NFL Offseason '18: Our American Cousins

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

15 hours ago, briantw said:

Man, I really, really hope they don't draft Allen.  He just seems like another Kizer to me.  Horribly inaccurate.  I want either Rosen or Darnold, with preference toward Rosen.  

I’d happily take him in the second round, but good god no at number one. He also reminds me of Paxton Lynch, a big freakish project player. Also, I wouldn’t want Darnold at number one either. Dude has mediocre written all over him. But given the move for Tayler, I’d bet you’re getting Allen.

15 hours ago, Pony Queen Jace said:

I don't know if you're applauding my burn or recommending a QB you think fits the team, but either way I think your comment was additionally Savage!

It’s good to let your mind wander.

11 hours ago, Week said:

Vikings WR Cayleb Jones.

What's that? 

ALSO, MORE PROOF WE HAVE THIEVES IN OUR MIDST!!!:

http://www.espn.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/272042/where-top-six-in-nfl-draft-stand-whos-taking-qbs-or-could-trade-down

[Bronn Stone]

16 hours ago, Week said:

(Link to Zay Jones story not carried over in quote)

#BillsMafia

Zay Jones may not have been my most successful Keeper League pick in the 2017 draft....

[Jace, Extat]

2 minutes ago, Bronn Stone said:

Zay Jones may not have been my most successful Keeper League pick in the 2017 draft....

Just wait. Jace gon give it to ya next year.

[Bronn Stone]

41 minutes ago, Pony Queen Jace said:

Just wait. Jace gon give it to ya next year.

You might want to go back and look through the thread for that league.  My roster for 2018 is STACKED with guys who will be picked in regular drafts in the first ten rounds but I get them in the latter ten.  Plus I have plenty of picks in the first ten to add to them.

[aceluby]

17 hours ago, Pony Queen Jace said:

Hey! In America it's perfectly legal to believe a dead nulligentarian wants you to fight for him against the armies of darkness.

Our Vice-President thinks a magical man in the sky with a beard speaks to him in his dreams.

In his dreams?  More like all day, every day.  Dude hears voices....

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

14 minutes ago, aceluby said:

In his dreams?  More like all day, every day.  Dude hears voices....

Don’t forget he’s always there watching you too. Especially when you’re alone with your wife. Behave yourself between the sheets you debaucherous freaks! You get three minutes, missionary only!

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

On 3/20/2018 at 0:27 PM, Pony Queen Jace said:

Or if they wanted Barkley the whole time?

McCagnan and Bowles need to win now, Barkley immediately makes them a relevant offense.

But yes, it's far more likely that they either know who Cleveland and Giants are taking or they have three guys they're ready to go all in with.

Remember, it's not beyond the pale to consider that the first five picks could be QB's.

I don't think that will happen, but it's not hard to see it happening if you're the Jets at 6.

The Colts trade out, then the Brown trade out of 4 and the Broncos take a QB? That could (still) happen, which would either kill the value of 6 or make it explode like nothing in recent memory.

So if you like 3, and you know you can get one, it's good.

And the Jets had to move to wrongfoot Buffalo, who were moving their way up the board with an ungodly amount of picks.

I think the move was so fucking genius that I believe without doubt that the Jets only understand half of what they accomplished in playing the Colts' dreams of even more picks into an advantageous trade.

Seriously, the Jets just traded hope of picks for a pick.

Forget the 2's, nobody gives a fuck about the 2's. It's all 'bout them 1's baby. And the Jets kept all of theirs while the Colts are hunting for more. It's fucking brilliant.

Whiles uz tooks z timez twos climz ups ons u’z rooz tops twos unleashish dis screedz, I’s dones snucks behindz u’z backs n tookz u’z monies foo!

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

@briantw

I heard a scenario on the radio today about a potential strategy for the Browns draft. The idea is to take Barkley first overall and grab Nelson fourth because it's unlikely that he goes second or third (especially if the Giants trade out, which they should if Barkley is picked) and then trade two second round picks (they have three, including the first and third pick) to move back up into the first round and grab Jackson later in the first round. Thoughts? 

