More Analytics That Suggests This QB Class Is Average At Best...

[Adam]

4 hours ago, SouthNYfan said:

 

No, but you linked it, and are acting like it's gospel.

Moron.

What language is this?

[PBLESS]

After looking at the various articles showing the history of QBs chosen in the early rounds  [such as this https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2017/nfl-draft-round-round-qb-study-1994-2016] I'm more convinced than ever that it's a crap shoot, and trading a bunch of high picks to get an unknown is a risky idea. I think that Lauletta or even Rudolph make as good a gamble as any of the other more highly ranked QBs, and we don't have to give up any picks to get either one. To me, the only way of being relatively certain that you're getting a sure fire, star QB is to keep your cap spending down by having a lot of rookie contracts on your roster and than signing a proven NFL QB when he becomes a free agent. next year the Bills will have 100 million in cap space. By then they will also know if they already have a talented QB, after assessing whichever rookie they select plus AJ or Nathan.  I'm not a GM or HC, just an original Bills season ticket holder whose job took him to Florida in 1972. But I know enough to realize they have too many holes to fill to give away valuable picks for an unknown college kid  because a bunch of guys who earn a living doing mock drafts, think he's God's gift to the NFL.

[BuckeyeBill]

5 hours ago, Boca BIlls said:

Your posts are average at best. Trade up get the QB the team wants and start making the playoffs.

I think you mean... continue making the playoffs .

[BigDingus]

4 hours ago, Domdab99 said:

...And that Josh Allen is a monster bust.  (Yes, he is likely going to be a bust)

For instance, we definitively know a prospect’s ceiling: His college stats." 

 

Since when is a QB's college stats their ceiling? Is the way they are in college the BEST they'll ever be in their lifetime? Have they learned EVERYTHING there is to learn in their 2-4 years in college? Have they been coached by the best of the BEST while at that school? Is the talent around them the BEST they'll ever have? Have they grown physically, and  mentally to their peak at that age? Are they as mature & emotionally stable as they'll ever get with age? Have they had the BEST leadership present at all levels, with no room for improvement? 

Jim Kelly's college stats:

1979 -  Yards: 721 / Comp %: 46.2 / TD's: 5 / Int: 6 
1980 -  Yards: 1519 / Comp %: 52.9 / TD's: 11 / Int: 7  (126 yards per game)

1981 -  Yards: 2403 / Comp %: 58.9 / TD's: 14 / Int: 14 (218 yards per game)
1982 -  Yards: 585 / Comp % 63.0 / TD's: 3 / Int: 1

Hmmm....I wonder if he got better? 

 

Tom Brady's college stats:

1996 -  Yards: 26 / Comp %: 60 / TD's: 0 / Int: 1

1997 -  Yards: 103 / Comp %: 80 / TD's: 0 / Int: 0

1998 -  Yards: 2427 / Comp %: 61.9 / TD's: 14 / Int: 10

1999 -  Yards: 2217 / Comp %: 61.0 / TD's: 16 / Int: 6

 

I think he got better too...

Aaron Rodgers college stats:

 

2003 -  Yards: 2903 / Comp %: 61.6 / TD's: 19 / Int: 5

2004 -  Yards: 2566 / Comp %: 66.1 / TD's: 24 / Int: 8

And he definitely had a higher ceiling than his college stats showed...

Then there's the flip-side where those who look like their ceiling is out of this world, only for it to be a mirage once they hit the pros. Many top-tier prospects that look like they're "can't-miss" draft picks end up bombing out, playing like they had been selected from off the couch having never thrown a ball.

Anyway...college stats are indicative of how good they can BECOME. They can grow into an all-time great, or they can sink to the Pit of Despair a la Ryan Leaf & JaMarcus Russell.
 

[Mat68]

2 hours ago, Domdab99 said:

 

But that's assuming Beane thinks there are 3 QBs of equal value and trading up to 3 is fine, because you can take whichever of the 3 falls to us. And this is probably not the case. The Jets paid a premium to select what will most likely be the 3rd QB picked in the draft. LOL Jets, like always.

 

I do not think Beane feels that way about 3 of the QBs. He likes ONE QB. That's why he's waited. He's going to see who the Browns pick. If they pick anyone other than Rosen, I will bet that the Bills move up to #2 to take Rosen. And  I will be willing to bet anyone on this site $100 that if the Browns select Rosen #1, the Bills do not trade up to #2. 

 

But this is all dependent on the Giants wanting to trade down. They might want Rosen. Or Darnold, or whoever. And if that's the case, Beane can not be held responsible. You need a willing trade partner in order to move up. 

I think Rosen is the best to start off the bat.  By bringing in  Mccarron for backup money I would like to believe they are confident they get a Qb thats competing to start week 1.  If that is Rosen, that remains to be seen.

[Domdab99]

1 hour ago, BigDingus said:

 

Since when is a QB's college stats their ceiling? Is the way they are in college the BEST they'll ever be in their lifetime? Have they learned EVERYTHING there is to learn in their 2-4 years in college? Have they been coached by the best of the BEST while at that school? Is the talent around them the BEST they'll ever have? Have they grown physically, and  mentally to their peak at that age? Are they as mature & emotionally stable as they'll ever get with age? Have they had the BEST leadership present at all levels, with no room for improvement? 

Jim Kelly's college stats:

1979 -  Yards: 721 / Comp %: 46.2 / TD's: 5 / Int: 6 
1980 -  Yards: 1519 / Comp %: 52.9 / TD's: 11 / Int: 7  (126 yards per game)

1981 -  Yards: 2403 / Comp %: 58.9 / TD's: 14 / Int: 14 (218 yards per game)
1982 -  Yards: 585 / Comp % 63.0 / TD's: 3 / Int: 1

Hmmm....I wonder if he got better? 

 

Tom Brady's college stats:

1996 -  Yards: 26 / Comp %: 60 / TD's: 0 / Int: 1

1997 -  Yards: 103 / Comp %: 80 / TD's: 0 / Int: 0

1998 -  Yards: 2427 / Comp %: 61.9 / TD's: 14 / Int: 10

1999 -  Yards: 2217 / Comp %: 61.0 / TD's: 16 / Int: 6

 

I think he got better too...

Aaron Rodgers college stats:

 

2003 -  Yards: 2903 / Comp %: 61.6 / TD's: 19 / Int: 5

2004 -  Yards: 2566 / Comp %: 66.1 / TD's: 24 / Int: 8

And he definitely had a higher ceiling than his college stats showed...

Then there's the flip-side where those who look like their ceiling is out of this world, only for it to be a mirage once they hit the pros. Many top-tier prospects that look like they're "can't-miss" draft picks end up bombing out, playing like they had been selected from off the couch having never thrown a ball.

Anyway...college stats are indicative of how good they can BECOME. They can grow into an all-time great, or they can sink to the Pit of Despair a la Ryan Leaf & JaMarcus Russell.
 

 

Someone didn't read the article

[Andy1]

Interesting article. Its all a complete crap shoot. No one knows anything about how these guys will translate into the NFL. The only thing I feel certain about is not to pick Allen. Other than that, I think Mayfield, Rosen, Rudolph and White/Lauletta could have all the same chance of success. 

[BillsFan17]

Is this satire?

[Nihilarian]

2 hours ago, BigDingus said:

 

Since when is a QB's college stats their ceiling? Is the way they are in college the BEST they'll ever be in their lifetime? Have they learned EVERYTHING there is to learn in their 2-4 years in college? Have they been coached by the best of the BEST while at that school? Is the talent around them the BEST they'll ever have? Have they grown physically, and  mentally to their peak at that age? Are they as mature & emotionally stable as they'll ever get with age? Have they had the BEST leadership present at all levels, with no room for improvement? 

Jim Kelly's college stats:

1979 -  Yards: 721 / Comp %: 46.2 / TD's: 5 / Int: 6 
1980 -  Yards: 1519 / Comp %: 52.9 / TD's: 11 / Int: 7  (126 yards per game)

1981 -  Yards: 2403 / Comp %: 58.9 / TD's: 14 / Int: 14 (218 yards per game)
1982 -  Yards: 585 / Comp % 63.0 / TD's: 3 / Int: 1

Hmmm....I wonder if he got better? 

 

Tom Brady's college stats:

1996 -  Yards: 26 / Comp %: 60 / TD's: 0 / Int: 1

1997 -  Yards: 103 / Comp %: 80 / TD's: 0 / Int: 0

1998 -  Yards: 2427 / Comp %: 61.9 / TD's: 14 / Int: 10

1999 -  Yards: 2217 / Comp %: 61.0 / TD's: 16 / Int: 6

 

I think he got better too...

