ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   The Lounge (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs So, how do you guys react if the Walrus waits to pick a QB until later rounds (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=268599)

BigCatDaddy 01-07-2013 07:42 PM

Reid is not a dumb mother ****er like Pioli so I know I don't have to worry about that happening.

RealSNR 01-07-2013 07:42 PM

Also, Reid hasn't had recent success with middle round picks necessarily.

Kevin Kolb sucks.

Nick Foles sucks even more.

Best way to ensure not getting one of those two? Go FIRST ROUND with your QB. Take the best guy.

OrtonsPiercedTaint 01-07-2013 07:43 PM

I would rather have Reid and a second rounder. Than Pioli, RGIII and revolving third rate HCs and OCs.

The_Doctor10 01-07-2013 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry (Post 9293703)
First year in Green Bay, they traded a first for Brett Favre. His first year in Philadelphia, they drafted Donovan McNabb 2nd overall. I think they are drafting a quarterback.

You silly bitch, how dare you make sense.

The_Doctor10 01-07-2013 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SNR (Post 9293730)
Also, Reid hasn't had recent success with middle round picks necessarily.

Kevin Kolb sucks.

Nick Foles sucks even more.

Best way to ensure not getting one of those two? Go FIRST ROUND with your QB. Take the best guy.

If Kolb weren't made of obsidian he'd be a middle of the road qb at worst.

Rain Man 01-07-2013 07:52 PM

I will doctor potatoes to look like hand grenades and then throw them at his office if he does not select a quarterback with the first pick.

This assumes of course that all of the elite prospects don't have accidents with antifreeze, aids trees, Jovan Belcher, or other natural hazards between now and the draft.

htismaqe 01-07-2013 07:52 PM

If Reid waits until the 2nd or 3rd, that guy better start immediately and succeed soon after.

Deberg_1990 01-07-2013 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the Talking Can (Post 9293491)
you mean if we do what we've been doing for 30 years?

i'll be thrilled like all true fans

You can find franchise QBs in the lower rounds....Montana, Brady, Russell Wilson.

hometeam 01-07-2013 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990 (Post 9293863)
You can find franchise QBs in the lower rounds....Montana, Brady, Russell Wilson.

Russel Wilson remains to be seen if he is a true franchise QB. Montana and Brady are the exceptions, not the rule. Brady was pure fluke, as far as where he was drafted to what he became.

The rule is that franchise QBs come in the first round, most in the top side of rd1 if not #1 overall.

Sure there are misses.

This is from 2009 but it still illustrates my point. In fact you could argue since 09 the balance is skewed more to QB favor...

http://walterfootball.com/nfldraftqu...ckriskmyth.php

Quote:

Quarterbacks:

There were 29 quarterbacks selected in the top 16 of the NFL Draft since 1993...

Hits: 13
Busts: 12
OK: 2
TBA: 2

Defensive Tackles:

There were 33 defensive tackles selected in the top 16 of the NFL Draft since 1993...

Hits: 15
Busts: 15
OK: 2
TBA: 1

Now, let's look at the hit and bust rates for each position:

Quarterback Hit Rate: 48.2%
Defensive Tackle Hit Rate: 46.9%

Quarterback Bust Rate: 44.4%
Defensive Tackle Bust Rate: 46.9%
So what does this really show? Its a close hit/bust rate on QBs? Yes. But pay attention. 50% Hit rate, thats a good QB. You have a 50% shot at a franchise guy. TAKE IT. Don't be stupid Clark! Quit being a pussy and go for the gold~


edit - another nice tidbit.

Quote:

It's a small sample size, but the disparity is even larger in the top five. In that area, only one defensive tackle has panned out of five opportunities, whereas five of 10 quarterbacks have been "hits," and only four of 10 quarterbacks have been busts.

Considering how important the quarterback is in relation to the defensive tackle, if a team is deciding between the two positions, the "risk" factor should not sway them away from taking a signal-caller. In fact, it's actually riskier to take a defensive tackle.


***

One more thing - I wanted to see how these two positions translated into winning and losing on the football field. I took all of the "hit" players listed in the two tables, and looked up how their initial franchise fared while they were on the roster:

Hit Quarterback Original Team Record: 828-593 (.583)
Hit Quarterback Average Years on Original Team: 6.9
Hit Quarterback Average Playoff Years on Original Team: 3.8

Hit Defensive Tackle Original Team Record: 966-745 (.565)
Hit Defensive Tackle Average Years on Original Team: 6.4
Hit Defensive Tackle Average Playoff Years on Original Team: 3.1

No one should be shocked that teams with hit quarterbacks were more successful than teams with hit defensive tackles. I actually thought there would be more of a disparity until I realized that the numbers are skewed; after all, did the Patriots win three Super Bowls because of Richard Seymour and Ty Warren (two of the hit defensive tackles that affected these numbers), or because of Tom Brady? Brady is the correct answer just in case you have Bucky Brooks Syndrome and inexplicably hate quarterbacks.

At any rate, I'm going to look into the hit and bust rates of the other positions soon. But with all of these facts and numbers in mind, hopefully the notion of taking a quarterback won't be seen as risky too much longer. In fact, the real risk is passing up on a franchise quarterback.

Spott 01-07-2013 08:07 PM

I'll get a banner.

Brock 01-07-2013 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990 (Post 9293863)
You can find franchise QBs in the lower rounds....Montana, Brady, Russell Wilson.

LMAO

Deberg_1990 01-07-2013 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hometeam (Post 9293974)
Russel Wilson remains to be seen if he is a true franchise QB. Montana and Brady are the exceptions, not the rule. Brady was pure fluke, as far as where he was drafted to what he became.

The rule is that franchise QBs come in the first round, most in the top side of rd1 if not #1 overall.

Sure there are misses.

This is from 2009 but it still illustrates my point. In fact you could argue since 09 the balance is skewed more to QB favor...

http://walterfootball.com/nfldraftqu...ckriskmyth.php



So what does this really show? Its a close hit/bust rate on QBs? Yes. But pay attention. 50% Hit rate, thats a good QB. You have a 50% shot at a franchise guy. TAKE IT. Don't be stupid Clark! Quit being a pussy and go for the gold~



Save your 1s and 0s dude. I'm trolliin

Captain Obvious 01-07-2013 08:11 PM

My prediction: #1 BAA and then trade up into late first round to take the QB.

Mecca 01-07-2013 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious (Post 9294022)
My prediction: #1 BAA and then trade up into late first round to take the QB.

So your plan is Tyler Bray?
Posted via Mobile Device

htismaqe 01-07-2013 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious (Post 9294022)
My prediction: #1 BAA and then trade up into late first round to take the QB.

Who is the BAA?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:24 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.