First vs. Best
-
-
2014 ... Don't forget about Derek Carr.
He already has 7,200 yards, 53 TDs and a Pro Bowl.ZomboZombo said:
2014 ... Don't forget about Derek Carr.
He already has 7,200 yards, 53 TDs and a Pro Bowl.ZomboI had to fix one thing for Gip. Brady is a mortal lock for the HOF, and I'd put Brees as highly probable. Regardless where you pick in the first round- your odds of hitting on a quarterback are around 33%. We've busted three times @ #22, so it's our turn for a hit.
-
no, it doesn't. But that is why the qb's you think are going to
be the guy....so often end up targeted very high in the draft.
Sometimes it's a lack of character, physical skills, leadership,
lack of football IQ, failure to mentally process the fluid action
after the snap very quickly...lack of loving the game...
The top notch candidates end up being in the first round, generally.
It's just that all things need to be considered. And if the right qb
happens to be there at the top of the first round, before any qb's are
taken....you take your qb.
no, it doesn't.
No, it doesn't what?
But that is why the qb's you think are going to
be the guy....so often end up targeted very high in the draft.
Sometimes it's a lack of character, physical skills, leadership,
lack of football IQ, failure to mentally process the fluid action
after the snap very quickly...lack of loving the game...
The top notch candidates end up being in the first round, generally.
Sure....but as pointed out...a good chunk of them are not the first QB taken.
It's just that all things need to be considered. And if the right qb
happens to be there at the top of the first round, before any qb's are
taken....you take your qb.
Sure....but what you mean to say is: "you take the QB that you think will be the right one". That does not mean that in reality years later that they will have turned out to be the right one.
I bet the team that drafted Dan McGwire instead of Brett Favre thought they were getting "the right one". Turns out...ah....No, they didn't.
-
Zombo said:
2014 ... Don't forget about Derek Carr.
He already has 7,200 yards, 53 TDs and a Pro Bowl.ZomboI had to fix one thing for Gip. Brady is a mortal lock for the HOF, and I'd put Brees as highly probable. Regardless where you pick in the first round- your odds of hitting on a quarterback are around 33%. We've busted three times @ #22, so it's our turn for a hit.
I had to fix one thing for Gip. Brady is a mortal lock for the HOF, and I'd put Brees as highly probable. Regardless where you pick in the first round- your odds of hitting on a quarterback are around 33%. We've busted three times @ #22, so it's our turn for a hit.
I guess I would have to go back and check....but in some instances, the first QB taken in a draft was not actually taken in round one.
And, of course, in any number of other cases the best QB in the draft was taken in rounds lower than the first round. Like a Brady, Montana etc. I would have to go back and check which rounds these "best" QBs were taken in. Many of the best were also first rounders....just not the first guy taken....like Donovan McNabb.
And sometimes even the undisputed first and Best Guy was not all that and a bag of chips....see Tony Banks , Sam Bradford. etc.
-
Much ado has been made about the fact that the Browns likely have the chance now to take the first QB that will be available in the forthcoming draft and that the Browns should make hay with that opportunity.
But....in the words of Lee Corso "Not so Fast My Friends"....maybe taking the first QB in a draft does not often mean that you get the best QB in the draft.
Here is a list of each of the first drafted QB in each draft in the Common draft era: 1966 to current, along with what QB was actually the best QB taken in that draft. If it is one and the same, then there will be a # sign, in a few years it is debatable and I will note those:
1966 Randy Johnson #
1967 Steve Spurrier....vs. Bob Griese
1968 Greg Landry....Ken Stabler
1969 Greg Cook.....James Harris
1970 Terry Bradshaw #
1971 Jim Plunkett....Ken Anderson# (but also Archie Manning/Joe Theisman in mix)
1972 Jerry Tagge....Brian Sipe
1973 Bert Jones.....Dan Fouts
1974 Danny White#
1975 Steve Bartkowski....Steve Grogan
1976 Richard Todd#
1977 Steve Pisarkewiscz....Tommy Kramer
1978 Doug Williams
1979 Jack Thompson....Joe Montana
1980 Marc Wilson....Eric Hipple (actually about equal between two mediocre QBs)
1981 Rich Campbell....Neil Lomax
1982 Art Schlichter....Jim McMahon
1983 John Elway....vs. Dan Marino (Jim Kelly also close)?
1984 Bommer Esiason#
1985 Randall Cunningham# (but Kosar in Supp draft??)
1986 Jim Everett
1987 Vinny Testaverde.....vs. Rich Gannon (close matchup)
1988 Tom Tupa ...Chris Chandler
1989 Troy Aikman#
1990 Jeff George....Neil O'Donnell
1991 Dan McGwire.....Brett Favre
1992 David Klingler....Brad Johnson
1993 Drew Bledsoe#
1994 Heath Shuler....Gus Frerotte or Trent Dilfer
1995 Steve McNair#
1996 Tony Banks#
1997 Jim Drukenmiller....Jake Plummer
1998 Peyton Manning#
1999 Tim Couch....Donovan McNabb
2000 Chad Pennington.....Tom Brady
2001 Michael Vick.....Drew Brees
2002 David Carr....David Garrard
2003 Carson Palmer#
2004 Eli Manning....vs. Phillip Rivers or Ben R. debateable
2005 Alex Smith....Aaron Rodgers
2006 Vince Young....Jay Cutler
2007 Jamarcus Russell....Trent Edwards
2008 Matt Ryan# (or Joe Flacco?)
2009 Matt Stafford#
2010 Sam Bradford#
2011 Cam Newton
2012 Andrew Luck....Russell Wilson
2013 EJ Manuel...or Geno Smith (equally bad)
2014 Blake Bortles.....Teddy Twatwater...so far
2015 Jameis Winston# so far
Out of 50 years, only 19 times did the first QB taken in the draft turn out to be the best QB to come out of that draft. In 5 other years I think it is debateable (1971, 1980, 1987 2004, 2013) leaving at least 26 times where clearly the better QB was not the first QB taken.
So that means that, historically, we have a 38% to get the best QB in this draft, if we take one at #2 .
Food for thought.
Bold= HOF or certain HOF.
2004 Eli Manning....vs. Phillip Rivers or Ben R. debateable
Out of 50 years, only 19 times did the first QB taken in the draft turn out to be the best QB to come out of that draft. In 5 other years I think it is debateable (1971, 1980, 1987 2004, 2013) leaving at least 26 times where clearly the better QB was not the first QB taken.
So that means that, historically, we have a 38% to get the best QB in this draft, if we take one at #2 .
Food for thought.
Bold= HOF or certain HOF.
Not debatable to me. Big Ben, as much as I and many loathe him, is superior to both.
Karlis Missed -
your logic is flawed.
You ranked 1st QB against all other slots.
If you looked at the percentages of all slots (1st QB taken vs 2nd vs 3rd vs 4th etc.) Im sure 1st QB taken has by far the best percentage.
-
2004 Eli Manning....vs. Phillip Rivers or Ben R. debateable
Out of 50 years, only 19 times did the first QB taken in the draft turn out to be the best QB to come out of that draft. In 5 other years I think it is debateable (1971, 1980, 1987 2004, 2013) leaving at least 26 times where clearly the better QB was not the first QB taken.
So that means that, historically, we have a 38% to get the best QB in this draft, if we take one at #2 .
Food for thought.
Bold= HOF or certain HOF.
Not debatable to me. Big Ben, as much as I and many loathe him, is superior to both.
Not debatable to me. Big Ben, as much as I and many loathe him, is superior to both.
Phillip Rivers is actually, statistically the most productive of those 3 2004 QBs. But he is the one without titles. The other two have two each.....so they have that edge.
Of course....what would Rivers have done with the Steelers defenses over the years? Possibly just as good or better.
-
your logic is flawed.
You ranked 1st QB against all other slots.
If you looked at the percentages of all slots (1st QB taken vs 2nd vs 3rd vs 4th etc.) Im sure 1st QB taken has by far the best percentage.
your logic is flawed.
I didn't apply any logic. I simply recited facts and statistics. If I had applied logic, I would have been right in the logic I applied.
You ranked 1st QB against all other slots.
If you looked at the percentages of all slots (1st QB taken vs 2nd vs 3rd vs 4th etc.) Im sure 1st QB taken has by far the best percentage.
I don't disagree with that at all. But it is still an historical statistical fact that the first QBs taken in all the previous drafts had only a 38% chance of being the best QB taken in that draft.
And don't be surprised if that happens again.
Its just a cautionary note.
-
your logic is flawed.
I didn't apply any logic. I simply recited facts and statistics. If I had applied logic, I would have been right in the logic I applied.
You ranked 1st QB against all other slots.
If you looked at the percentages of all slots (1st QB taken vs 2nd vs 3rd vs 4th etc.) Im sure 1st QB taken has by far the best percentage.