[briantw]

26 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

@briantw

I heard a scenario on the radio today about a potential strategy for the Browns draft. The idea is to take Barkley first overall and grab Nelson fourth because it's unlikely that he goes second or third (especially if the Giants trade out, which they should if Barkley is picked) and then trade two second round picks (they have three, including the first and third pick) to move back up into the first round and grab Jackson later in the first round. Thoughts? 

Personally, I just think I'm generally against taking a RB at first overall.  I'm not even a huge fan of taking them in the first round.  I just don't think a RB, even a great one, is all that important in the modern NFL.  The two teams in the Super Bowl both went with a RB by committee approach.  If you have a good run blocking offensive line, you can get sustainable production from even average backs, and you can always find average or better backs later in the draft.  This draft, too, is particularly deep at the position, so I'm not sure I like the idea of taking a RB so high when you can get one who isn't significantly worse in the second round.

Further, when you look at the Browns and you look at Barkley, is he really what they need?  Perhaps his best aspect outside of his athleticism is his ability as a pass-catching back, but the Browns already have one of the best satellite backs in the league in Duke Johnson.  Duke is an incredibly efficient player and the Browns look to be interested in keeping him.  I think what they need is a back who can excel in short yardage situations.  A guy who knows how to fall forward and get those extra two or three yards.  Barkley has a great many positives, but that's just not one of them.

Like, is Barkley really that much better than Guice or Chubb, or even Michel?  I'm not convinced.  I think he'll be great, and particularly great as a fantasy player, but taking him first overall?  That's a tough pill to swallow.

If I'm the Browns, I take a QB first and then see if Barkley falls to four.  If he does, I definitely consider that.  If he doesn't, you draft Nelson, Chubb (the DE), or one of the DBs, all of whom will be on the board.  Or you trade down a couple of spots to a team that wants the third QB (if Barkley went second or third, then a top three QB is still on the board) and still get one of those guys.  

[dbunting]

To me it's all about maximizing talent. I don't think many people have said that ANY of the QB's coming out this year are generational talents or even can't miss QB's. All three of the top QB's have some big question marks from leadership abilities to accuracy. I am sounding like a broken record but I take Barkley #1, Nelson or Fitzpatrick #4 and if you see a QB you like dropping, trade back into the middle of the first round and grab him.

In Barkley, Nelson and Fitzpatrick you have three plug in day one starters with pro bowl written all over them.

Clevelands dream scenario IMO should be trading out of the #1 spot with Denver back to #5 or the Jets at #6. They could get at least another #1 next year and a few more 2's and still get a combination of Barkley, Nelson, Fitzpatrick and more draft stock to keep looking for a QB.

So, how is it that Cleveland, a team that hasn't won shit forever, is the talk of the boards? I really think that Sasha guy maybe knew what he was doing and got fired a season or two too early.

[sperry]

Don't take a running back in the top 10. Just don't do it. I guarantee you there will be two pro bowl running backs drafted in the 2nd-5th rounds of this draft. It's a stone cold lock. You aren't even getting the RB on a cheap rookie contract if you take them that high, you'll be paying them way above market value by the end of that rookie deal, and then they won't be looking to take a paycut if they've lived up to the hype. You could probably use two running backs anyway, take one in the 2nd and one in the 3rd.

[dbunting]

18 minutes ago, sperry said:

Don't take a running back in the top 10. Just don't do it. I guarantee you there will be two pro bowl running backs drafted in the 2nd-5th rounds of this draft. It's a stone cold lock. You aren't even getting the RB on a cheap rookie contract if you take them that high, you'll be paying them way above market value by the end of that rookie deal, and then they won't be looking to take a paycut if they've lived up to the hype. You could probably use two running backs anyway, take one in the 2nd and one in the 3rd.

They have Duke Johnson already, so no need to draft more than one.

I just think people get too college QB happy and way over value the next big thing only to have them flounder in the NFL. You can make the same statement about QB's as you do RB's. Where was last years best rookie QB...Texans, and where was he drafted? 12th. Not #1-2-3, but 12th.

Aaron Rodgers? 20's. Russel Wilson, 3rd round, Cousins, 105th overall. Brady, we all know... Keenum, undrafted....Prescott, 4th round.