Aaron Rodgers college stats:

 

2003 -  Yards: 2903 / Comp %: 61.6 / TD's: 19 / Int: 5

2004 -  Yards: 2566 / Comp %: 66.1 / TD's: 24 / Int: 8

And he definitely had a higher ceiling than his college stats showed...

Then there's the flip-side where those who look like their ceiling is out of this world, only for it to be a mirage once they hit the pros. Many top-tier prospects that look like they're "can't-miss" draft picks end up bombing out, playing like they had been selected from off the couch having never thrown a ball.

Anyway...college stats are indicative of how good they can BECOME. They can grow into an all-time great, or they can sink to the Pit of Despair a la Ryan Leaf & JaMarcus Russell.
 

I agree with this! 

 

What Bill Connelly at SB Nation and the OP don't realize is that Allen only played two full years of College ball and we are dealing with young men who are growing, developing into full grown adults. Allen started college as a scrawny 198 lb kid and grew into his 237lb frame. Plus, he has already started working with coaches on his footwork and mechanics. This showed in the senior bowl, combine and pro day as his accuracy, touch on the ball has improved.

 

There is no exact science to determine if a player will become the next Ryan Leaf or the next Aaron Rodgers...regardless of stats. Each college QB will develop differently depending on the team they go to and how that team develops them.

 

I can tell you right now that Josh Allen carried his team to an 8-5 record and won a bowl game as he was about the only player who returned for the 2017 season at Wyoming. 

 

The article in comparing Josh Allen to Tim Tebow is downright moronic as Tebow always had serious issues with his mechanics and it never did get better. Allen played in a deep passing pro-style offense at Wyoming which is more difficult for a QB than say a WCO scheme in which Josh Rosen played in. Allen doesn't have injury issues like Rosen or a loopy delivery like Darnold. The only other QB I like for Buffalo in this years draft class is Baker Mayfield. 

 

Want to compare him to an NFL player? Try Cam Newton, Matthew Stafford, Aaron Rodgers. 

 

"When he’s on his game, Allen will deliver the ball into minuscule throwing windows, 50+ yards downfield.

 

Allen has a good foundation for his mechanics, having played in a system that taught him how to take 3- 5- and 7-step drops from under center. He has a compact overhand throwing motion. Allen’s offense used plenty of bootlegs and moving pockets, so he’s comfortable rolling out to pass (arguably, his strongest suit is when he rolls out to the right and throws downfield). 

 

On a micro level, Allen has the tools to fit a camel through the eye of a needle. When his feet are lined up, and he’s not pressured, Allen will deliver incredible throws to the perfect point."

 

From another article SB Nation, https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2018/4/5/17201220/josh-allen-scouting-report-2018-nfl-draft-film-analysis-quarterback

 

How Josh Allen develops as an NFL QB will be determined by which team drafts him and if that team allows him to properly develop.

 

 

 

 

[Adam]

7 hours ago, Boca BIlls said:

Exactly yet we won't make  playoffs if we trade up...

I'm not against trading up or staying put. Depends on where they have the players rated based on what the offensive/defensive game plan is. I think we make the playoffs again with McCarron starting as long as we add guys who contribute. And IMHO if we trtade up, it has to be for Darnold or Rosen. Allen and Mayfield aren't worthy of the pick we have now

[BigDingus]

19 minutes ago, Adam said:

I'm not against trading up or staying put. Depends on where they have the players rated based on what the offensive/defensive game plan is. I think we make the playoffs again with McCarron starting as long as we add guys who contribute. And IMHO if we trtade up, it has to be for Darnold or Rosen. Allen and Mayfield aren't worthy of the pick we have now

 

Mayfield definitely is worthy of being taken in the top 5. Allen, I agree. He has bust written all over him unless he's put in the perfect system with great talent & coaching around him.

I think Mayfield has Drew Brees written all over him. Slightly bigger coming out of college, fantastic stats, skillset, and leadership, and also has that "it" talent lurking beneath. 

They both played 4 years of college football, both carried their teams, and they put up similar yearly numbers (with Mayfield beating him out).

And Mayfield did all of this against better competition.

What I like about Mayfield is he got better EVERY year and in virtually every category.