I don't disagree with that at all. But it is still an historical statistical fact that the first QBs taken in all the previous drafts had only a 38% chance of being the best QB taken in that draft.
And don't be surprised if that happens again.
Its just a cautionary note.
While duly noted as a cautionary tale, historical facts also say that the 1st QB taken has the best chance of being good, and has far more relevance.your logic is flawed.
I didn't apply any logic. I simply recited facts and statistics. If I had applied logic, I would have been right in the logic I applied.
You ranked 1st QB against all other slots.
If you looked at the percentages of all slots (1st QB taken vs 2nd vs 3rd vs 4th etc.) Im sure 1st QB taken has by far the best percentage.
I don't disagree with that at all. But it is still an historical statistical fact that the first QBs taken in all the previous drafts had only a 38% chance of being the best QB taken in that draft.
And don't be surprised if that happens again.
Its just a cautionary note.
-
Not debatable to me. Big Ben, as much as I and many loathe him, is superior to both.
Phillip Rivers is actually, statistically the most productive of those 3 2004 QBs. But he is the one without titles. The other two have two each.....so they have that edge.
Of course....what would Rivers have done with the Steelers defenses over the years? Possibly just as good or better.
Phillip Rivers is actually, statistically the most productive of those 3 2004 QBs. But he is the one without titles. The other two have two each.....so they have that edge.
Of course....what would Rivers have done with the Steelers defenses over the years? Possibly just as good or better.
I guess I should elaborate.
I don't see Rivers or Eli escaping the hits Big Ben has taken, and extending the play. The guy is built to withstand a beating, and in his absence (games he hasn't started), Pitt suffers a tad (although Maddox filled in for him well in 2002).
You're correct on the Pitt D for the most part, as it's been stellar, especially early on in his career. The guy will be a 1st ballot HOFer, and maybe Eli as well. Rivers probably gets there in time.
-
While duly noted as a cautionary tale, historical facts also say that the 1st QB taken has the best chance of being good, and has far more relevance.your logic is flawed.
I didn't apply any logic. I simply recited facts and statistics. If I had applied logic, I would have been right in the logic I applied.
You ranked 1st QB against all other slots.
If you looked at the percentages of all slots (1st QB taken vs 2nd vs 3rd vs 4th etc.) Im sure 1st QB taken has by far the best percentage.
I don't disagree with that at all. But it is still an historical statistical fact that the first QBs taken in all the previous drafts had only a 38% chance of being the best QB taken in that draft.
And don't be surprised if that happens again.
Its just a cautionary note.
While duly noted as a cautionary tale, historical facts also say that the 1st QB taken has the best chance of being good, and has far more relevance.
OK.....but, as noted....so many on here are saying..."If now instead of taking the dregs of the first round....like JMZ/Weeden/Quinn...we can now get the top prospect at QB because of our #2 position, ergo, we are going to get a great franchise QB!! Hallelujah, Glory Be, Va Va Voom"......well
yea, we are in a better position than we have been in the past with those guys......but our chances go up to having the franchise player we want from like 10-15% to 38%. Better, yes. A sure thing...by no means.
-
While duly noted as a cautionary tale, historical facts also say that the 1st QB taken has the best chance of being good, and has far more relevance.
OK.....but, as noted....so many on here are saying..."If now instead of taking the dregs of the first round....like JMZ/Weeden/Quinn...we can now get the top prospect at QB because of our #2 position, ergo, we are going to get a great franchise QB!! Hallelujah, Glory Be, Va Va Voom"......well
yea, we are in a better position than we have been in the past with those guys......but our chances go up to having the franchise player we want from like 10-15% to 38%. Better, yes. A sure thing...by no means.
Haha well hopefully were all well aware theres no such thing as a sure thing.OK.....but, as noted....so many on here are saying..."If now instead of taking the dregs of the first round....like JMZ/Weeden/Quinn...we can now get the top prospect at QB because of our #2 position, ergo, we are going to get a great franchise QB!! Hallelujah, Glory Be, Va Va Voom"......well
yea, we are in a better position than we have been in the past with those guys......but our chances go up to having the franchise player we want from like 10-15% to 38%. Better, yes. A sure thing...by no means.
-
Perhaps here is the point that some of you are trying to make:
The first QB drafted was the best 19 times in the last 50 years, by my count
The second QB drafted was the best 11 times in the last 50 years, by my count
The third QB drafted was the best 4 times in the last 50 years. Cutler, Grogan, Favre, Bridgewater.
The 4th QB drafted was the best 3 times in the last 50 years. Stabler, Montana, Hipple
The 5th QB drafted was the best 2 times in the last 50 years....Garrard, O"donnel
The 6th QB drafted was the best 6 times in the last 50 years. (Wilson, edwards, Frerotte, Fouts, Anderson, and arguably Marino)
The 7th QB drafted was the best 3 times in the last 50 years. Brady, Gannon, Harris
The 12th QB drafted was the best one time in the last 50 years.....Sipe
The 13th was the best drafted one time in the last 50 years....Brad Johnson
So, yes, getting the first QB is still best....but getting #2 is not far behind.
-
your logic is flawed.
You ranked 1st QB against all other slots.
If you looked at the percentages of all slots (1st QB taken vs 2nd vs 3rd vs 4th etc.) Im sure 1st QB taken has by far the best percentage.
your logic is flawed.
You ranked 1st QB against all other slots.
If you looked at the percentages of all slots (1st QB taken vs 2nd vs 3rd vs 4th etc.) Im sure 1st QB taken has by far the best percentage.
Yup... it's a "1st vs. The Field" exercise. Among many factors that render it useless. Does not mean it is uninteresting, however.
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
Perhaps here is the point that some of you are trying to make:
The first QB drafted was the best 19 times in the last 50 years, by my count
The second QB drafted was the best 11 times in the last 50 years, by my count
The third QB drafted was the best 4 times in the last 50 years. Cutler, Grogan, Favre, Bridgewater.
The 4th QB drafted was the best 3 times in the last 50 years. Stabler, Montana, Hipple
The 5th QB drafted was the best 2 times in the last 50 years....Garrard, O"donnel
The 6th QB drafted was the best 6 times in the last 50 years. (Wilson, edwards, Frerotte, Fouts, Anderson, and arguably Marino)
The 7th QB drafted was the best 3 times in the last 50 years. Brady, Gannon, Harris
The 12th QB drafted was the best one time in the last 50 years.....Sipe
The 13th was the best drafted one time in the last 50 years....Brad Johnson
So, yes, getting the first QB is still best....but getting #2 is not far behind.
Looks to me your chances of getting the best almost double by taking the first, and quadruple over the third!Perhaps here is the point that some of you are trying to make:
The first QB drafted was the best 19 times in the last 50 years, by my count
The second QB drafted was the best 11 times in the last 50 years, by my count
The third QB drafted was the best 4 times in the last 50 years. Cutler, Grogan, Favre, Bridgewater.
The 4th QB drafted was the best 3 times in the last 50 years. Stabler, Montana, Hipple
The 5th QB drafted was the best 2 times in the last 50 years....Garrard, O"donnel
The 6th QB drafted was the best 6 times in the last 50 years. (Wilson, edwards, Frerotte, Fouts, Anderson, and arguably Marino)
The 7th QB drafted was the best 3 times in the last 50 years. Brady, Gannon, Harris
The 12th QB drafted was the best one time in the last 50 years.....Sipe
The 13th was the best drafted one time in the last 50 years....Brad Johnson
So, yes, getting the first QB is still best....but getting #2 is not far behind.
-
Bortles is better than Twatty
-
-
Zombo said:
Carr is better than both.
Z
Debatable
-
your logic is flawed.
You ranked 1st QB against all other slots.
If you looked at the percentages of all slots (1st QB taken vs 2nd vs 3rd vs 4th etc.) Im sure 1st QB taken has by far the best percentage.
Yup... it's a "1st vs. The Field" exercise. Among many factors that render it useless. Does not mean it is uninteresting, however.
Yup... it's a "1st vs. The Field" exercise. Among many factors that render it useless. Does not mean it is uninteresting, however.
Sure, there is no real practical use for this other than as I said....knowing that the first QB taken is more often than not not the best QB to come out of a particular draft.
I mean....if a team has the opportunity to take the top QB available, and if they need one....they should take him regardless of the above statistic. That team should not wait around and say "oh, we will wait to take the 2d QB in this draft because the first one taken has only a 38% chance of success". You take that QB if you want him.....provided that there is not a more talented prospect to take at another position that you need as well. Then, if you get that other more talented player you might be willing to take a chance on the 2d/3rd/6th QB taken
-
Zombo said:
Carr is better than both.
Z
So far in their short careers the Transvestite has the better stats by just a bit. Of course it remains to be seen who will ultimately come out the best. Carr could be it....but my money would go with Bortles.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login