My point is simply that a good starting QB, much like any other position does not have to be a high pick, just the right pick. For every Peyton Manning there are 4-5 Ryan Leafs (yes extreme example). So if Peyton Manning isn't in this draft but Emmitt Smith, Ed Reed and Zack Martin are, you take as many of them as you can and hope to find Deshaun Watson later in the draft.

[sperry]

7 minutes ago, dbunting said:

They have Duke Johnson already, so no need to draft more than one.

I just think people get too college QB happy and way over value the next big thing only to have them flounder in the NFL. You can make the same statement about QB's as you do RB's. Where was last years best rookie QB...Texans, and where was he drafted? 12th. Not #1-2-3, but 12th.

Aaron Rodgers? 20's. Russel Wilson, 3rd round, Cousins, 105th overall. Brady, we all know... Keenum, undrafted....Prescott, 4th round.

My point is simply that a good starting QB, much like any other position does not have to be a high pick, just the right pick. For every Peyton Manning there are 4-5 Ryan Leafs (yes extreme example). So if Peyton Manning isn't in this draft but Emmitt Smith, Ed Reed and Zack Martin are, you take as many of them as you can and hope to find Deshaun Watson later in the draft.

 

I have no problem taking an Ed Reed in the top 5 if there is one in the draft. You don't find Ed Reed's in the 2nd-3rd rounds on a regular basis. You do find hihg end running backs in the 2nd-5th rounds on a regular basis though.You can also get solid running bcks in free agency at bargain prices.

[dbunting]

2 minutes ago, sperry said:

 

I have no problem taking an Ed Reed in the top 5 if there is one in the draft. You don't find Ed Reed's in the 2nd-3rd rounds on a regular basis. You do find hihg end running backs in the 2nd-5th rounds on a regular basis though.You can also get solid running bcks in free agency at bargain prices.

Ok, but that doesn't address the comparison that you can also find QB's in 2nd and later rounds which is what this discussion is mostly about. Cleveland can get two guys that are considered day one pro bowler talent in the same draft. To me there are just too many questions on the QB's and none on the other three.

 

FYI, I tossed out Ed Reed / Minkah Fitzpatrick comparison just because I was showing my Dallas bias with the other two.

 

[sperry]

24 minutes ago, dbunting said:

Ok, but that doesn't address the comparison that you can also find QB's in 2nd and later rounds which is what this discussion is mostly about. Cleveland can get two guys that are considered day one pro bowler talent in the same draft. To me there are just too many questions on the QB's and none on the other three.

 

FYI, I tossed out Ed Reed / Minkah Fitzpatrick comparison just because I was showing my Dallas bias with the other two.

 

That's not really true, though. You mentioned 6 quarterbacks, drafted over a span of 20 years. And Keenum and Prescott are not guys I would consider franchise QBs, and Rodgers was a first rounder who was projected to go top 10 and then fell because "reasons."

 

I mean, I don't necessarily disagree with you. If you look at Rosen/Mayfield/Darnold/Allen and evaluate them and come to the conclusion that none of them are potential franchise guys, then don't draft one just to draft one. But unlike running back, thinking that you can find one in the later rounds is not a reasonable assumption.

[briantw]

QBs drafted first overall have a significantly higher chance of becoming quality NFL players than QBs drafted just about anywhere after.  Granted, at least part of that is the fact that they tend to get more time to prove themselves and teams don't give up on them so quickly, but still.

[dbunting]

I got a little curious after thinking about this QB draft issue and did some digging.

I looked up each teams current starting QB and their draft position, range was 1 - 199(Brady - Keenum). I gave Keenum a 199 since he was UDFA.

Of the 15 QB's picked between #1 and #10 only one has won a SB, Eli Manning. Not Sam Bradford, Matt Ryan, Cam Newton, Tribiski, Stafford, Luck, Bortles, Mahommes, Goff, Tannehill, Wentz, Winston, Mariota, or Alex Smith. Of these 14 only two have been to a SB (i did this off memory so if I am wrong I will edit this)

As to the #1 overall QB picks currently starting, only 4 of the 8 have won a playoff game, not a championship, just a playoff game. The #1's record in playoffs is 16-20.

