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!

     

let's talk about Brock Purdy and Mike White


GOAT
 Share

Recommended Posts

I don't  have time to read at the moment, but just in general I think it's too soon to make any definitive judgment. But, I also think that coaches are generally susceptible to the notion that higher draft picks are better simply because they're higher--and hyped. It's another lesson about being patient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kungfoodude said:

If you want to try a strategy of only trying late round QB's, good luck. This is a strategy of ignoring all facts and statistics. If you build your decision tree on only considering outliers, you will fail. If you fall prey to hot takes, you will also fail.

The statistics are extremely and painfully obvious when it comes to drafting QB's and their success rate. It is very heavily weighted towards 1st round picks historically. 

If you are looking for 100% success rate, it's probably best to just never draft anyone because that isn't how the NFL draft works.

The examples used here are completely ridiculous. The 49ers are not going to move on with Brock Purdy. They have seen less than a game of him. In all likelihood he will play well for a stretch and then fall apart, like most backup QB's do. Mike White is not the future in NY. They know that because he has been on their team for the last two years and had a 2-3 record with some middling to bad production. 

At some point you do actually have to look beyond a game or a stretch if games. If you don't, you'll end up with Sam Darnold/Kyle Allen with a 10 year, $500 billion dollar contract after 3 games of play.

I really just wonder what is running through some of your heads sometimes.

It's because these kids only hear about the Dak Prescotts or Kirk Cousins which leads to them jumping to dumb conclusions. For every one of those there are 10 Jeff Driskels or Brad Kaayas

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Sean Payton's Vicodin said:

It's because these kids only hear about the Dak Prescotts or Kirk Cousins which leads to them jumping to dumb conclusions. For every one of those there are 10 Jeff Driskels or Brad Kaayas

IMO, it is because a simple, basic understanding of statistical probability isn't present in most fans. 

You just see Russell Wilson in the 3rd or Tom Brady in the 6th and that now becomes the norm, despite the fact that nothing could be further from the truth.

  • Pie 4
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Statistically speaking, QB's selected in the first round hit at a rate of about 50%.  Which isn't wonderful . . . until you consider that QB's selected in every other round hit at a rate of about 10%.  Coaching and system play a huge role in this, yes, but the delta between round 1 and all other rounds is so high that you simply can't ignore it.

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 2
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody has any real film on these 2.  Happens all the time.  Let teams get some film learn their tendencies, strengths, weaknesses etc. and then see how they do when their best attributes are mitigated by a good defensive coordinator.  Not saying they won't be able to overcome them, but there is a reason many quarterbacks struggle in year 2 and many end of as journeymen after that season.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

If you want to try a strategy of only trying late round QB's, good luck. This is a strategy of ignoring all facts and statistics. If you build your decision tree on only considering outliers, you will fail. If you fall prey to hot takes, you will also fail.

The statistics are extremely and painfully obvious when it comes to drafting QB's and their success rate. It is very heavily weighted towards 1st round picks historically. 

If you are looking for 100% success rate, it's probably best to just never draft anyone because that isn't how the NFL draft works.

The examples used here are completely ridiculous. The 49ers are not going to move on with Brock Purdy. They have seen less than a game of him. In all likelihood he will play well for a stretch and then fall apart, like most backup QB's do. Mike White is not the future in NY. They know that because he has been on their team for the last two years and had a 2-3 record with some middling to bad production. 

At some point you do actually have to look beyond a game or a stretch if games. If you don't, you'll end up with Sam Darnold/Kyle Allen with a 10 year, $500 billion dollar contract after 3 games of play.

I really just wonder what is running through some of your heads sometimes.

The huddle is stupid AF man.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
  • The D 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't a reason not to select a QB in the first round. But for our situation this is a dig on some of the weird Darnold Stans. The Jets have zero qualms in quickly moving on from mistakes. Meanwhile some Panthers fans want to quadruple down. Cope to the extreme.

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be happy with a regular pick for a QB in the 1st, no trades. It's never perfect but the odds are a lot better. I wouldn't mind a miss but a low ceiling guy like MJones or Pickett would be worst case scenario for me.

If we miss out on in the first than draft one later and be prepared to draft one again, just like we should do after Corral last year. Keep drafting QBs until we get a franchise QB, ok or servicable is not a reason to pass on a potential upgrade.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1st round QB’s are certainly more talented on average than rounds after.

But I think what’s more impactful is that the 1st round QB’s are given much more commitment from the front office/coaches than rounds after. 
 

If every rookie QB, no matter what round, was given the same commitment, I’d be curious to see how many starters would still be 1st round picks. 

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Wundrbread33 said:

1st round QB’s are certainly more talented on average than rounds after.

But I think what’s more impactful is that the 1st round QB’s are given much more commitment from the front office/coaches than rounds after. 
 

If every rookie QB, no matter what round, was given the same commitment, I’d be curious to see how many starters would still be 1st round picks. 

 

Good point. In a perfect world, every QB would get a fair shot. Unfortunately, that's not how things go. The CBA doesn't allow for enough practice time for this to be a possibility. 

