Draft '09: The Quarterbacks - Page 7

The Poz · 02-06-2009, 03:17 PM

Interesting read on the QB's of this years draft class.

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/fea...rticleid=32164

Too much to actually post here (3 pages worth) so I'll just copy what they're saying about the top 3.

1. Mark Sanchez, Southern Cal

Height/Weight: 6'3/225
College Experience: Fourth-year junior
Projected 40: 4.70
Comparison: Aaron Rodgers
2008 Stats: 241-of-366 (65.8%), 3,207 Yds, 34 Tds, 10 Ints, 3 Rush Tds

Positives: This class is not laden with pro-ready QBs, but of those eligible Sanchez most closely resembles an NFL signal caller. He took the vast majority of his snaps from center in a pro-style offense, tore apart elite college defenses, and often stood out as the best player on the field. Sanchez is highly elusive in the pocket, throws exceptionally well on the run, and took only 17 sacks in 13 games as a junior behind an offensive line that started four underclassmen, including three sophomores. His arm strength is close to ideal and he delivers the football quickly. Sanchez is a leader, outwardly competitive, and doesn't ruffle under pressure. He has the physical makeup of a franchise QB.

Negatives: Sanchez started 16 college games, a startlingly low number. He did not beat out John David Booty, a fringe NFL player, for a starting job in 2006 or 2007. Sanchez was temporarily suspended from USC for a sexual assault accusation in April 2006. Charges were later dropped. Sanchez went against coach Carroll's recommendation to stay in school another year. Carroll has countless ties to pro teams and his disapproval reflects poorly on Sanchez.

Lewin on Sanchez: It's difficult to doubt Sanchez's ability to be a big-time QB despite his low starts total. His body of work is excellent and he demonstrated accuracy as a junior. Sanchez's production in the Steve Sarkisian system is clearly superior to Booty's. However, low-start guys have the most to gain from sitting early in their careers. Sanchez needs to be in a situation like Matt Cassel or Aaron Rodgers. If he has to play right away, there is a strong chance Sanchez will fail. Seattle at No. 4 would be a good fit. The Seahawks could start Matt Hasselbeck for 2-3 more seasons while Sanchez prepares.

Verdict: Teams that need immediate help (Detroit, Tampa, Minnesota) may shy from Sanchez because they know the long odds raw passers face. But Sanchez could be a gem for a team that can groom him (Tennessee, Chicago, Jets, Buffalo, San Francisco). Sanchez is unlikely to be ready before 2010, but his skill set smacks of star potential. Sanchez should be comfortable with an extended waiting period because he's already spent two years behind Booty and one behind Matt Leinart.

2. Josh Freeman, Kansas State

Height/Weight: 6'6/250
College Experience: Third-year junior
Projected 40: 4.68
Comparison: More athletic Jason Campbell
2008 Stats: 224-of-382 (58.6%), 2,945 Yds, 20 Tds, 8 Ints, 3.8 YPC, 14 Rush Tds

Positives: Freeman is physically stronger than any QB in the draft and it translates to the field. His arm power is superior to Sanchez and Matthew Stafford's, and Freeman is extremely difficult to bring down. Playing behind an offensive line that was devoid of pro prospects and started a 6'3 left tackle, Freeman took only 15 sacks in 2008. It led to increased experience throwing on the run, although his completion rate fell from 63.3% to 58.6%. Freeman can outrun most defensive linemen and linebackers and will be a legitimate threat for positive rushing yards at the next level. K-State's offense used spread concepts, but Freeman spent plenty of time under center and the learning curve shouldn't be steep.

Negatives: Freeman exhibits inconsistent accuracy outside the pocket and his touch on short-to-intermediate throws needs work. While he developed into a superb decision maker by his junior year, Freeman played out of control at times early in his career. He also faced loosy-goosy Big 12 defenses and needs time to adjust to NFL game speed. As an underclassman, most areas of Freeman's game need touch-up, including his footwork and defensive recognition.

