Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins
So, the fact that we could draft a QB in every other round other than the first, and still have a lower rate of winning a Super Bowl than simply drafting first round QBs is somehow "misleading" and "changes nothing", and you wonder why we feel the need to insult you?
|
Your statistic would support us signing a 1st round QB that has been cut. If we are going by that stat, why not just sign David Carr or Joey Harrington or Micheal Vick? I say this to make a point, not to support that conclusion. Your stat is not a good stat to base selecting a QB in the first round.
The stat does not account for great QBs like Dan Marino that were great 1st round pics. Why should the Dolphins selecting Dan Marino add to the statistic of not taking a QB? Taking Marino was obviously a good choice but the fact that he never won a superbowl supports the statistical analysis of not taking a QB in round 1.
Trent Dilfer was also a first round pick and the Ravens won a superbowl with him. He was not drafted by the Ravens. He was a castoff of another team. The defense won that superbowl, but your statistics will use Trent Dilfer as support for taking a QB in round 1.
The statistical analysis of superbowl winning QBs is hard to rely on when taking into account who to draft because Superbowls are won by teams. You would probably be better off with using a statistic that shows the percentage of top 5 offenses with QBs that were drafted in the first round and still play on the team that drafted them.
That's what we are really looking for right? Picking a QB that can lead a successful offense. The QB can't control the defense. Your stat should only account for offensive production, not team production.