JohnBonhamRocks Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 I'll put it this way, more likely than not, if we aren't signing Cousins, then the best action to take is to trade up to #2, #3, or #4. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndirish1978 Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 2 minutes ago, simool said: No. Definitely not. Then you must be on the FA QB train? How does drafting a second-tier rookie QB help this team? I'm tired of pretending our scouting staff is somehow plugged in to things other teams aren't. If your guy isn't a consensus top pick the odds are he isn't a franchise QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simool Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 Just now, ndirish1978 said: Then you must be on the FA QB train? How does drafting a second-tier rookie QB help this team? I'm tired of pretending our scouting staff is somehow plugged in to things other teams aren't. If your guy isn't a consensus top pick the odds are he isn't a franchise QB. Wrong again Sally. And your consensus top pick or not a franchise QB line is absolute bs. Ron Wolf would like to speak with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndirish1978 Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 Just now, simool said: Wrong again Sally. And your consensus top pick or not a franchise QB line is absolute bs. It's absolutely not, but thanks for calling me Sally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJS Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 I think we had better wait to see what happens in free agency before we start saying we have to do anything. A lot of those QB needy teams may have their guy from free agency. Whoever signs Cousins won't be drafting a QB high, at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victory Formation Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 I think if we move up to 10-12, there is a good chance we can pick between Mayfield, Rudolph and Allen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simool Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 24 minutes ago, ndirish1978 said: It's absolutely not, but thanks for calling me Sally. Really? I don't see absolutely in this list of winning and losing super bowl qb's of the last 20 years. I should have called you Superlative Sally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 3 hours ago, Socal-805 said: + 1 Beauty. Very well said! Also, I read an article which shows the percentage of "franchise" QBs selected in picks 1 - 5 is about 30 %. Picks 6 - 10 drops to about 10 %, and picks 11 - 20 jumps back up to 20 %. GMs are clearly reaching or misevaluating in the 6 - 10 range. I think?? *raises hand* mine. And thank you very much for the kind words - good to know when the work put in is of interest to someone. It might be worth reiterating that the criteria I used to define "success" were strictly numeric (completion %, YPA, and TD/INT) and chosen to look for "a QB who can play competently in the NFL" vs. "top 5, guy who can carry a team" You remember correctly. I don't know quite how to interpret that 6-10 range. There were only 5 QB chosen in that range (Yes: Tannehill No: Locker, Leinart, Gabbert, Leftwich), so it might be small sample size. But I think it reflects that if teams really think a QB is The Man, they don't want to take chances, so they trade up out of that range into the top picks. Over 2 decades, 26 QB have been drafted in the first 5 picks - 27 in the entire rest of the 1st round!!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Call_Of_Ktulu Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 1 hour ago, SaviorPeterman said: The only guy the Bills want is Darnold and still think Cleveland takes him #1 overall especially since John Dorsey is a proven commodity at GM and understands he's the best QB and/or player in the draft. Cleveland is actually in a great spot because if they land their franchise QB with the first pick they can then trade the #4 pick for a kings ransom to another desperate team looking for a QB. Could easily go from 0-16 to 8-8 or better very quickly. I agree, I think Darnold goes #1 as well. I also think Darnold is the only QB the Bills will trade up for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaviorPeterman Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 1 hour ago, YoloinOhio said: At their current rate of winning 1 game every 2 years, it will take 14 years to get to where they are still not making the playoffs at 8-8. Juicy! John Dorsey is a great GM and KC was foolish to let him go after completely turning around their team and accumulating boatloads of talent. Yes Cleveland is still Cleveland but they can easily turn things around if they finally get a franchise QB. And even if they stay put with both of their top 5 picks this year they are guaranteed two blue chip players. But the smart move would be to move one of the picks for a kings ransom and accumulate as much talent as possible the next few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 57 minutes ago, ndirish1978 said: Then you must be on the FA QB train? How does drafting a second-tier rookie QB help this team? I'm tired of pretending our scouting staff is somehow plugged in to things other teams aren't. If your guy isn't a consensus top pick the odds are he isn't a franchise QB. Not meaning