Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Draft Analysis: "A massive value-destroying error"?


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Shocker said:

White was a fuggin monster for Tamp last season and they got a ship.  Next meaningless stat shet

that chart is all about positional value to a team.  It's why the list is all LBs, DBs, RBs, and the right side of the OL.   That isn't how you go about building a team in the NFL.   Those positions are largely complimentary to team with the key ingredients.... that have a QB, OL that slants left, WRs, and a DL.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, CRA said:

If Horn becomes a Pro Bowler and Fields becomes a Pro Bowler.....it becomes a massive and epic failure.  Just because of the impact positionally.  Doesn't really have anything to do with the specific players mentioned. 

What is the hit rate on first round DBs vs first round QBs? Pretty bad on both.  Like everything else.   But if you don't have a QB...the QB scratch off ticket is generally going to be the right call over any other spot in the first.  Hindsight is hindsight.  Hindsight can make anything dumb. 

But it's not a good article. 

That's the thing. For better or for worse, we have a QB. A QB that Rhule & Fitterer value as highly or even higher than Fields. So the value of choosing yet another QB was not as high as picking a potential lockdown corner.

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CarolinaLivin said:

Nothing against you, I just hate when people say this 🙂

true.  I don't like saying it.  But the league has designed it that way.    

I personally liked prior eras better. 

  • Beer 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CRA said:

that chart is all about positional value to a team.  It's why the list is all LBs, DBs, RBs, and the right side of the OL.   That isn't how you go about building a team in the NFL.   Those positions are largely complimentary to team with the key ingredients.... that have a QB, OL that slants left, WRs, and a DL.  

So I guess we should use our first rounder on a QB every draft and we cool.  GTFOH

  • Pie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Shocker said:

So I guess we should use our first rounder on a QB every draft and we cool.  GTFOH

Teams that have a hole at QB should.  I mean, that is what the discussion is centered around.   Not having a QB.

If you draft Cam Newton.....obviously you don't keep drafting QBs. 

 

  • Pie 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, CRA said:

If Horn becomes a Pro Bowler and Fields becomes a Pro Bowler.....it becomes a massive and epic failure.  Just because of the impact positionally.  Doesn't really have anything to do with the specific players mentioned. 

What is the hit rate on first round DBs vs first round QBs? Pretty bad on both.  Like everything else.   But if you don't have a QB...the QB scratch off ticket is generally going to be the right call over any other spot in the first.  Hindsight is hindsight.  Hindsight can make anything dumb. 

But it's not a good article. 

You're missing the key component of this - what if Darnold becomes a Pro Bowler too?

  • Pie 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, CRA said:

that chart is all about positional value to a team.  It's why the list is all LBs, DBs, RBs, and the right side of the OL.   That isn't how you go about building a team in the NFL.   Those positions are largely complimentary to team with the key ingredients.... that have a QB, OL that slants left, WRs, and a DL.  

In a passing league, CBs are incredibly valuable. So are DEs (or pass rushing DTs).

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, travisura said:

This is all based on player potential by position. If Horn becomes a perennial pro-bowler and Fields doesn't live up to the hype do we really call it a failure? 

Nope. I don’t think that chart correlated with how the perceived QBs actually performed.

  • Pie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, CRA said:

Teams that have a hole at QB should.  I mean, that is what the discussion is centered around.   Not having a QB.

If you draft Cam Newton.....obviously you don't keep drafting QBs. 

I disagree. Not all prospects play at a high level right out of the gate. Sometimes it takes guys more than one season to put it together, especially if they were drafted by a bad team. Taking another QB in round one right after you drafted one the previous year is a huge waste of draft capital that could be used to get your young QB a WR, LT, or whatever else. You have to give them a fair shake before you move on to the next one.

And trading a first round QB for a lower pick a year later is a waste of resources if you can trade him at all.

  • Pie 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, CRA said:

If Horn becomes a Pro Bowler and Fields becomes a Pro Bowler.....it becomes a massive and epic failure.  Just because of the impact positionally.  Doesn't really have anything to do with the specific players mentioned. 

 

Unless Darnold also becomes a Pro Bowler, which this article do not mentions. I am sure we did not pass on a QB for a CB because we see CB as a more valued position. 

What they try to say is that a QB in NFL wins more than anything, which is correct. But their arguments har trash.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We had a great QB, a one of a kind talent and where did that get us without a team around him? QBs can't do it on there own, someone needs to catch, block, COACH all that good stuff too .

  • Pie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jayboogieman said:

I disagree. Not all prospects play at a high level right out of the gate. Sometimes it takes guys more than one season to put it together, especially if they were drafted by a bad team. Taking another QB in round one right after you drafted one the previous year is a huge waste of draft capital that could be used to get your young QB a WR, LT, or whatever else. You have to give them a fair shake before you move on to the next one.

And trading a first round QB for a lower pick a year later is a waste of resources if you can trade him at all.

Nothing to disagree with.  I didn't say you draft Cam Newton #1 and just give him one year to be great or draft another QB.

Bears were right to draft Fields.  After Trubisky had the opportunity and time show he wasn't the answer.   They shouldn't of drafted one in Trubisky's 2nd year. 

But we don't have a QB right now.  The rest of the world isn't going to view Sam Darnold as a first round draft pick and pretend like his 3 years starting at QB don't exist.  

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...