2013 - Yards: 2315 / Comp %: 64.1 / TD's: 12 / Int: 9

2014 - Yards: 3700 / Comp %: 68.1 / TD's: 36 / Int: 7

2015 - Yards: 3965 / Comp %: 70.9 / TD's: 40 / Int: 8

2016 - Yards: 4627 / Comp %: 70.5 / TD's: 43 / Int: 6

The more he was relied on, the better he was. He put up 119 TD's compared to only 21 Int's in his 3 years at OU. That's far & away the best ratio of the group, as well as carrying a 70% completion percentage in those years. That's insanely good. He'd be the consensus #1 overall pick if he was a few inches taller, that's for damn sure.

[Augie]

I skipped to the end. Allen scares me to death! 

[PIZ]

 

[{::'KayCeeS::}]

I think that's a well articulated analysis full of very interesting info.

 

But that's the point of analytics, imo: to be very interesting....data.

 

But data don't win games.

 

So embrace it fully with a grain of salt, I say.  Because there's something there, for sure.  It would be stupid to ignore it.  But I wouldn't want us not to take the QB we want because of analytics.

Edited April 6, 2018 by {::'KayCeeS::}

[DrDawkinstein]

18 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:

Why are you actively competing for the title of "Most **** Threads"?

 

@Domdab99 I apologize for this post yesterday. knee jerk reaction and unfair.

[SoTier]

21 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

That's a passive, play-not-to-lose approach that's setting you up for a reach.

 

I just want to be clear here.  Staying at #12 and picking QB is automatically a "reach" but recklessly trading away high draft picks to move up to the top five in order to grab one of the media mavens' darlings who isn't even a good pick in the top ten isn't?  Is that what you're saying?

[DrDawkinstein]

1 minute ago, SoTier said:

 

I just want to be clear here.  Staying at #12 and picking QB is automatically a "reach" but recklessly trading away high draft picks to move up to the top five in order to grab one of the media mavens' darlings who isn't even a good pick in the top ten isn't?  Is that what you're saying?

 

Sure, I'll clarify since you obviously dont understand.

 

No, I'm saying identifying the top Franchise QB prospects and doing what it takes to get one is the best path. Those prospects (assuming there is more than 1, but probably not more than 3) are all going to go early. If that means trading a handful of picks to get to #2 and securing a top tier prospect, then so be it. Not "recklessly" trading to get a media darling. Trading the assets we spent the last year acquiring just so we could secure a top prospect.

 

Where as staying at #12 and taking a 2nd tier guy that early is definitely a reach.

 

[SoTier]

21 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Last year's draft has nothing to do with McD's ability to pick QBs. There was no logical reason for him to go after a QB last year, knowing "Whaley and Co." were about to be fired. Why would McD trust Whaley's QB scouting? Why would McD saddle his incoming GM with someone else's QB pick?

 

Made much more sense to trust Whaley on things like DB and LB and even OL and wait on QB until this year.

 

I dont agree with trading up just to get A guy either. They need to identify THE guy(s) and go get him.

 

You don't pass on a future franchise QB when you have a chance to get one.  That the Bills didn't pick a QB in the first round with 2 available says that they didn't think either Mahomes or Watson was likely to be one rather than that McDermott passed on a first round QB because of FO politics.  Plain and simple, Mahomes and Watson were flawed prospects ... as are some of this year's highly touted media favorites.

 

[DrDawkinstein]

3 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

You don't pass on a future franchise QB when you have a chance to get one.  That the Bills didn't pick a QB in the first round with 2 available says that they didn't think either Mahomes or Watson was likely to be one rather than that McDermott passed on a first round QB because of FO politics.  Plain and simple, Mahomes and Watson were flawed prospects ... as are some of this year's highly touted media favorites.

 

 

Them being flawed certainly played into it, but jsut further proves my point. McD wasnt going to trust Whaley to pick the best of the flawed QBs, nor was he going to tie his HC career to Whaley's pick, nor was he going to saddle the incoming GM with Whaley's pick. If there was a franchise-QB prospect he would have gone long before we picked at #10 anyways. Point is, McD wasnt taking a QB in the 1st last year, for a number of reasons so we dont know anything about his true ability to pick QBs.

 

The bolded being the ultimate point I was making there to someone who said they dont trust his ability to pick QBs.

[Bing Bong]

Just from my limited knowledge I think the class is a bit overrated.. Just because there's a lot of quarterbacks at the top for QB needy teams all very close in speculative talent doesn't make this a good class necessarily great. It'd be like if 6 jamarcus Russells were in the draft, people would be preemptively calling it the best ever. Or It could be like the 83 draft but I don't see it.