Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Food for thought on QB pick

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by TEM View Post

    If you look at the data I address how many are taken in each draft in the 1st round,

    2001
    Michael Vick 1st QB taken
    1 taken in the first.

    I used 20 season a s data. i do not believe it would change.
    I got that thanks - I wasn't sure what you thought was being addressed by just sending me back to the raw data though. For instance, I'm not great at math but, you wrote that "50% after the first QB is taken off the board." I read that to mean that there was a 50-50 shot of a Franchise QB being taken in the rest of the draft after the first QB was taken - was that correct? If it was, wouldn't the number change if we took out the later round picks? If 1/2 the drafts ended up in a franchise QB after the first selected, but 1/2 of those 1/2 got a franchise QB after the first round, that would be 25% then, right?

    In any case, my questions wouldn't impact the overall analysis much since I think it is abundantly clear already that later round picks are less likely to end up as franchise QBs (regardless of why). So, if answering requires you to do some actual work rather than just shifting some numbers on a spreadsheet, don't feel compelled to answer. The food you've given my thoughts is trying to figure out how much better off one is spending a #2 pick on a QB than one is spending #34. It seems the debate on the board is largely binary at this point: take a QB at 2 or don't take a QB.

    Comment


    • #32
      I think when you are talking about franchise vs bust on QBs you also have to consider who develops them and how long they are given to adapt to the NFL game. And to an extent and how good the team is.

      Rodgers was taken later, but he also had 3 years before he took a snap, and his first year wasnt great. Eli didnt look good in his first few years either. Some of these QBs will need time too, IMO.

      Also good article from a few years ago (2011):

      https://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpr...ing-an-nfl-qb/

      "In fact, the first pick is the best time to take a QB: nine out of the fifteen QBs selected first overall in the past thirty years have become elite while only two have turned into busts. After the first round, the chances of selecting an elite quarterback plummet to 19% in the second, 6% in the third, and dwindle to 1% in the seventh round. Contrary to what many believe, the earlier you select a QB, the better the odds that he is actually good."

      "It seems like drafting a QB might not be such a good idea after all. However, teams must gamble on QBs in the draft because elite quarterbacks stay on the teams that draft them for around six years, on average. That is far too long for franchises to wait around while wallowing in mediocre quarterback play. So teams have to take a chance on drafting quarterbacks especially early in the first round."

      Last edited by DandyDon; 04-15-2018, 12:22 PM.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by bringsimmsback View Post

        I got that thanks - I wasn't sure what you thought was being addressed by just sending me back to the raw data though. For instance, I'm not great at math but, you wrote that "50% after the first QB is taken off the board." I read that to mean that there was a 50-50 shot of a Franchise QB being taken in the rest of the draft after the first QB was taken - was that correct? If it was, wouldn't the number change if we took out the later round picks? If 1/2 the drafts ended up in a franchise QB after the first selected, but 1/2 of those 1/2 got a franchise QB after the first round, that would be 25% then, right?

        In any case, my questions wouldn't impact the overall analysis much since I think it is abundantly clear already that later round picks are less likely to end up as franchise QBs (regardless of why). So, if answering requires you to do some actual work rather than just shifting some numbers on a spreadsheet, don't feel compelled to answer. The food you've given my thoughts is trying to figure out how much better off one is spending a #2 pick on a QB than one is spending #34. It seems the debate on the board is largely binary at this point: take a QB at 2 or don't take a QB.
        It is pretty much spread out evenly after the first Qb is off the board. You have a 50% chance of one of the other 14 (average) better in the first round Qbs being a franchise QB. But mind you there are more QBs picked after the 1st round . Those odds have to be calculated. It comes out to 2% ( poor). I could go round by round.I don't have will to go through that much data. My entire analysis was based on what our chances are at pick 2 . If we pick the first QB (good). The second Qb take with 2nd pick ,(very sketchy). If we trade down out of the 2nd pick and take a QB lower in the first ( fair).
        Last edited by TEM; 04-15-2018, 12:22 PM.
        The Dallas Cowboys have now gone exactly One Third of their pathetic existence without a Super bowl appearance.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by TEM View Post
          It is pretty much spread out evenly after the first Qb is off the board. You have a 50% chance of one of the other 14 (average) better in the first round Qbs being a franchise QB. But mind you there are more QBs picked after the 1st round . Those odds have to be calculated. It comes out to 2% ( poor). I could go round by round.I don't have will to go through that much data. My entire analysis was based on what our chances are at pick 2 . If we pick the first QB (good). The second Qb take with 2nd pick ,(very sketchy). If we trade down out of the 2nd pick and take a QB lower in the first ( fair).
          I lost track of where it happened but something in our conversation had me focus on order picked rather than pick number or round and I looked at all of the first 4 QBS selected (regardless of where/when) per draft between 2016 and 1994. My quick count resulted in the following:

          Failure rate
          1st QB 2nd QB 3rd QB 4th QB
          45% 64% 90% 90%
          My even quicker count for the 5th QB and beyond didn't see the numbers getting any better.

          These numbers hold up to logic as well - with all the focus and analysis of these players - the first one selected is going to be the most likely to work out. I'm pretty sure some posters have made this point from a logic point of view but I haven't seen anyone back it up with the numbers.

          If I were to dig deeper, I'd want to figure out how often both the first and second selected were good. Also, how often the years where more than 3 were selected in the first round, more than one ended up good. I'm not sure how much nuance would be added though, given the stark drop off to the third QB selected. My take-away: if I'm going QB this year, I'm only doing it if I'm sure the Browns were really wrong with their selection or if they don't go QB. I'm rethinking my belief that we can wait until later in the first round because any QB we get later will be at least the 3rd QB taken. If we trade back, as I hope we do, we have to get enough picks that we can trade back up next year or the year after (depending on how well Eli does) to get the first or second QB selected. All that being said, I think the FA market next year will be unusual in that there will be some good options if we don't want to roll the dice (fail rate is pretty high even for 1st and 2nd) via the draft.


          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by shane4177 View Post
            I know a lot of people on here claim that we don't get to pick this high that often, so we should grab Eli's replacement.............I believe this thinking to be flawed........Aaron Rodgers was drafted later in the 1st, 24th pick of that draft if I am correct. So are you gonna tell me GB just got lucky?!
            It's always possible to get a franchise type QB later in RD1 or later RD's.
            But FAR less likely.
            We have an aging, declining QB. This is a very good QB class and we have the 2nd pick.

            Do the math.....
            Deny everything. Admit nothing. Make counter accusations.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by DandyDon View Post
              I think when you are talking about franchise vs bust on QBs you also have to consider who develops them and how long they are given to adapt to the NFL game. And to an extent and how good the team is.

              Rodgers was taken later, but he also had 3 years before he took a snap, and his first year wasnt great. Eli didnt look good in his first few years either. Some of these QBs will need time too, IMO.

              Also good article from a few years ago (2011):

              https://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpr...ing-an-nfl-qb/

              "In fact, the first pick is the best time to take a QB: nine out of the fifteen QBs selected first overall in the past thirty years have become elite while only two have turned into busts. After the first round, the chances of selecting an elite quarterback plummet to 19% in the second, 6% in the third, and dwindle to 1% in the seventh round. Contrary to what many believe, the earlier you select a QB, the better the odds that he is actually good."I m

              "It seems like drafting a QB might not be such a good idea after all. However, teams must gamble on QBs in the draft because elite quarterbacks stay on the teams that draft them for around six years, on average. That is far too long for franchises to wait around while wallowing in mediocre quarterback play. So teams have to take a chance on drafting quarterbacks especially early in the first round."
              I missed this earlier - their numbers support the conclusion I came to in my response to TEM above with more of an emphasis on aiming for 1st pick overall. I would like to see them update their numbers, though, since the article is from 2011. Also, I'm not sure they give enough thought to the average QB on a good team.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by bringsimmsback View Post

                I lost track of where it happened but something in our conversation had me focus on order picked rather than pick number or round and I looked at all of the first 4 QBS selected (regardless of where/when) per draft between 2016 and 1994. My quick count resulted in the following:

                Failure rate
                1st QB 2nd QB 3rd QB 4th QB
                45% 64% 90% 90%
                My even quicker count for the 5th QB and beyond didn't see the numbers getting any better.

                These numbers hold up to logic as well - with all the focus and analysis of these players - the first one selected is going to be the most likely to work out. I'm pretty sure some posters have made this point from a logic point of view but I haven't seen anyone back it up with the numbers.

                If I were to dig deeper, I'd want to figure out how often both the first and second selected were good. Also, how often the years where more than 3 were selected in the first round, more than one ended up good. I'm not sure how much nuance would be added though, given the stark drop off to the third QB selected. My take-away: if I'm going QB this year, I'm only doing it if I'm sure the Browns were really wrong with their selection or if they don't go QB. I'm rethinking my belief that we can wait until later in the first round because any QB we get later will be at least the 3rd QB taken. If we trade back, as I hope we do, we have to get enough picks that we can trade back up next year or the year after (depending on how well Eli does) to get the first or second QB selected. All that being said, I think the FA market next year will be unusual in that there will be some good options if we don't want to roll the dice (fail rate is pretty high even for 1st and 2nd) via the draft.

                Well stated. I agree 100% with the browns statement. If Dorsey picks a QB , I am pretty sure he is not picking the second or lower then the best QB just because as some have stated " They will pick a QB like Tyrod" and they want a guy that can run around.
                The Dallas Cowboys have now gone exactly One Third of their pathetic existence without a Super bowl appearance.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by blu_buddha View Post

                  I don't think anyone is saying taking a QB is taboo. The stats are pretty interesting and that is all we are discussing. The draft is a crapshoot it really comes down to how confident the team is with its evaluation process. To me the top 5 should be a prospect that has the lowest risk factor, fit your system, must demostrate pro-bowl level talent and hall of fame tendencies (intangibles) with the least coaching investment to bring it out. I think what it comes down to don't force yourself to reach and trust the process.

                  As far a the board goes I am pretty sure you can find just as many threads discussing taking QB first as there are not taking a QB. Don't let these threads get to you at the end of the day what we discuss has no bearing on the draft process and really not important at all. All being right on these boards tend to do is stokes our egoes in a virtual construct that we create in order to escape the reality we have no power to make the Giants any better than it is regardless of the invested time, emotion and money.
                  blu buddha. Thanks for talking me off the ledge. It's just very frustrating sometimes talking to these people. The thing that gets me tho is it's not only on this board. The uproar when Eli got benched astonished me and set this franchise back. We instantly had to reinstitute him at QB in meaningless games just to appease the fans, That scared me. This fanbase is clinging to Eli and now Mara and Gettlemen seem to want to do anything they can not to **** off the fans. So now it's all about praising Eli, and saying he has years left and now top priority is the Oline. All things the fans want to hear. But this team desperately needs to look past Eli and get their next QB.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by TEM View Post

                    Weird you fit right in. I find it weird you want a Qb in this draft and have and failed to name one that you think should be picked.
                    Look at my avatar, And I've said it about a zillion times... Darnold, Rosen and now I'll even take Allen. There..ok... those 3.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by StewieZ View Post

                      Look at my avatar, And I've said it about a zillion times... Darnold, Rosen and now I'll even take Allen. There..ok... those 3.
                      Thanks now at least we know where you stand and are just not a pick a QB the position and not pick the QB player.
                      The Dallas Cowboys have now gone exactly One Third of their pathetic existence without a Super bowl appearance.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        I've said it over and over and over. I sound like a broken record. In fact it bugs me when people want Mayfield. I even got in an argument with a guy touting Lamar Jax... telling me the Jets are taking him at 3. I can't get in any more arguments. It's not good for my blood pressure

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by StewieZ View Post
                          I've said it over and over and over. I sound like a broken record. In fact it bugs me when people want Mayfield. I even got in an argument with a guy touting Lamar Jax... telling me the Jets are taking him at 3. I can't get in any more arguments. It's not good for my blood pressure
                          I agree with Mayfield and Jackson . IMO: I just do not see a cool headed QB(Mayfield) and QB that has the discipline to go through his reads (Jackson). Both bad traits to have in the NFL. IMO unfixable.
                          The Dallas Cowboys have now gone exactly One Third of their pathetic existence without a Super bowl appearance.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by TEM View Post

                            70% a franchise Qb will be taken in any give draft
                            50% after the first QB is taken off the board
                            15% chance 2 franchise QBs taken with picks 1 and 2
                            25% a Franchise QB will be taken in any given draft after the 1st round.

                            If we use an average of 15 Qbs taken in every draft , with an average of 2 taken in the 1st round.

                            There is a 2% chance to pick the 1 QB in every 4 drafts picked after the first round that is a franchise QB
                            So, if Cleveland picks a QB, we shouldn't. Because according to line 3, either they screwed up, or we did, historically speaking. Also, line 2 would make that a 50-50 crap shoot, historically speaking. But, truthfully, more so than any other position, drafting a QB is pretty much a crap shoot. You have to do it at some point, unless you shell out serious FA money. A few teams get really lucky, like the Pats; but most teams might have to go for a franchise QB two, three or more times before they find one.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by NorwoodBlue View Post

                              So, if Cleveland picks a QB, we shouldn't. Because according to line 3, either they screwed up, or we did, historically speaking. Also, line 2 would make that a 50-50 crap shoot, historically speaking. But, truthfully, more so than any other position, drafting a QB is pretty much a crap shoot. You have to do it at some point, unless you shell out serious FA money. A few teams get really lucky, like the Pats; but most teams might have to go for a franchise QB two, three or more times before they find one.
                              I agree. the data shows back to back franchise QB going 1 -2 is a rare occurrence. Teams keep taking QB with 1 and 2 so the data is for the most part ignored.
                              Last edited by TEM; 04-15-2018, 09:08 PM.
                              The Dallas Cowboys have now gone exactly One Third of their pathetic existence without a Super bowl appearance.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by StewieZ View Post
                                And here we go with the list of non 1st rd QB. And I could list all the guards and RB that became stars that weren't 1st rd picks too.

                                This is the weirdest board ... somehow taking a QB is taboo...it's like me saying here's a new car...you guys would say "no no no I'll stick with my old car cuz these new cars tend to be lemons and I don't wanna get stuck on the side of the road ...no no I like my 37 yr old car thank you. I'm going to ride this forever. I'm never going to get a new car ..it's too risky"
                                Here we go with your QB or bust posts again. We get it man. There's a lot of options at 2, so just because you're QB or bust doesn't mean you have to comment on every single thread that we need to go QB and anyone who doesn't agree gets mocked by you. If our FO isnt sold on a QB, we aint taking one and you're going to have to get over it. Its going to be hard to screw up the #2 pick either way.
                                2018 Draft Wishlist:
                                1. Josh Allen QB Wyoming
                                2. Sony Michel RB Georgia
                                3. Conner Williams OT Texas OR Orlando Brown OT Oklahoma
                                4. Rashaan Gaulden CB Tennessee

                                "Behold, the tailgate party. The pinnacle of human achievement. Since the dawn of parking lots, man has sought to fill his gut with food and alcohol in anticipation of watching others exercise."
                                - Homer J. Simpson

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X