to pick on you, but I do get frustrated with the "franchise QB" concept. The meaning squirms about like a cat facing a bathtub and when one tries to pin a guy down on exactly what he means by the phrase, one gets scratched and bitten. What do you mean by "franchise QB"? Do you mean QB who will be top-5 in the league, future HOF material - guy who can carry a team on his arm, "f*ck D, if you let them score 42 points we'll score 45"? I would say there are about 5-7 of those in the league right now that you wouldn't get too much push back about, on a list looking something like: Brady 6th round Brees 32nd (2nd round) Rivers 4th Rodgers 24th Ryan 3rd Roethlisberger 11th Wilson 75th (3rd round) Which of those guys would you say were the consensus #1 pick in their draft? Was Peyton Manning the consensus top pick in his draft? If you mean "I want the best odds of getting a QB who can play competently in the league" yeah, best odds in the first couple picks. But he won't necessarily be a "franchise guy". He might be Luck, Ryan, Stafford, or Wentz. Or he might be Bradford, JaMarcus Russell, Alex Smith, or Vince Young. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndirish1978 Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 45 minutes ago, simool said: Really? I don't see absolutely in this list of winning and losing super bowl qb's of the last 20 years. I should have called you Superlative Sally. The premise to your entire argument is Tom Brady? Yeah, real solid point. Let's keep dumpster diving for a couple more decades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnBonhamRocks Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 2 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: Not meaning to pick on you, but I do get frustrated with the "franchise QB" concept. The meaning squirms about like a cat facing a bathtub and when one tries to pin a guy down on exactly what he means by the phrase, one gets scratched and bitten. What do you mean by "franchise QB"? Do you mean QB who will be top-5 in the league, future HOF material - guy who can carry a team on his arm, "f*ck D, if you let them score 42 points we'll score 45"? I would say there are about 5-7 of those in the league right now that you wouldn't get too much push back about, on a list looking something like: Brady 6th round Brees 32nd (2nd round) Rivers 4th Rodgers 24th Ryan 3rd Roethlisberger 11th Wilson 75th (3rd round) Which of those guys would you say were the consensus #1 pick in their draft? Was Peyton Manning the consensus top pick in his draft? If you mean "I want the best odds of getting a QB who can play competently in the league" yeah, best odds in the first couple picks. But he won't necessarily be a "franchise guy". He might be Luck, Ryan, Stafford, or Wentz. Or he might be Bradford, JaMarcus Russell, Alex Smith, or Vince Young. I don't think anyone is denying the variance and uncertainty in scouting. Still, if OBD likes a guy enough that they think he is going to be (instead of a franchise QB, I'll say) great, then they should trade up to get him. The same logic regarding uncertainty can be applied to every single pick in the draft. But teams still draft guys. Relying on their scouting departments. And if they are sold based on their scouting that a guy is a great QB, then they should move what need be moved to get him. I don't think we should settle for competence. We should be going all-out to obtain a great QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndirish1978 Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: Not meaning to pick on you, but I do get frustrated with the "franchise QB" concept. The meaning squirms about like a cat facing a bathtub and when one tries to pin a guy down on exactly what he means by the phrase, one gets scratched and bitten. What do you mean by "franchise QB"? Do you mean QB who will be top-5 in the league, future HOF material - guy who can carry a team on his arm, "f*ck D, if you let them score 42 points we'll score 45"? I would say there are about 5-7 of those in the league right now that you wouldn't get too much push back about, on a list looking something like: Brady 6th round Brees 32nd (2nd round) Rivers 4th Rodgers 24th Ryan 3rd Roethlisberger 11th Wilson 75th (3rd round) Which of those guys would you say were the consensus #1 pick in their draft? Was Peyton Manning the consensus top pick in his draft? If you mean "I want the best odds of getting a QB who can play competently in the league" yeah, best odds in the first couple picks. But he won't necessarily be a "franchise guy". He might be Luck, Ryan, Stafford, or Wentz. Or he might be Bradford, JaMarcus Russell, Alex Smith, or Vince Young. I mean if their ceiling isn't top 5. If the opinions of a guy are all over the place, it's historically been more of a crapshoot. Let's be honest, even consensus top QBs fizzle out as often as they pan out, but you at least have a chance with them. 2 of the guys on your list were pushed way down in the draft because of height concerns, but not necessarily talent concerns. I'm getting tired of people who hold Wilson and Brady up as examples of how you can take a shot on a later pick and have them pan out, they are the exception to the rule, not the rule. If you want to put yourself in the best position to succeed all you can do is minimize risk factors, that's quite frankly the only