Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 So what happens if Tyrod plays well this year and Peterson shows promise in pre season? Don't think we need to fear that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San-O Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 1. Peterman was a 5th round pick 2. Many QBs show well in preseason 3. Cardale was a 4th round pick and isn't being mentioned 4. You can NEVER have too many good QBs, especially on rookie deals. + 1 PLus: Buffalo isn't going ANYWHERE with Tayor or the 4th or 5th pick this year or last... Management is well aware of this, even if some on this board aren't Draft away -> 2018 1st round QB! It's been so long since the Bills had any winning Qb play, I really think some people have forgotten when good QB play looks like. Me too maybe... Don't think we need to fear that LOL. Yeah, that's1 thing I'm not going to be staying awake worrying aboot! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarleyNY Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 (edited) as much as I liked this QB class and felt this was our best chance in years to get a good QB, it wouldn't have made sense to have a GM on his way out choose a franchise QB for a coach he couldn't work with. Organizational symmetry matters. I just hope we don't get mired in a spot where we win between 7 and 10 games and are on the outside looking in at the best QB prospects. Hopefully that Chiefs pick will buy us some upward movement I really did not like this year's QB class much at all. Not sure what you saw in it. Lots of QBs got pushed up in this one because there was no top end talent. Two QBs that should've been late first round picks go 2 and 10 and a second round QB goes 12. Yeeesh. Kudos to SF, Buffalo and Cleveland for hosing some desperate teams. Whaley didn't chose anything in this draft, it was all McD. He chose his players. On that note, I'm very happy with the Peterman pick especially considering where we got him. He was the only QB who's game film didn't make me cringe. Every other one of the top QBs had issues bad enough for me to want to pass. His didn't "wow" me, but I didn't cringe either. Edited May 11, 2017 by BarleyNY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuvian Posted May 11, 2017 Author Share Posted May 11, 2017 How long are we going to play on the whole arm strength thing? This was debated to death in regards to Watson and been inconclusive in regards to QBs overall success. Accuracy is what's important. You don't seem to get that. I'll play on that arm strength thing until I see a play that changes my opinion. If you don't think opposing defenses won't jump patterns on a weak armed QB you haven't been watching football. And yes I do get that regardless of your patronizing tone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarleyNY Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 I'll play on that arm strength thing until I see a play that changes my opinion. If you don't think opposing defenses won't jump patterns on a weak armed QB you haven't been watching football. And yes I do get that regardless of your patronizing tone I have an issue with weaker armed QBs. Since 2008 QBs who have been clocked at under 55mph have not been successful with only a few exceptions. Those exceptions are: Jake Locker (54mph, 2011), Tyrod Taylor (50mph, 2011) and Dak Prescott (54mph, 2016). Peterman clocked in at 54mph this year. I know he's not strong armed, but I'm okay with 54mph. Here's a spreadsheet to check out: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_-SienfT3umX0HKxRyQqyXM9BqHrotdcQA6W-V_pDiY/htmlview?pli=1# Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blokestradamus Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 I'm not as down on him as Blokes but he's a #2 IMO. In my interview yesterday, I was asked about my greatest achievement. If this was posted 24 hours earlier, I would've said this. May change my Twitter bio to "Barometer for scepticism regarding Nathan Peterman". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 (edited) I have an issue with weaker armed QBs. Since 2008 QBs who have been clocked at under 55mph have not been successful with only a few exceptions. Those exceptions are: Jake Locker (54mph, 2011), Tyrod Taylor (50mph, 2011) and Dak Prescott (54mph, 2016). Peterman clocked in at 54mph this year. I know he's not strong armed, but I'm okay with 54mph. Here's a spreadsheet to check out: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_-SienfT3umX0HKxRyQqyXM9BqHrotdcQA6W-V_pDiY/htmlview?pli=1# The most overshared and overvalued spreadhseet of all time. Which if those QBs below 55mph had done anything in college before showing up and throwing at the combine to indicate that they had a chance to be good pro QBs? Is Connor Cook maybe the best college tape of those? It isn't a great selection. And indeed I'd argue AJ (49mph) McCarron has shown a whole lot more in limited action that some of this big arm boys who passed that particular test. Could say the same for Glennon too. I just don't buy that it is sound analysis at all at this stage. There is no causal link proven at all. Edited May 11, 2017 by GunnerBill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaattMaann Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 (edited) The most overshared and overvalued spreadhseet of all time. Which if those QBs below 55mph had done anything in college before showing up and throwing at the combine to indicate that they had a chance to be good pro QBs? Is Connor Cook maybe the best college tape of those? It isn't a great selection. And indeed I'd argue AJ (49mph) McCarron has shown a whole lot more in limited action that some of this big arm boys who passed that particular test. Could say the same for Glennon too. I just don't buy that it is sound analysis at all at this stage. There is no causal link proven at all. You can think velocity is not an indicator of success all you'd like, but the numbers indicate otherwise. Since 08, there hasnt been a successful NFL QB who threw less than 55 mph. You can say "what did those QBs do in college?" all you want, I don't care if they threw for 15,000 yards in college or never played. The number 55 is the indicator. McCarron and his weak 49 has not shown anything to indicate hes more than a backup. Just because those under 55 dont have great college production does not mean the 55 mph mark is wrong, it means that if you don't have a strong arm you probably aren't going to light it up in college either. The fact remains none of the "under 55" club has ever been anything other than a bust, never was, or career backup. I'll take my chances with the stronger throwers. 