Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteWhale
What a silly question.
Ask yourself... was the team that drafted the real Leon Sandcastle any better for having done so?
After 4 losing seasons in 5 years in Atlanta Leon bailed out. There was no chance to resign. He knew what CB's bring and he knew you needed a cast for him to win championships... so he went out and joined the best teams in the NFL.
So even if we assume he wins those SB's, we should probably mirror Leon's career and assume he'd be doing it for a team that was smart enough to get a QB.
So how about we draft a QB, mold him into a star, and then sign Leon after he bails on the shitty team that drafted him.  |
It's a silly question if you assume that the QB will pan out. I think it's at least an interesting thing to think about because it forces you to weigh the relative values of the positions.
The numbers guy in me thinks of it as a question of expected value. If you rate the value of a solid QB and a solid CB on a scale of 1 to 10, I'd probably say QB is a 10 and CB is a 6. In this case, we're assuming that the CB has a 100% probability of panning out, and the QB only has a 50% probability of panning out. Therefore, the CB in this case would be worth 6 points, and the QB would be worth 5.
Of course, I'm just making the numbers up, which is where the debate lies. And of course, this is all a non-realistic scenario anyway, but hey - it's the offseason.