The avg draft pick of current starting QB's to win a SB is 51.4.   (this uses Wentz as Philly QB not Foles or it would drop even more since he was 88th pick vs Wentz at 2)    Flacco 18th, Rodgers 24th, Brady 199th, Brees 32nd, Manning 1st, Rothelisburger 11th, Wilson 75th. 

I think at the end of the day all this means is the draft is crap shoot voodoo, because you could probably get same results by changing QB to LT draft position. No one can really tell who will be great, but I sure like thinking and talking about it.

[briantw]

48 minutes ago, dbunting said:

I got a little curious after thinking about this QB draft issue and did some digging.

I looked up each teams current starting QB and their draft position, range was 1 - 199(Brady - Keenum). I gave Keenum a 199 since he was UDFA.

Of the 15 QB's picked between #1 and #10 only one has won a SB, Eli Manning. Not Sam Bradford, Matt Ryan, Cam Newton, Tribiski, Stafford, Luck, Bortles, Mahommes, Goff, Tannehill, Wentz, Winston, Mariota, or Alex Smith. Of these 14 only two have been to a SB (i did this off memory so if I am wrong I will edit this)

As to the #1 overall QB picks currently starting, only 4 of the 8 have won a playoff game, not a championship, just a playoff game. The #1's record in playoffs is 16-20.

The avg draft pick of current starting QB's to win a SB is 51.4.   (this uses Wentz as Philly QB not Foles or it would drop even more since he was 88th pick vs Wentz at 2)    Flacco 18th, Rodgers 24th, Brady 199th, Brees 32nd, Manning 1st, Rothelisburger 11th, Wilson 75th. 

I think at the end of the day all this means is the draft is crap shoot voodoo, because you could probably get same results by changing QB to LT draft position. No one can really tell who will be great, but I sure like thinking and talking about it.

What stands out about that list you made of QBs drafted through one and ten is that they are largely quality NFL QBs.  Judging them by Super Bowl wins or playoff wins is pointless, because it doesn't factor in the quality of the team as a whole or the coaching.

[dbunting]

1 hour ago, briantw said:

What stands out about that list you made of QBs drafted through one and ten is that they are largely quality NFL QBs.  Judging them by Super Bowl wins or playoff wins is pointless, because it doesn't factor in the quality of the team as a whole or the coaching.

Judging a QB based on playoff success and SB wins is pointless? I'd saying judging a QB drafted #1 overall based on his playoff success and SB wins it rather important. The team that was picking 1st overall usually are the worst team or close to it and the QB drafted #1 took them from that to the SB. Isn't that the whole point of it all?

If not then you are making the arguement for not taking the QB #1 this year for me. If you don't expect that guy to make a you a playoff winner then select the safer people who by all accounts are can't miss pro bowlers and leaders and find that QB in the 51st to 90th pick range or try again next year.

Again, not saying Cleveland will do this, I mean they may love one of these QB's. My arguement is, if you don't absolutely love the QB, then make your team better and get more players who can help you win so when you do find that QB you are ready for it.

[briantw]

12 minutes ago, dbunting said:

Judging a QB based on playoff success and SB wins is pointless? I'd saying judging a QB drafted #1 overall based on his playoff success and SB wins it rather important. The team that was picking 1st overall usually are the worst team or close to it and the QB drafted #1 took them from that to the SB. Isn't that the whole point of it all?

If not then you are making the arguement for not taking the QB #1 this year for me. If you don't expect that guy to make a you a playoff winner then select the safer people who by all accounts are can't miss pro bowlers and leaders and find that QB in the 51st to 90th pick range or try again next year.

Again, not saying Cleveland will do this, I mean they may love one of these QB's. My arguement is, if you don't absolutely love the QB, then make your team better and get more players who can help you win so when you do find that QB you are ready for it.

Yes, it's pointless, because football is a team sport.  A good to great QB can be held back by a team with a shitty defense, for example, or by a general lack of weapons around him.  Saying a guy wasn't worthy of the number one pick because he hasn't won a playoff game is hot take material that doesn't factor in the quality of his team.  This isn't basketball, where there are eight to ten guys who you can put on a team and expect to make the playoffs regardless of the supporting cast.  In the NFL, you need a team to compete.

But to maximize your chances of success, you want a QB who is good enough to help you win games rather than just not making you lose them, and you get the best shot at one of those guys at the top of the draft.