2 mph equates to 3 yards on a ball travelling 20 yards...thats a HUGE window (or missed window) in the NFL. "Passing" the Velocity test does not mean you WILL be a good NFL QB, but "failing" it so far has proved that you will NOT be a good NFL QB (I mean "good" as in, potential franchise guy, because who cares about anything else). Peterman came in at 54, could he be the guy who breaks the rule? Sure...but I wont bet on it. Edited May 11, 2017 by PaattMaann Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffaloboyinATL Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 I have an issue with weaker armed QBs. Since 2008 QBs who have been clocked at under 55mph have not been successful with only a few exceptions. Those exceptions are: Jake Locker (54mph, 2011), Tyrod Taylor (50mph, 2011) and Dak Prescott (54mph, 2016). Peterman clocked in at 54mph this year. I know he's not strong armed, but I'm okay with 54mph. Here's a spreadsheet to check out: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_-SienfT3umX0HKxRyQqyXM9BqHrotdcQA6W-V_pDiY/htmlview?pli=1# Wait, I thought it was hand size that determined successful QB's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffismagic Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 You can think velocity is not an indicator of success all you'd like, but the numbers indicate otherwise. Since 08, there hasnt been a successful NFL QB who threw less than 55 mph. You can say "what did those QBs do in college?" all you want, I don't care if they threw for 15,000 yards in college or never played. The number 55 is the indicator. McCarron and his weak 49 has not shown anything to indicate hes more than a backup. Just because those under 55 dont have great college production does not mean the 55 mph mark is wrong, it means that if you don't have a strong arm you probably aren't going to light it up in college either. The fact remains none of the "under 55" club has ever been anything other than a bust, never was, or career backup. I'll take my chances with the stronger throwers. 2 mph equates to 3 yards on a ball travelling 20 yards...thats a HUGE window (or missed window) in the NFL. "Passing" the Velocity test does not mean you WILL be a good NFL QB, but "failing" it so far has proved that you will NOT be a good NFL QB (I mean "good" as in, potential franchise guy, because who cares about anything else). Peterman came in at 54, could he be the guy who breaks the rule? Sure...but I wont bet on it. Peterman is a 53 on that chart. Same as Kaaya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blokestradamus Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 Peterman is a 53 on that chart. Same as Kaaya. I'm curious if the magic number becomes 54 if Dak backs up a decent rookie season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffismagic Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 I'm curious if the magic number becomes 54 if Dak backs up a decent rookie season. Dak had a shoulder injury so he can't be the one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blokestradamus Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 Dak had a shoulder injury so he can't be the one. I'm intrigued by the data but there's a bunch of guys that data wasn't recorded on. A few of which, from watching them, I'd consider candidates to be on the borderline of the threshold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffismagic Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 I'm intrigued by the data but there's a bunch of guys that data wasn't recorded on. A few of which, from watching them, I'd consider candidates to be on the borderline of the threshold. I don't think this data analytics approach is definitive. I do think there is a threshold where the MPH would be too low to draft. As we get more data we will know more where the minimum MPH should be. For now the best guess is under 54 based upon available data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KellyToughII Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 + 1 PLus: Buffalo isn't going ANYWHERE with Tayor or the 4th or 5th pick this year or last... Management is well aware of this, even if some on this board aren't Draft away -> 2018 1st round QB! It's been so long since the Bills had any winning Qb play, I really think some people have forgotten when good QB play looks like. Me too maybe... LOL. Yeah, that's1 thing I'm not going to be staying awake worrying aboot! BS. Peterman could become a franchise QB. No one knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blokestradamus Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 I don't think this data analytics approach is definitive. I do think there is a threshold where the MPH would be too low to draft. As we get more data we will know more where the minimum MPH should be. For now the best guess is under 54 based upon available data. Definitely something to keep an eye on. Although I think there would be more merit to put a chip in game balls to replicate realistic throwing scenarios & platforms rather than chucking it in shorts inside a dome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffismagic Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 (edited) Definitely something to keep an eye on. Although I think there would be more merit to put a chip in game balls to replicate realistic throwing scenarios & platforms rather than chucking it in shorts inside a dome. But let's be clear. Peterman is not a 5th rounder because of his weak arm. His tape is also not pretty. His stint in Tennessee had him public enemy #1. The scouting reports I got said Peterman is a younger T.J. Yates or a Matt Moore. Edited May 11, 2017 by jeffismagic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KellyToughII Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 But let's be clear. Peterman is not a 5th rounder because of his weak arm. His tape is also not pretty. His stint in Tennessee had him public enemy #1. The scouting reports I got from my old school scouting network said Peterman is a younger T.J. Yates or a Matt Moore. And he could be, but lets see first Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blokestradamus Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 But let's be clear. Peterman is not a 5th rounder because of his weak arm. His tape is also not pretty. His stint in Tennessee had him public enemy #1. The scouting reports I got said Peterman is a younger T.J. Yates or a Matt Moore. Preaching to the choir on this one. I have more than enough scars from the battle already Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffismagic Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 Preaching to the choir on this one. I have more than enough scars from the battle already Well, no need for us to do anything now. Training camp will start soon and people will be able to see for themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts