Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The QB pool of prospective draftees has been over-hyped to a greater extent than I remember occurring in the past.  I think some of us have fallen into the position of thinking that we must grab a QB based on the idea that these QBs are not consistent with historical probabilities and will be very good for the teams that grab them.

I think the success rate of the top 4 picks at QB will be in line with historical probability.  So, of the 4 best prospects, how many will be successful?  Probability says 1.  One QB will be very good for his lucky team.  And, the probability of any one succeeding is about 25%.  If you could pick all 4 of the top QBs, there is essentially a 100% chance of getting 1 QB that will be good.  But, you only get 1 pick.  And, that pick is not at position 1.  Three teams are ahead of you.  So, you get 25% of 25%.  There is a 6.25% chance that we get the one good QB at pick 4.  Yet, some believe we must do that.  We must do that with great needs on this team and a very tight cap situation.  I must say that I do not understand.

I am open to learning new things.  Why must we leap at this low probability draft choice and put greater stress on our cap situation?  How does that help the Falcons?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

A few of us have tried to explain that the probability that all 4 of the consensus top 4 QBs will turn into great NFL QBs is extremely, extremely low. I know I've pointed out that history tells us tha

The QB pool of prospective draftees has been over-hyped to a greater extent than I remember occurring in the past.  I think some of us have fallen into the position of thinking that we must grab a QB

Well, tbf to those who are pushing for it, stats only matter so much. It really comes down to the evaluation of that specific prospect. Having said that, I do feel like this QB class is overhyped

A few of us have tried to explain that the probability that all 4 of the consensus top 4 QBs will turn into great NFL QBs is extremely, extremely low. I know I've pointed out that history tells us that 1 of the 4 will be really good, maybe even HOF great, that another might be a solid serviceable NFL starter and the other two will be outright busts. That is what history tells us. Someone else posted the history of the 4th QB selected in every draft for the last 20 years and the names, well, they're mostly forgettable. I'm totally with you. Don't draft a QB just for the heIl of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some drafts are better than others in that regard.

2012- Russell Wilson, Luck, Tannehill, Cousins, RGIII, Nick Foles

2005- Rodgers, Alex Smith, Fitzpatrick, Cassell, Orton

2004- Rivers, Eli Manning, Big Ben, Schaub

1983- Marino, Elway, Kelly, O'Brien, Eason

So, it's quite possible for multiple quarterbacks in one draft to have NFL success, while other drafts there is none

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hjerry said:

Well, tbf to those who are pushing for it, stats only matter so much. It really comes down to the evaluation of that specific prospect.

Having said that, I do feel like this QB class is overhyped. 

It's extremely overhyped. I remember the QB class of 1999 and how they were going blow away the 1983 QB class. That was why QBs went 1-2-3 in the draft that year. Here's the QBs drafted in the 1st round that year.

  • Tim Couch - #1
  • Donovan McNabb - #2
  • Akili Smith - #3
  • Daunte Culpepper - #11
  • Cade McNown - #12

The only one that had a great career was McNabb. Culpepper had a few good years thanks in large part to Randy Moss but never did squat without Moss. 2000 was the only year Culpepper's team made the playoffs. Couch (5), Smith (4) and McNown (2) lasted a combined 11 years in the NFL

So yeah, I'm not going to fall for the hype of this QB class cause I've seen this movie before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And the Lord spake, saying, "First shalt thou take out the Holy Pen. Then shalt thou draft to four, no more, no less. Four shall be the number thou shalt draft, and the number of the drafting shall be four. Five shalt thou not draft, neither draft thou three, excepting that thou then proceed to four. Six is right out! Once the number four, being the fourth number, be reached, then thou thy shall draft Kyle Pitts and send him towards thy foe, who, being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it.
 

Im sorry I just felt Monty python fit in this topic

Edited by Aluminafalcon
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mister pudding said:

Some drafts are better than others in that regard.

2012- Russell Wilson, Luck, Tannehill, Cousins, RGIII, Nick Foles

2005- Rodgers, Alex Smith, Fitzpatrick, Cassell, Orton

2004- Rivers, Eli Manning, Big Ben, Schaub

1983- Marino, Elway, Kelly, O'Brien, Eason

So, it's quite possible for multiple quarterbacks in one draft to have NFL success, while other drafts there is none

But not all of those guys were 1st round picks. I don't think anyone is saying that more than 1 QB from this draft will have NFL success or that some midround pick somewhere won't have some level of success. But history tells us that 2 of the top 4 guys will be busts. To expect all 4 of the top 4 guys to turn into great NFL QBs is living in fantasy land. It's not reality.

 

Here's something else about greatness and how hard it is to find a HOF QB. I mention this because Matt Ryan has a lot of support for HOF consideration and his career isn't even over yet.

The only draft where multiple 1st round picks turned in HOF careers was the clear cut best QB draft ever in 1983. There's not another QB class in the modern day of the NFL that has produced HOF QBs in the 1st round of the draft. Here's all the 1st round QBs that have made the HOF since 1970.

  • Terry Bradshaw - Pick #1 - 1970
  • John Elway - Pick #1 - 1983
  • Jim Kelly - Pick #14 - 1983
  • Dan Marino - Pick #27 - 1983
  • Troy Aikman - Pick #1 - 1989
  • Peyton Manning - Pick #1 - 1998

That's it, that's the list. 6 guys. It's pretty remarkable that the number is so low.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure "I kinda remember the success rate being 25%" counts as "numbers to consider." And it certainly doesn't mean much when not compared with the relative success rate of other positions (the lengthy post made a couple of weeks ago that did include actual data really should have been the definitive thread on the topic). 

If TF is deciding which actual players to draft in 2021 based on how Akili Smith and Tim Couch turned out 22 years ago, then Blank wasted his money hiring him. According to "historical probability," Peyton Manning would be a bust because Heath Shuler was. 

And I say this as someone who's not advocating for QB at 4. 

The reason to not pick a QB has nothing to do with the previous success rate of top 5 QBs and everything to do with:

1. ATL just restructured the contract of their top 10 QB in a way that makes it financially unwise to do anything other than start him for at least the next two years, severely cutting into the main benefit of having a QB on a rookie contract

2. The Falcons have a meh roster of a couple of very good/great older players, a couple of very good reaching their prime players, a few solid players, some unproven young talent, and a lot of gaping holes that desperately need to be filled with legit NFL players.

If they hadn't restructured Ryan, I could be talked into one of the QBs at 4. But they've started down a very different path and the best thing to do now is follow it in a way that makes sense. 

Trade down, fill holes on D, count on AS to get the Offense back to the level its % of the salary cap warrants, try to make the playoffs next season, and expect to contend by 2023/ win it all by 2024 before deciding whether a blow-it-up-and-rebuild is necessary. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason I don't like this argument is because it's purely in a vacuum. Eventually, the Falcons will need to take a QB. Everybody loves to use the "Well you don't have to take a QB in the first" as their rationale against taking a QB at 4. That's true, but the math in the OP still applies. If taking QB4 scares you, why doesn't taking QB8 scare you more? 

This is the better, more sound argument:

3 minutes ago, Kaptain Krazy said:

The reason to not pick a QB has nothing to do with the previous success rate of top 5 QBs and everything to do with:

1. ATL just restructured the contract of their top 10 QB in a way that makes it financially unwise to do anything other than start him for at least the next two years, severely cutting into the main benefit of having a QB on a rookie contract

2. The Falcons have a meh roster of a couple of very good/great older players, a couple of very good reaching their prime players, a few solid players, some unproven young talent, and a lot of gaping holes that desperately need to be filled with legit NFL players.

Saying the Falcons shouldn't take a QB because QBs in the top five bust more than others is stupid because you can say the same for every position taken in the top five. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not so much going to be the QB as the organization.

The QB who the Jags pick and the one the Jets pick have a pretty good chance of not producing the numbers they are expected to. It really doesn't matter which QB, the organizations are run poorly and have losing cultures. A 21 year old QB will probably not come and change that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, vel said:

The reason I don't like this argument is because it's purely in a vacuum. Eventually, the Falcons will need to take a QB. Everybody loves to use the "Well you don't have to take a QB in the first" as their rationale against taking a QB at 4. That's true, but the math in the OP still applies. If taking QB4 scares you, why doesn't taking QB8 scare you more? 

This is the better, more sound argument:

Saying the Falcons shouldn't take a QB because QBs in the top five bust more than others is stupid because you can say the same for every position taken in the top five. 

QB evals should work the same as with any other prospect. A good GM takes a QB because they're sold on them and see them as worth the pick, not because they believe that they need one. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, vel said:

The reason I don't like this argument is because it's purely in a vacuum. Eventually, the Falcons will need to take a QB. Everybody loves to use the "Well you don't have to take a QB in the first" as their rationale against taking a QB at 4. That's true, but the math in the OP still applies. If taking QB4 scares you, why doesn't taking QB8 scare you more?

That is simple.  Taking a QB at 8 is less expensive and we have great needs and a limited budget.  The probability of getting a starting QB at 8 is not significantly less than one at 4.  The probability of getting a good defender at 8 is about 40%.  The probability of getting a good QB at 4 is significantly less.  The Falcons need to complete our roster for 2021, not shoot for the QB replacement in 202(?).

Quote

Saying the Falcons shouldn't take a QB because QBs in the top five bust more than others is stupid because you can say the same for every position taken in the top five. 

OK.  Perfect logic when you do not have a starting QB, do not have many holes on defense, and do not have cap issues.  Take the leap.  You have to.  We have a starting QB, many holes on defense, and cap issues.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, vel said:

The reason I don't like this argument is because it's purely in a vacuum. Eventually, the Falcons will need to take a QB. Everybody loves to use the "Well you don't have to take a QB in the first" as their rationale against taking a QB at 4. That's true, but the math in the OP still applies. If taking QB4 scares you, why doesn't taking QB8 scare you more? 

This is the better, more sound argument:

Saying the Falcons shouldn't take a QB because QBs in the top five bust more than others is stupid because you can say the same for every position taken in the top five. 

Well first off, I think it's unfair to equate taking a QB #4 overall to taking a QB in the 3rd or 4th round. The difference in the money paid to each isn't even comparable. But that being said, you pick a guy in the top 5 and the thought is you want to get someone who's an immediate difference maker because the goal is to win in the NFL right now. It's not, well lets suck and hope to be good in 2 years. If that's the goal we're in the wrong business.

The draft is a complete crap shoot, we all know that. But after the first couple of rounds, man the odds of successful draft picks really really declines. If you find some really good players after the first couple of rounds of the draft you're drafting at an above average success rate. Personally, I can live with a gamble on a guy in the 3rd or 4th round being a bust a whole lot better than I can swallow a top 5 pick being a bust because my expectations aren't as high for the 3rd or 4th round pick. But picking a guy in the top 5, my goal is NFL greatness. That should be the goal of every top 5 pick.

Like I said, don't draft a QB just so you can say you drafted a QB. If you believe in him and think he is what is best for the future of the franchise in 2021 and the years to come then so be it. I'll support it either way. What I won't support is drafting a QB just for the heIl of it. That's dumb.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hjerry said:

QB evals should work the same as with any other prospect. A good GM takes a QB because they're sold on them and see them as worth the pick, not because they believe that they need one.

Summed up perfectly. That's all I'm trying to say.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, AUTiger7222 said:

Well first off, I think it's unfair to equate taking a QB #4 overall to taking a QB in the 3rd or 4th round. The difference in the money paid to each isn't even comparable. But that being said, you pick a guy in the top 5 and the thought is you want to get someone who's an immediate difference maker because the goal is to win in the NFL right now. It's not, well lets suck and hope to be good in 2 years. If that's the goal we're in the wrong business.

The draft is a complete crap shoot, we all know that. But after the first couple of rounds, man the odds of successful draft picks really really declines. If you find some really good players after the first couple of rounds of the draft you're drafting at an above average success rate. Personally, I can live with a gamble on a guy in the 3rd or 4th round being a bust a whole lot better than I can swallow a top 5 pick being a bust because my expectations aren't as high for the 3rd or 4th round pick. But picking a guy in the top 5, my goal is NFL greatness. That should be the goal of every top 5 pick.

Like I said, don't draft a QB just so you can say you drafted a QB. If you believe in him and think he is what is best for the future of the franchise in 2021 and the years to come then so be it. I'll support it either way. What I won't support is drafting a QB just for the heIl of it. That's dumb.

That's what a LOT of people have resorted to. Why take a QB at #4 when you can take one at #68? Forget the money, if you're taking a QB in this class, at #4 or in the 7th round, neither is seeing snaps for two years. So why is one at #4 so frowned upon but once in the mid rounds is welcomed? 

TF/AS won't be fired if they take a QB at #4 and the Falcons go 4-12 again. Yes, the goal is to win. But the expectations are different for different teams. They could win exactly 1 game in 2021 and they aren't in jeopardy of losing their jobs, so that doesn't even matter. 

If the goal of a top five pick is greatness, and that player is a QB, again....why not take him? You're not building much of an argument outside of "the QB would be on the bench for 2 years". Yes, but if that QB turns out better than Mahomes, would anybody care? No. The very far ends of the spectrum are "We took Mahomes+ at #4 and he sat for two years" or "We took Ryan Leaf at #4". Only one side of the spectrum is treated as the most likely outcome. 

I don't even get why "drafting a QB just for the heIl of it. That's dumb." is always thrown out. Who's suggesting that? We all think TF is a very smart guy and a fitting GM. I highly doubt that's even a thing being considered by TF so why mention it? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Mister pudding said:

Some drafts are better than others in that regard.

2012- Russell Wilson, Luck, Tannehill, Cousins, RGIII, Nick Foles

2005- Rodgers, Alex Smith, Fitzpatrick, Cassell, Orton

2004- Rivers, Eli Manning, Big Ben, Schaub

1983- Marino, Elway, Kelly, O'Brien, Eason

So, it's quite possible for multiple quarterbacks in one draft to have NFL success, while other drafts there is none

I know you meant well but that 2005 example is a bit of a stretch 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good conversation on QBs. I agree the chance all 4 or even 3 turn out to be stars low probability. All these Qbs are looking good in the pro days but what you can't measure are.

1. Work ethic..are these QBs prepared to put in the time to be a great Qb.

2. How are the QBs under pressure. Lance is lowest on the totem pole here.

3. How quickly can they make the right decision.

Jones,Lawrence and Fields have played big games. Wilson and Lance have not.

Given the odds on QB bust I think a non Qb would be the right way to go. Whatever TF and AS decide I will support but they need to hit this one out of the park.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, vel said:

The reason I don't like this argument is because it's purely in a vacuum. Eventually, the Falcons will need to take a QB. Everybody loves to use the "Well you don't have to take a QB in the first" as their rationale against taking a QB at 4. That's true, but the math in the OP still applies. If taking QB4 scares you, why doesn't taking QB8 scare you more? 

This is the better, more sound argument:

Saying the Falcons shouldn't take a QB because QBs in the top five bust more than others is stupid because you can say the same for every position taken in the top five. 

No you cannot. Some positions drafted in the first round are significantly better than other based on the percentage of players getting their fifth year option picked up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Run 'n' Shoot said:

No you cannot. Some positions drafted in the first round are significantly better than other based on the percentage of players getting their fifth year option picked up.

I can make a list of all of the players who bust in the top five to tear down any argument for taking any player in the top five. That's my point. Take Pitts. There is no TE who's gone that high and the TEs who have gone top ten haven't panned out compared to non-first round TEs. OL? Robert Gallery and Luke Joeckel. CB? Okudah sure looked like a stud as a rookie. Every single position. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, vel said:

That's what a LOT of people have resorted to. Why take a QB at #4 when you can take one at #68? Forget the money, if you're taking a QB in this class, at #4 or in the 7th round, neither is seeing snaps for two years. So why is one at #4 so frowned upon but once in the mid rounds is welcomed? 

TF/AS won't be fired if they take a QB at #4 and the Falcons go 4-12 again. Yes, the goal is to win. But the expectations are different for different teams. They could win exactly 1 game in 2021 and they aren't in jeopardy of losing their jobs, so that doesn't even matter. 

If the goal of a top five pick is greatness, and that player is a QB, again....why not take him? You're not building much of an argument outside of "the QB would be on the bench for 2 years". Yes, but if that QB turns out better than Mahomes, would anybody care? No. The very far ends of the spectrum are "We took Mahomes+ at #4 and he sat for two years" or "We took Ryan Leaf at #4". Only one side of the spectrum is treated as the most likely outcome. 

I don't even get why "drafting a QB just for the heIl of it. That's dumb." is always thrown out. Who's suggesting that? We all think TF is a very smart guy and a fitting GM. I highly doubt that's even a thing being considered by TF so why mention it? 

This goes back to if you draft a player in the top 5 (regardless of if it's a QB or not) it's expected for him to come in a make an immediate impact. That's not the goal of drafting one in the 7th round. In the 7th round you're drafting one that you hope might be good with 2 years of coaching. QBs are no longer drafted in the top 5 to sit. Matt Ryan changed all that.

As for TF and AS being fired after 1 year, I never said that. I said if the goal is to piss away 2021 and not attempt to win then we're in the wrong business. There's even been threads made suggesting that TF and AS weren't trying to win in 2021 as "reason" why drafting a QB at #4 is the right call.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NorthGaBoy said:

The QB pool of prospective draftees has been over-hyped to a greater extent than I remember occurring in the past.  I think some of us have fallen into the position of thinking that we must grab a QB based on the idea that these QBs are not consistent with historical probabilities and will be very good for the teams that grab them.

I think the success rate of the top 4 picks at QB will be in line with historical probability.  So, of the 4 best prospects, how many will be successful?  Probability says 1.  One QB will be very good for his lucky team.  And, the probability of any one succeeding is about 25%.  If you could pick all 4 of the top QBs, there is essentially a 100% chance of getting 1 QB that will be good.  But, you only get 1 pick.  And, that pick is not at position 1.  Three teams are ahead of you.  So, you get 25% of 25%.  There is a 6.25% chance that we get the one good QB at pick 4.  Yet, some believe we must do that.  We must do that with great needs on this team and a very tight cap situation.  I must say that I do not understand.

I am open to learning new things.  Why must we leap at this low probability draft choice and put greater stress on our cap situation?  How does that help the Falcons?

While I agree with the sentiment some of your math is off. If there is a 25% chance one of these QBs is successful, that percentage is not reduced by 75% if we draft the fourth QB. It remains at 25%.

Assuming 25% is the correct percentage, it's still not great odds in Atlanta's circumstance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, vel said:

That's what a LOT of people have resorted to. Why take a QB at #4 when you can take one at #68? Forget the money, if you're taking a QB in this class, at #4 or in the 7th round, neither is seeing snaps for two years. So why is one at #4 so frowned upon but once in the mid rounds is welcomed? 

TF/AS won't be fired if they take a QB at #4 and the Falcons go 4-12 again. Yes, the goal is to win. But the expectations are different for different teams. They could win exactly 1 game in 2021 and they aren't in jeopardy of losing their jobs, so that doesn't even matter. 

If the goal of a top five pick is greatness, and that player is a QB, again....why not take him? You're not building much of an argument outside of "the QB would be on the bench for 2 years". Yes, but if that QB turns out better than Mahomes, would anybody care? No. The very far ends of the spectrum are "We took Mahomes+ at #4 and he sat for two years" or "We took Ryan Leaf at #4". Only one side of the spectrum is treated as the most likely outcome. 

I don't even get why "drafting a QB just for the heIl of it. That's dumb." is always thrown out. Who's suggesting that? We all think TF is a very smart guy and a fitting GM. I highly doubt that's even a thing being considered by TF so why mention it? 

I understand what you're saying but simply put you're leaving out two very important things.

1. Value of the pick

2. The power of "If"

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, AUTiger7222 said:

This goes back to if you draft a player in the top 5 (regardless of if it's a QB or not) it's expected for him to come in a make an immediate impact. That's not the goal of drafting one in the 7th round. In the 7th round you're drafting one that you hope might be good with 2 years of coaching. QBs are no longer drafted in the top 5 to sit. Matt Ryan changed all that.

As for TF and AS being fired after 1 year, I never said that. I said if the goal is to piss away 2021 and not attempt to win then we're in the wrong business. There's even been threads made suggesting that TF and AS weren't trying to win in 2021 as "reason" why drafting a QB at #4 is the right call.

I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. They can take a QB at #4 and still win games in 2021. Saying they'd be pissing away 2021 if they took a QB at #4 is just as bad as suggesting they aren't trying to win. They've repeatedly said they don't anticipate picking this high anymore, so whatever they do will be based around that. Whether it's taking Pitts, trading down big, or taking a QB. Why can't it just be that? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...