Lewin on Freeman: Freeman is big, mobile, and has a highly impressive arm. The talent surrounding him was incredibly poor last season; Kansas State's top runner averaged only 3.5 yards per carry. Freeman was second on the team in rushing. You can present the Joe Flacco argument for Freeman as a big-time talent with a big-time arm for whom it could all come together in the right situation. Having posted superior numbers with a worse supporting cast against a pretty tough schedule, Freeman is a better prospect than Matthew Stafford.

Verdict: Like any underclassman QB, Freeman needs to sit the bench for at least one year. He would've benefited immeasurably from a senior season, assuming his awful line didn't get him hurt. Freeman is not ready to play, but his ceiling is higher than any quarterback that will be taken in April. That upside makes Freeman worth drafting in the second round, ideally by a team with a starter who can hold down the fort for 1-2 seasons.

3. Matthew Stafford, Georgia

Height/Weight: 6'3/228
College Experience: Third-year junior
Projected 40: 4.78
Comparison: Kyle Boller
2008 Stats: 235-of-383 (61.4%), 3,459 Yds, 25 Tds, 10 Ints, 1 Rush Td

Positives: Stafford has as many college starts (34) as a senior who started three years. Georgia won all three bowl games Stafford played in and he comes from a balanced, pro-style offense. Stafford faced the best defenses D-I can offer playing in the SEC. He won't be a plus-yardage running threat in the pros, but is a gifted athlete (Stafford can dunk a basketball) and a dangerous on-the-run passer. Stafford's arm strength is ideal and he flashes the ability to make all the throws. He is a vocal leader, releases the football quickly, and has good pocket presence.

Negatives: Elite arm strength has covered up Stafford's flaws. He throws off his back foot often and is considered raw in his reads. Stafford tended to go in the tank for long stretches at Georgia and his teams underachieved (e.g. the Dogs were D-I's consensus top team entering 2008 but finished 13th). Stafford is prone to head-scratching under and overthrows. He was surrounded by NFL talent (Knowshon Moreno, Mohamed Massaquoi, Thomas Brown, Kregg Lumpkin, Danny Ware, Martrez Milner) in college, but never put up outstanding numbers.

Lewin on Stafford: Completing passes is the fundamental thing quarterbacks should do and Stafford is in the red-flag area with a 56.9 career completion rate. NFL starters must complete 60% of their throws. Stafford's college team was never as good as it should've been and he wasn't as good as he should've been either. D.J. Shockley and David Greene put up similar numbers in the same system and won SEC titles -- something Stafford never did. Scouts might compare Stafford to Carson Palmer and Jay Cutler physically, but he's in the Rex Grossman, Dave Ragone, and Brodie Croyle range from a production standpoint.

Verdict: Lewin noted that Stafford's college stats and success level were unimpressive with so many tools and weapons, and there's no reason to think he'll be a better pro than collegiate. While Stafford will surely be a top-ten pick, his track record says he'll be a long-term starter whose team tops out in the 9-7 range because of inconsistent quarterback play. Stafford will look like a Pro Bowler in one game, and Joey Harrington in the next.

melbar · 02-13-2009, 01:08 PM

If you look up top 100 rankings and start to go through them, especially the ones just before Bradford decided to stay in had him in the 40-50 overall rankings. Course that is before bowl games...just saying.

melbar · 02-13-2009, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

The first response was posted while I was still writing.

You didn't get it at first, or you never would have said that comparing the two is ridiculous.

Yes. I did.

Its Ridiculous.

Chiefnj2 · 02-13-2009, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Link?

Pete Carroll.

melbar · 02-13-2009, 01:13 PM

"He became Tennessee's all-time leading passer with 11,201 yards and 89 touchdowns and won 39 of 45 games as a starter, breaking the Southeastern Conference (SEC) record for career wins.[11]

This alone puts him in a completely different league.

Do I studder?....

**DeezNutz** · 02-13-2009, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Pete Carroll.

And Gonzo says that Thigpen should be the starter.

Carroll has no reason, none what so ****ing ever, to have been pissed about Sanchez's decision to leave.

Think about this logically. Do you think Sanchez would have declared if he really believed, based on all the info presented to him, that he'd be a second rounder?

If this were the case, of course he would have returned to school.

**DeezNutz** · 02-13-2009, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by melbar

"He became Tennessee's all-time leading passer with 11,201 yards and 89 touchdowns and won 39 of 45 games as a starter, breaking the Southeastern Conference (SEC) record for career wins.[11]

This alone puts him in a completely different league.

Do I studder?....

And he was roundly abused for "never being able to win the big one."

Man, if it weren't for that ****ing smilie, I would go full grammar nazi.

melbar · 02-13-2009, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

And Gonzo says that Thigpen should be the starter.

Carroll has no reason, none what so ****ing ever, to have been pissed about Sanchez's decision to leave.

Think about this logically. Do you think Sanchez would have declared if he really believed, based on all the info presented to him, that he'd be a second rounder?

If this were the case, of course he would have returned to school.

I think he just saw a quick payday...JMO

Otherwise why not perfect your craft when every mentor and expert says you should?

melbar · 02-13-2009, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

And he was roundly abused for "never being able to win the big one."

Man, if it weren't for that ****ing smilie, I would go full grammar nazi.

Not winning the big one in a team game while playing well over 3 seasons is different from no experience and some off the field questions.

The last part is a movie quote...

**DeezNutz** · 02-13-2009, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by melbar

I think he just saw a quick payday...JMO

Otherwise why not perfect your craft when every mentor and expert says you should?

I have no doubt that he wants to get paid. And I don't hold this against him in the least. If he can do it, God bless 'em.

Your second sentence is far from accurate. Get rid of the absolute language. "Every"? Not hardly.

You could say the same thing about Stafford. Return. When you've demonstrated enough, there's no need.

Different sport (and the analogy isn't perfect) but you used to hear the same thing about high school players jumping right to the League. James and Bryant. Why didn't they continue to work on their craft?

**DeezNutz** · 02-13-2009, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by melbar

Not winning the big one in a team game while playing well over 3 seasons is different from no experience and some off the field questions.

The last part is a movie quote...

He has experience. And we can't talk about non-existent issues.

ChiefRon · 02-13-2009, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by melbar

I think he just saw a quick payday...JMO

Otherwise why not perfect your craft when every mentor and expert says you should?

I'm not saying it wasn't for the money.

However, when you want to be the best, you want to compete with the best.

How do you know he didn't do it so he could get into the NFL and begin competing with the best?

Fits his profile...

Chiefnj2 · 02-13-2009, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

And Gonzo says that Thigpen should be the starter.

Carroll has no reason, none what so ****ing ever, to have been pissed about Sanchez's decision to leave.

Think about this logically. Do you think Sanchez would have declared if he really believed, based on all the info presented to him, that he'd be a second rounder?

If this were the case, of course he would have returned to school.

Carroll came out and said that Sanchez received a 2nd round grade from the advisory committee and that after speaking with his NFL contacts it was much better for Mark to return. Why would Carroll lie about that? Sanchez never refuted it. Supposedly just about everyone told Sanchez to go back to school. He didn't listen and he has now hired his brother (an attorney who has never represented NFL prospects before) to be his agent. He's making some questionable decisions.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 02-13-2009, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Not necessarily you, but what I've seen in general from the Sanchez backers the last month and a half:

- "History has no bearing on what will happen." People say that when trying to argue Sanchez's number of starts don't have a good bearing on whether he should be drafted at 3 or not. However, they will then say "history shows us spread quarterbacks suck" when trying to discredit a different QB. In other words, history matters when it supports my position.

Fair point

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

- Before Sanchez declared it was Bradford has tons of talent around him. His receivers are always wide open. When someone says that about Sanchez it is shrugged off.

It's shrugged off because it's bullshit, and anyone that knows anything about college football or watched USC in more than the Rose Bowl knows this.

All of their talent is on the defensive side of the ball. I'd be curious to see what Mecca thinks of this, but I don't see a single 1st round talent on that offense other than Sanchez, and I'm not sure I see any 2nd round guys either. Patrick Turner is a late round guy, Scott Wright thinks he could go undrafted. There's no one on the OL that would warrant a pick before the 4th.

Fact is, he had very little talent around him. People assume because it's USC that they were stocked at every position - far from it on offense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

- Last year if someone dared to express the opinion that KC should draft someone that Scott Wright or Mayock had listed as the #8-10 player on their boards, people whined about what a huge reach it would be. Last I looked Wright had Sanchez at 7 or 8, which would mean it is a 4-5 space reach, but those same people no longer think it is a reach.

QB is the most important position on the field, and is subject to different rules, and you know it. As someone else pointed out recently, if you have the opportunity to draft what you think is a franchise QB at 3, and know that he won't be available at your next pick, you take him, even if it's considered a reach by fans and draft experts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

- A general dishonest analysis of any other player mentioned. I'll see Curry only has X sacks, he can't get to the QB. Maybe, or maybe he wasn't asked to. That would be like me saying Sanchez can't win when coming from behind. Well he wasn't in a position to play from behind on a great USC team. It doesn't mean he can't.

That's not dishonest at all, and your comparison is completely flawed.

Regarding Curry: If the kid was a phenomenal pass rusher, wouldn't it be stupid of the coaches to make the kids play in coverage? Do the Colts ask Peyton Manning to not throw the ball downfield? Hell no. Players are asked to do things that fit what they do best.

As for what you said about Sanchez, there are completely different factors that go into getting that opportunity. No one has any control over that situation, where the WF coaching staff has all the control when it comes to putting Curry in a position to succeed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

A majority of people who think they know so much about the draft are being the most closed minded people. It's like Voyager took possession of their soul and replaced Trevor Laws with Mark Sanchez.

I don't see people being close minded, I see people that stick to their beliefs, and the way this draft is shaking out, in concert with our needs, it makes it look like people are being closed minded.

Positional value hasn't changed since last year

There are 3 positions that are generally worth a Top 5 pick: QB, LT, DE

There is 1 QB that is consistently getting a Top 5 grade, and one that is getting a grade anywhere from 1-10.

There are 3 LT's that are getting a Top 10 grade. We already have our LTOTF.

There are no DE's getting a Top 10 grade.

That's what is putting the clamps on people.

ChiefRon · 02-13-2009, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Carroll came out and said that Sanchez received a 2nd round grade from the advisory committee and that after speaking with his NFL contacts it was much better for Mark to return. Why would Carroll lie about that? Sanchez never refuted it. Supposedly just about everyone told Sanchez to go back to school. He didn't listen and he has now hired his brother (an attorney who has never represented NFL prospects before) to be his agent. He's making some questionable decisions.

Maybe he just wants to play football, and the business side is secondary?

Maybe he doesn't care if it's 1st or 2nd round (although I really doubt that)?

Maybe he saw Thigpen play and said, "How in the hell could the Chiefs pass on me?"

melbar · 02-13-2009, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

I have no doubt that he wants to get paid. And I don't hold this against him in the least. If he can do it, God bless 'em.

Your second sentence is far from accurate. Get rid of the absolute language. "Every"? Not hardly.

You could say the same thing about Stafford. Return. When you've demonstrated enough, there's no need.

Different sport (and the analogy isn't perfect) but you used to hear the same thing about high school players jumping right to the League. James and Bryant. Why didn't they continue to work on their craft?

OK. Most. Better?

Yes, get the money and more power to you. But It doesnt mean he should be a top 5 pick or that he accomplished anywhere near what Peyton did in TN.

I think it can be said that College FB better prepares you for the Pro game. There is a lot more to learn in FB than BB from high school to the pros.

02-06-2009, 03:17 PM
The Poz Enjoyer of things Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Toronto Casino cash: $10012210	Draft '09: The Quarterbacks Interesting read on the QB's of this years draft class. http://www.rotoworld.com/content/fea...rticleid=32164 Too much to actually post here (3 pages worth) so I'll just copy what they're saying about the top 3. 1. Mark Sanchez, Southern Cal Height/Weight: 6'3/225 College Experience: Fourth-year junior Projected 40: 4.70 Comparison: Aaron Rodgers 2008 Stats: 241-of-366 (65.8%), 3,207 Yds, 34 Tds, 10 Ints, 3 Rush Tds Positives: This class is not laden with pro-ready QBs, but of those eligible Sanchez most closely resembles an NFL signal caller. He took the vast majority of his snaps from center in a pro-style offense, tore apart elite college defenses, and often stood out as the best player on the field. Sanchez is highly elusive in the pocket, throws exceptionally well on the run, and took only 17 sacks in 13 games as a junior behind an offensive line that started four underclassmen, including three sophomores. His arm strength is close to ideal and he delivers the football quickly. Sanchez is a leader, outwardly competitive, and doesn't ruffle under pressure. He has the physical makeup of a franchise QB. Negatives: Sanchez started 16 college games, a startlingly low number. He did not beat out John David Booty, a fringe NFL player, for a starting job in 2006 or 2007. Sanchez was temporarily suspended from USC for a sexual assault accusation in April 2006. Charges were later dropped. Sanchez went against coach Carroll's recommendation to stay in school another year. Carroll has countless ties to pro teams and his disapproval reflects poorly on Sanchez. Lewin on Sanchez: It's difficult to doubt Sanchez's ability to be a big-time QB despite his low starts total. His body of work is excellent and he demonstrated accuracy as a junior. Sanchez's production in the Steve Sarkisian system is clearly superior to Booty's. However, low-start guys have the most to gain from sitting early in their careers. Sanchez needs to be in a situation like Matt Cassel or Aaron Rodgers. If he has to play right away, there is a strong chance Sanchez will fail. Seattle at No. 4 would be a good fit. The Seahawks could start Matt Hasselbeck for 2-3 more seasons while Sanchez prepares. Verdict: Teams that need immediate help (Detroit, Tampa, Minnesota) may shy from Sanchez because they know the long odds raw passers face. But Sanchez could be a gem for a team that can groom him (Tennessee, Chicago, Jets, Buffalo, San Francisco). Sanchez is unlikely to be ready before 2010, but his skill set smacks of star potential. Sanchez should be comfortable with an extended waiting period because he's already spent two years behind Booty and one behind Matt Leinart. 2. Josh Freeman, Kansas State Height/Weight: 6'6/250 College Experience: Third-year junior Projected 40: 4.68 Comparison: More athletic Jason Campbell 2008 Stats: 224-of-382 (58.6%), 2,945 Yds, 20 Tds, 8 Ints, 3.8 YPC, 14 Rush Tds Positives: Freeman is physically stronger than any QB in the draft and it translates to the field. His arm power is superior to Sanchez and Matthew Stafford's, and Freeman is extremely difficult to bring down. Playing behind an offensive line that was devoid of pro prospects and started a 6'3 left tackle, Freeman took only 15 sacks in 2008. It led to increased experience throwing on the run, although his completion rate fell from 63.3% to 58.6%. Freeman can outrun most defensive linemen and linebackers and will be a legitimate threat for positive rushing yards at the next level. K-State's offense used spread concepts, but Freeman spent plenty of time under center and the learning curve shouldn't be steep. Negatives: Freeman exhibits inconsistent accuracy outside the pocket and his touch on short-to-intermediate throws needs work. While he developed into a superb decision maker by his junior year, Freeman played out of control at times early in his career. He also faced loosy-goosy Big 12 defenses and needs time to adjust to NFL game speed. As an underclassman, most areas of Freeman's game need touch-up, including his footwork and defensive recognition. Lewin on Freeman: Freeman is big, mobile, and has a highly impressive arm. The talent surrounding him was incredibly poor last season; Kansas State's top runner averaged only 3.5 yards per carry. Freeman was second on the team in rushing. You can present the Joe Flacco argument for Freeman as a big-time talent with a big-time arm for whom it could all come together in the right situation. Having posted superior numbers with a worse supporting cast against a pretty tough schedule, Freeman is a better prospect than Matthew Stafford. Verdict: Like any underclassman QB, Freeman needs to sit the bench for at least one year. He would've benefited immeasurably from a senior season, assuming his awful line didn't get him hurt. Freeman is not ready to play, but his ceiling is higher than any quarterback that will be taken in April. That upside makes Freeman worth drafting in the second round, ideally by a team with a starter who can hold down the fort for 1-2 seasons. 3. Matthew Stafford, Georgia Height/Weight: 6'3/228 College Experience: Third-year junior Projected 40: 4.78 Comparison: Kyle Boller 2008 Stats: 235-of-383 (61.4%), 3,459 Yds, 25 Tds, 10 Ints, 1 Rush Td Positives: Stafford has as many college starts (34) as a senior who started three years. Georgia won all three bowl games Stafford played in and he comes from a balanced, pro-style offense. Stafford faced the best defenses D-I can offer playing in the SEC. He won't be a plus-yardage running threat in the pros, but is a gifted athlete (Stafford can dunk a basketball) and a dangerous on-the-run passer. Stafford's arm strength is ideal and he flashes the ability to make all the throws. He is a vocal leader, releases the football quickly, and has good pocket presence. Negatives: Elite arm strength has covered up Stafford's flaws. He throws off his back foot often and is considered raw in his reads. Stafford tended to go in the tank for long stretches at Georgia and his teams underachieved (e.g. the Dogs were D-I's consensus top team entering 2008 but finished 13th). Stafford is prone to head-scratching under and overthrows. He was surrounded by NFL talent (Knowshon Moreno, Mohamed Massaquoi, Thomas Brown, Kregg Lumpkin, Danny Ware, Martrez Milner) in college, but never put up outstanding numbers. Lewin on Stafford: Completing passes is the fundamental thing quarterbacks should do and Stafford is in the red-flag area with a 56.9 career completion rate. NFL starters must complete 60% of their throws. Stafford's college team was never as good as it should've been and he wasn't as good as he should've been either. D.J. Shockley and David Greene put up similar numbers in the same system and won SEC titles -- something Stafford never did. Scouts might compare Stafford to Carson Palmer and Jay Cutler physically, but he's in the Rex Grossman, Dave Ragone, and Brodie Croyle range from a production standpoint. Verdict: Lewin noted that Stafford's college stats and success level were unimpressive with so many tools and weapons, and there's no reason to think he'll be a better pro than collegiate. While Stafford will surely be a top-ten pick, his track record says he'll be a long-term starter whose team tops out in the 9-7 range because of inconsistent quarterback play. Stafford will look like a Pro Bowler in one game, and Joey Harrington in the next.
Posts: 2,178

02-13-2009, 01:08 PM	#91
melbar Hillbilly Pharoh Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Branson MO. Casino cash: $10004900	If you look up top 100 rankings and start to go through them, especially the ones just before Bradford decided to stay in had him in the 40-50 overall rankings. Course that is before bowl games...just saying. __________________
Posts: 2,148

02-13-2009, 01:13 PM	#94
melbar Hillbilly Pharoh Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Branson MO. Casino cash: $10004900	"He became Tennessee's all-time leading passer with 11,201 yards and 89 touchdowns and won 39 of 45 games as a starter, breaking the Southeastern Conference (SEC) record for career wins.[11] This alone puts him in a completely different league. Do I studder?.... __________________
Posts: 2,148