Neither Stafford or Sanchez belong in top 10

[chiefforlife]

SOME DON’T VIEW STAFFORD, SANCHEZ AS TOP TEN PICKS
Posted by Mike Florio on February 21, 2009, 8:21 a.m.

Our initial mock draft of the year created plenty of consternation among folks who regard such matters even more importantly that some of our other readers regard their chosen religion.

And, yes, we were trying to make a point with the thing. At this stage, none of the draft experts (i.e., guys who couldn’t get or hold a scouting job with an NFL team and who instead tried to create a niche in the media for the stuff no NFL team would pay them to do) know with any degree of certainty what will occur on draft day.

Apart from the premature nature of prognosticating the events of late April is the fact that every NFL team makes its own decisions for its own reasons, especially in round one. Some draft based on need. Others take the best available player. And when 32 teams have different views on how those available players are ranked from best to worst, the stage is set for all sorts of screwy stuff.

We could have created even more consternation by dropping Georgia quarterback Matt Stafford and USC quarterback Mark Sanchez out of the top ten. In some war rooms, it’s an accurate view of the two players.

Said one source, “In other years those guys aren’t first-round picks. Stafford played well in 2007 but was horrible in 2008. He stunk in all their big games.”

The source specifically pointed to the contests against Alabama, Florida, and Tennessee. Based on the numbers, Stafford was bad against Florida, mediocre against Alabama, and decent against Tennessee.

“He is an average leader at best,” the source opined. “When you put a lot of pressure on him, he pees his pants. Detroit has a new front office, but if they take him then it’s the same old stuff. I guarantee that if he goes in the top 20 he will never play to the level he was drafted.

“What he has is physical skills,” the source added. “He has a strong arm and is athletic but he also has poor instincts and poor decision-making.”

Some might disagree with that assessment. But the point is that, when you’ve got a bunch of different folks assessing the same players, there will be significant variations from person to person.

“As far as Sanchez,” the source said, “he is a more solid choice. He played in a pro style offense. He’s accurate and has a good arm. He’s smart and a leader.

“The negative is he was a one-year starter. Tell me the last time a quarterback who was a one-year starter in college made it big in the NFL? Game time is huge with quarterbacks. Granted, from a money standpoint he made the right decision, but from the standpoint of having a top career, his decision has to be questioned.”

(And, no, our source isn’t Pete Carroll.)

So there you have it. Evidence of how the viewpoints on supposedly top players can diverge dramatically. It makes the process of predicting draft picks even more precarious. So, in the end, we think the final tally of players taken two months from now would presently seem every bit as goofy and unrealistic as some viewed our initial Pre-Combine Mock Draft.

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Think about what you're trying to assert here. You're trying to mix generalized odds with a specific player and acting as if the disconnect is with the people who won't do that.

Let me put it this way: Does the performance of any past QB to enter the league have any bearing on Sanchez? Does the performance of a Palmer or an Akili Smith have an bearing?

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

We're not far apart in our approaches, actually.

The one thing I'll add is that, for most posters, it's not fair to paint the ballwashing with a broad brush. Most of the regulars, many of whom are very knowledgeable fans, are pro Stafford or Sanchez because it's a position arrived at after careful analysis.

Yeah, there are some bandwagoners, but you seem smart enough to distinguish between the two. Mecca, for all the heat he draws, would not be a part of the bandwagon crowd.

No, but Mecca has so much invested in his defense of Sanchez that he makes piss poor arguments in order to defend him, even when he doesn't have to. Unfortunately, he gets lumped in the the idiot brigade because they hold his position and drown out any validity in a sea of needless insults. There's nothing wrong with Mecca saying something as basic as "I've seen Sanchez play. I know he's got fewer games under his belt than people would like, but I'm still excited by his talent and I think he's worth the risk.". That's a valid position, whether or not it turns out Sanchez can survive in the NFL at any particular level.

Where he goes off the track is when he starts belittling the lower rounds as if that somehow strengthens the argument for Sanchez. They aren't the same argument because he's trying to insert a specific person into a generalized equation, but he misses that in the grand scheme. It's why he gets so upset when the Brady example is used: Brady completely kills the argument, as does Warner, Montana, etc..., because it takes to the specific player who's not in round 1 and points to success.

Many of the rest of the crowd are just idiots who think calling those who disagree "asshole", "true fan" and the like somehow is a pithy rejoinder worthy of honor. Unfortunately for Mecca, he gets lumped in the generality.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Let me put it this way: Does the performance of any past QB to enter the league have any bearing on Sanchez? Does the performance of a Palmer or an Akili Smith have an bearing?

Absolutely not, The odds of any general QB taken in any round don't define the success or failure of any specific player. What they can do is use the past to inform the present.

edit: just to follow up with a non-football comparison...

If a man has 9 divorces, it doesn't guarantee that his 10th marriage will end in divorce. It is, however, something the prospective wife should take note of.

[Pioli Zombie]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Absolutely not, The odds of any general QB taken in any round don't define the success or failure of any specific player. What they can do is use the past to inform the present.

edit: just to follow up with a non-football comparison...

If a man has 9 divorces, it doesn't guarantee that his 10th marriage will end in divorce. It is, however, something the prospective wife should take note of.

Hey! I've only had 2!!!!
Posted via Mobile Device

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Absolutely not, The odds of any general QB taken in any round don't define the success or failure of any specific player. What they can do is use the past to inform the present.

edit: just to follow up with a non-football comparison...

If a man has 9 divorces, it doesn't guarantee that his 10th marriage will end in divorce. It is, however, something the prospective wife should take note of.

And that's what I was saying.

Flawed logic. Same man.

As far as I know, Sanchez will be entering the league for the first time. Could be wrong, though.

I makes no difference how many QBs with X games starting experience have or have not been successful pros.

[baitism]

Some of you morons would have us reach for a QB at #3, just like we reached for Sims at #6. How did that pan out? I can't wait to see his all-star production next year...

[kstater]

Originally Posted by baitism

Some of you morons would have us reach for a QB at #3, just like we reached for Sims at #6. How did that pan out? I can't wait to see his all-star production next year...

So you want a rookie QB to a Pro Bowler?

[Pioli Zombie]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

No, but Mecca has so much invested in his defense of Sanchez that he makes piss poor arguments in order to defend him, even when he doesn't have to. Unfortunately, he gets lumped in the the idiot brigade because they hold his position and drown out any validity in a sea of needless insults. There's nothing wrong with Mecca saying something as basic as "I've seen Sanchez play. I know he's got fewer games under his belt than people would like, but I'm still excited by his talent and I think he's worth the risk.". That's a valid position, whether or not it turns out Sanchez can survive in the NFL at any particular level.

Where he goes off the track is when he starts belittling the lower rounds as if that somehow strengthens the argument for Sanchez. They aren't the same argument because he's trying to insert a specific person into a generalized equation, but he misses that in the grand scheme. It's why he gets so upset when the Brady example is used: Brady completely kills the argument, as does Warner, Montana, etc..., because it takes to the specific player who's not in round 1 and points to success.

Many of the rest of the crowd are just idiots who think calling those who disagree "asshole", "true fan" and the like somehow is a pithy rejoinder worthy of honor. Unfortunately for Mecca, he gets lumped in the generality.

This is an excellent point!!!

Its not an insult to say these qbs aren't worth a # just as its not an insult to brady to say he shouldn't have been picked in the first round in 2000. Its great the patriots got him at #199 but there would have been no justification to use a first on him at the time. Likewise it is not out of the question the chiefs qb of the future comes out of a later round ala montana or brady or found like warner. This is what gms are paid to do. And it doesn't mean sanchez "sucks"
Posted via Mobile Device

[DeezNutz]

All these anti-QB name callers are really hurting my feelings.

Name calling is wrong.

[ChiefsCountry]

I wouldnt really call Sims a reach at #6 either at that time everybody had him, Henderson, Haynesworth and Wendall Bryant all rated the same.

[FAX]

"Darb" was a Babylonian demi-god who, according to ancient legend, was the demi-peep who wept for a couple of months over the loss of his wife who was snatched by some other demi-dude and taken to the afterlife in a big boat. His tears fell to the Earth as rain and caused the Great Flood which wiped out several species that Noah either couldn't find or lasso including unicorns, the giant, two-legged opossum, and the T Rex. I don't think it's solely coincidence that "Brady" spelled backwards is "Y Darb".

Just want to keep things in perspective.

FAX

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

I wouldnt really call Sims a reach at #6 either at that time everybody had him, Henderson, Haynesworth and Wendall Bryant all rated the same.

This is why it's so risky to take a DT high. Sims has crippled this franchise for years.

We should do something safer, like QB.

[baitism]

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

I wouldnt really call Sims a reach at #6 either at that time everybody had him, Henderson, Haynesworth and Wendall Bryant all rated the same.

He was a reach. He did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in college, even though he was on the same line as Peppers (who was always getting double teamed). Lets face it, the Chiefs put way too much stock (as well as everyone else) into the combine and got burned hardcore on it.

My friend is a UNC fan and he called that bust from the get go. I guess CP never actually looked at game tapes, just combine stats.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

And that's what I was saying.

Flawed logic. Same man.

As far as I know, Sanchez will be entering the league for the first time. Could be wrong, though.

I makes no difference how many QBs with X games starting experience have or have not been successful pros.

But it's not flawed logic, because it's looking at the same problem from two different angles. For any one player, the odds of success aren't known or knowable. However, over the course of numerous "one player" results, the odds of success for those in that same position can be found. You are absolutely right about Sanchez the individual, but the anti-Sanchez people are absolutely right about players in Sanchez' position as they define it. That's what makes vigorous debate fun, but it also makes the idiot brigade useless and obnoxious.

[DeezNutz]

Right.

It was the combine. The Sims selection had nothing to do with the Grandpa network.