 

Man, the scouting gurus on here would go nuts having to actually learn more than just a few top names. Imagine the research that would go into picking a QB in the later rounds? Imagine the arguments over which 5th rounder has the most upside. It could be epic.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Gerry Green said:

 

Good point. In a perfect world, every QB would get a fair shot. Unfortunately, that's not how things go. The CBA doesn't allow for enough practice time for this to be a possibility. 

 

Man, the scouting gurus on here would go nuts having to actually learn more than just a few top names. Imagine the research that would go into picking a QB in the later rounds? Imagine the arguments over which 5th rounder has the most upside. It could be epic.

 

Makes me think of Jake Delhomme/Chris Weinke. 
 

Back in their day, there were enough reps for a legit QB battle. Weinke vs. Lewis, and a couple years later, Weinke/Delhomme/Peete.

 

Delhomme, undrafted, backup for years, but was brought in and given a chance, and then the staff committed to him.  

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
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.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It all sounds great. The only unknowns are injuries and how they will need to be addressed. Horn has a history as does the newly added Jaelen Phillips and Cooker has yet to play an entire season as well. And then there are the Ikey's - totally unexpecteded injuries that put a major wrench in your plans. I do think its a great plan though.
    • If we pay Bryce like a franchise QB we're completely and utterly buttfuged.
    • In my view, the realistic expectation for this team to compete will start 2027.  At that time, I think we could be looking at the following (this is HIGHLY speculative):   QB:  You know, Bryce.  I am not a fan, but they don't ask me.  But there is reason for hope--and here it is.  Bryce will be entering his prime.  Since we are likely to pay him, there will be changes that I include throughout this exercise--I realistically speculate on what they are going to do with Bryce and then I realistically speculate on what means in terms of the cap and other positions. Bryce HAS IMPROVED.  The idea is that if you give him more weapons and protection, that will continue.  His career:   At this rate, if his growth continues, by 2027 we should expect nearly 30 TDs and about 12 Interceptions and a Rating of about 98.  His completion percentage should settle at 65-66% or so.  If that happens, you can win with it. The following stats demonstrate how the Panthers will be able to afford it (and re-sign Ickey) My guess is they will require about $60m per year. This is why rookies who can play are important.  It also helps us see the blueprint.  You may disagree, but this is the cruel realities of the salary cap. Robert Hunt:  Cut post June 1 and save $19m.  Who do you replace him with?  Ickey. Tershawn Wharton:  Cutting him saves nearly $15m.  We should all hope to see Aaron Hall (UDFA) make the roster and play well.  Regardless, this is a position we would likely have to address in the next draft. Trevin Moehrig:  Cutting Moehrig as the starting SS saves this team $16.5m.   Ransom will be on year 3 of a cheap rookie deal and should be more than ready to take the reins.  their styles are similar.  Furthermore, FS Wheatley (R, 4th round) will be starting. Taylor Moton:  So much depends on his knee, but I have an idea that he can play another 3 years.  extending him could save the team about $5m per year.  Cutting him outright would save the team about $21m. In the most drastic situation, we have to cut Moton and the other three players mentioned.   We would need (in all likelihood) a starting DT and RT.  It is possible that the DE would be addressed, but Wharton's production (so far) could be equaled by a rookie.  Look for a cut free agent and a 2027 draft pick here.  If you cut Moton, you save $21m, and that would be the only big hole to fill.  Having Ickey at RG gives you some depth at T, and Ickey could be the guy.  T could be pick in the 2027 draft (first round), fwiw.  It saves you $21m while costing you $5m, for example. We get younger, creating a core of Freeling, Hecht, and the RT first rounder in 2027) along with Ekownu (second contract in the $15m range, and Lewis, whose contract would be in the $16m range if not extended.)  The OL cuts (Hunt, Moton) would save $40m.  The OL would get younger and still solid with veterans at G.   By cutting Wharton (no brainer if his play stays the same) and Moehrig (good player--but we have Ransom on a rookie contract who would not be that much of a drop off--if any) in addition to Hunt and Moton, we would save over $70m in cap room. We would be able to give Bryce bag  and we would have enough to re-sign Ickey (if the knee is not too risky) to a Guard contract (probably at a discount, coming off that injury).  Furthermore, we could add a RT in the draft (or a RG if Ickey moves to RT) and that would be the only large hole to fill. Correct my logic if you see issues-- On defense, in addition to the aforementioned, Scott ($2m contract) is out, replaced by a 4th round rookie contract. CB Jackson's contract ($7.8m) expires and he is (possibly) replaced by a rookie contract.  At Edge, patrick Jones II's $10m contract expires and he is likely a reserve, and his role is absorbed by Phillips, Scourton, Princely, and possible an UDFA like Isaiah Smith or a 2027 draft pick.   These productive developmental players over the past 2 drafts will pay huge dividends.  On paper, I see the team getting much younger and possibly better while cutting nearly $100m and reallocating that money to get more production.          
×
×
  • Create New...