjective. I don't think the case is closed but we have almost a decade now and there is no success for any QB in the last decade who threw 53 or below unless you count Taylor as a success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts