Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 8245385)

So if I look at those groups I referred to earlier, let's assume the following:

In Group 1, Manning, Rivers, McNabb, and Whiny Manning are franchise QBs. That's a stretch with Rivers and Whiny, but let's give it to them. So 4 of the 14 are franchise QBs, meaning you had a 28 percent chance of success.

In Group 2, Roethlisberger is a franchise QB. 1 in 7 chance, or 14 percent. We'll ignore Cutler and Culpepper to be conserve, though one could make a case that they're equivalent to the whiny Manning.

In Group 3, Rodgers is a franchise QB. 1 in 6 chance, or 17 percent.

In Group 4, Brees is a franchise QB. 1 in 7 chance or 14 percent.

So you take a top 10 pick and you have a 28 percent chance of success.

If you draft a QB from Group 2, Group 3, and 2 from Group 4, the odds of getting a franchise QB are:

1 - [6/7*5/6*6/7*6/7) = 48%

Would you rather have a 48% chance of winning or a 28% chance of winning?

Originally Posted by durtyrute (Post 8245404)

I like where you are going, but you can't do the math like that. It would be a 28% chance vs a 14 or 17% chance. You can't add up the percentages unless you pick a qb in each of those rounds.

Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 8245457)

That's what I'm arguing, though. Instead of taking one high QB by trading those four picks, you have a better chance of getting a franchise QB by taking four QBs with those four picks and letting them duke it out in training camp.

Originally Posted by durtyrute (Post 8245475)

Ahh okay. It makes perfect sense, but no team will ever do that. That would be pretty cool though. We have one fifth rounder, now just draft a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th round qb and we will have great odds to be in the superbowl in 3 years.

I'm in

Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 8245457)

That's what I'm arguing, though. Instead of taking one high QB by trading those four picks, you have a better chance of getting a franchise QB by taking four QBs with those four picks and letting them duke it out in training camp.

Originally Posted by Micjones (Post 8245398)

FS and ILB for depth purposes?

Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 8245491)

I really think that this is a viable outside-the-box strategy.

Originally Posted by cdcox (Post 8245538)

I agree, but you would need two or three years to sort through each crop. Give them all playing experience in their first year in proportion to their initial perceived value. In season 2 you would refine it with more playing time being given to top performers and so on. I don't think any of them would get better just sitting on the bench. I also don't think you can just play a rookie week after week without working on fundamentals. I think that alternating playing time and prolonged periods to work on fundamentals without the pressure of getting ready to play a game would be the way to get the most of out of a prospect. You probably need a couple of good QB coaches too.

NFL teams don't seem to do much to develop and nurture young QB talent.

Originally Posted by Chiefaholic (Post 8245521)

I meant to type SS, rather than FS... McGraw has to go and let the rook fight it out with Washington, Langford, and Lewis (if he can play SS). At ILB, Belcher has shown progression, but Williams and Greenwood haven't impressed me at all. The rook could come in and fight it out with Belcher and at the very least add depth at a position we're extremely thin at talent.

On another position of need, a big 'ol boy with tree stumps for legs needs to be drafted to compete with Powe at NT.

Originally Posted by patteeu (Post 8246093)

It looks like these people who want to trade away 4 picks on just one QB prospect just don't want a franchise QB as much as you do. :)