real option. If you're going to be risk-averse, that's fine and it's absolutely that team's prerogative. But don't do that and then justify your argument by saying there is a chance this lesser prospect could be just as good as the higher touted one. There are many more Leafs and Jamarcus Russells out there as there are Wentz and Mannings, other posters have shown statistical correlations between how high a QB is picked and their chance of success in the NFL. The percentages may still not be great, but it's better than nothing. Edited January 25, 2018 by ndirish1978 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 9 minutes ago, ndirish1978 said: The premise to your entire argument is Tom Brady? Yeah, real solid point. Let's keep dumpster diving for a couple more decades. Not meaning to interfere if you guys wanna get a room and go back and forth at each other whilst singing ChumbaWamba Tubthumping, but I think the point is that there are a bunch of QB (not just Brady) who have taken a team to the superbowl without having been the consensus #1 pick (or #1 QB pick) in the draft. Tom Brady, Russ Wilson, Joe Flacco, Colin Kaepernick, Ben Roethlisberger, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Kurt Warner, Rex Grossman, Matt Hasselbeck, Jake Delhome, Rich Gannon, etc - heck, we add one to the list this year in Foles Edited January 25, 2018 by Hapless Bills Fan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simool Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 9 minutes ago, ndirish1978 said: The premise to your entire argument is Tom Brady? Yeah, real solid point. Let's keep dumpster diving for a couple more decades. How you take Tom Brady out of that entire list is really quite remarkable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndirish1978 Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: Not meaning to interfere if you guys wanna get a room and go back and forth at each other whilst singing ChumbaWamba Tubthumping, but I think the point is that there are a bunch of QB (not just Brady) who have taken a team to the superbowl without having been the consensus #1 pick (or #1 QB pick) in the draft. Tom Brady, Russ Wilson, Joe Flacco, Colin Kaepernick, Ben Roethlisberger, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Kurt Warner, Rex Grossman, Matt Hasselbeck, Jake Delhome, Rich Gannon, etc - heck, we add one to the list this year in Foles I made a point, the other guy decided it was cool to insult me for it. I defended my point. I don't care about that dude. My point is that the goal is supposed to be sustained success is it not? If, as a GM your goal is to catch lightning in a bottle for a single season and make it to a championship, ok. But that's not a recipe for a successful franchise. The other guy's point is that Tom Brady was a sixth rounder. That's a BS argument any way you slice it. Edited January 25, 2018 by ndirish1978 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simool Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 5 minutes ago, ndirish1978 said: The other guy's point is that Tom Brady was a sixth rounder. That's a BS argument any way you slice it. Crack kills buddy. I never said anything about Brady. You and your top shelf comprehension skills did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndirish1978 Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 8 minutes ago, simool said: How you take Tom Brady out of that entire list is really quite remarkable. You are ridiculous. I'm talking about statistical probability and you're using an outlier to "prove" your point. That's like saying "that one guy won powerball by buying a single ticket, so why would you buy more than a single ticket?" Your argument basically states that the guy who spends $1,000 on powerball tickets has the same likelihood of winning as the guy who buys one - it's moronic. The draft is a crapshoot, all you can do is maximize your chances of hitting. You don't get to draft in hindsight, else I dare say that Brady MIGHT have been the top pick in the draft. And yes you did base your argument on Brady when you posted a chart that relied mostly on his being there. Edited January 25, 2018 by ndirish1978 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simool Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 3 minutes ago, ndirish1978 said: You are ridiculous. I'm talking about statistical probability and you're using an outlier to "prove" your point. That's like saying "that one guy won powerball by buying a single ticket, so why would you buy more than a single ticket?" Your argument basically states that the guy who spends $1,000 on powerball tickets has the same likelihood of winning as the guy who buys one - it's moronic. The draft is a crapshoot, all you can do is maximize your chances of hitting. You don't get to draft in hindsight, else I dare say that Brady MIGHT have been the top pick in the draft. Again, please reference where I said anything about Brady? Are you hallucinating? 3 minutes ago, ndirish1978 said: And yes you did base your argument on Brady when you posted a chart that relied mostly on his being there. Again, that is your interpretation. I was referring to the TOTALITY of the chart. Do I need to replace it with a remedial chart so you can comprehend that? Edited January 25, 2018 by simool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts