kungfoodude

Yeah, I am not trying to pay an exorbitant fee but I would rather it exist than not exist. I suppose if that becomes a solution in the future, I would have interest. Provided it isn't something absurd like $12+k/yr or something egregious. I don't care about losing money(I would immediately nuke all the ads anyway) but I don't want to blow an unreasonable sum of money I could use to pursue other ventures.

Is this broken down by round? Lower to higher like the OP? I am not grading on luck. I am grading based on "Was this QB successful based on round drafted in?" That's why I am not being super specific because I don't think that will ultimately work. If I say that only QB's that have 3 SB appearances are "successful" I am literally excluding almost all the HOF players at the position. Similarly, if I say that only players with 3+ TD:INT ratio are "successful" I might be eliminating most of the HOF and almost all of the SB Champs. I am not against any input but it has to scale well across all rounds and be reasonably definable. That is how I came up with the criteria I did. 1. Accolades 2. Longevity 3. Time as an NFL Starter This should basically control for a lot of purely stats driven factors. I say that because, if you aren't successful, you aren't going to garner many of the "accolades." Nor will you be in the league long or be a starter for long. That is the basis of what I have so far.

It's a more palatable format than Twatter(an absolute sewer from day 1) or Facebook(an absolute sewer for the past 10+ years) but it's heavily groupthink. If you swim counter to the stream too often some power hungry mod on Panthers will squash you.

Silver's QBERT?? I subscribe to his Substack but what he is doing there is fairly different than what I am trying to accomplish. I am less focused on the "pure" stats than the results since this is a "success" metric. Pure stats can favor unsuccessful players or successful players or vice versa. Also, I don't care even a little bit about UDFA'S. I can use that as a draft success metric. They weren't drafted. They are irrelevant factors.

FWIW, I am not trying to shut down all this great input, I am just asking for workable solutions to add it to the spreadsheet.

I will never resort to that sewer. I am just recently on Reddit and that is bad enough.

Does anyone know(mods I assume) why he wouldn't consider just selling to one of us?

But are you gauging QB success or QB DRAFT PICK success? I am not trying to make something that guages QB careers. I am trying to make something that judges QB careers SOLELY as a function of draft position.

How would you structure that? What are the thresholds for "success?" What what does that structure look like? What are the thresholds? No, I am asking given draft position(round based) what are good baselines for a "successful" pick? It's not so much actually grading QB's as grading QB CAREERS based on what round they were taken in. I am not against incorporating other criteria or changing mine but I want input into what that looks like. So, say completion%, which was mentioned. Does a 1st round pick need to have a higher career completion percentage than a 2nd/3rd/etc? If so. what is the threshold for that? I am 100% trying to make a solid model but I do need defineable input that I can add.

Okay, but how do you translate that to each round? What is the threshold for a "successful" 1st rounder? 2nd? Etc? I suppose I would ask, if you are a HOF/All Pro/Pro Bowl guy, wouldn't that largely exclude players with low completion percentage? Brett Favre(he wouldn't be eligible for this due to timeline) has a very poor TD:INT ratio and he is a SB Champion, HOFer, All Pro, Pro Bowler, etc. He ticks every box on that list. So, I would ask for a reasonable way of using those stats to determine "success" for each round. In theory, if a guy has a great completion percentage and TD:INT ratio but his career is 3 games started and less than two years in the NFL, would that be successful?

It isn't rules, I am just trying to make it useful. It's a discussion. I don't know if you would be excluding anyone without that. Take Dilfer and Foles. Both hit as successes even with these rules in place. I am not sure how I would include team accomplishments in a reasonable manner. Open to suggestions. UDFA's don't add much value. The root of this is to determine draft success. Adversity isn't something that can easily be quantified. It's really hard to make that work and not be very subjective. Open to suggestions. The college criteria couldn't be used for this.

But Eli would be a "success" with this criteria.

That's hard to quantify and I think a little unfair since most of these QB's end up with dumpster fire franchises. What would be the way you would include that? Win percentage? Total wins? How do you account for guys that just end up on shitty teams(Stafford pre-Rams, for example)? Not against it, I just don't know how to do that and be fair across all those tiers.

In between Huddle crashing, anyone have input? I am trying to make this model fairly reasonable. I understand there is a lot more nuance but I feel like these rough outlines encompass what I would consider "successful return" on a QB given draft positioning. It also doesn't overtly penalize successful QB's that have injury shorted careers. Just looking to bounce this off people and improve it before going live with it. I already have almost 300 QB's loaded from 1994(first year of the 7 round draft) to 2018(outer limit of the 1st rounder 8 year mark).

Yeah, I didn't either but Jones had already been a solid QB in his career. That wasn't a tough sell. Richardson was INSANELY raw in college and looked even worse in the NFL. I agree on QB but we do need to upgrade for sure in the offseason. We can't keep throwing backup QB's at the job and expect franchise results.

I mean it's ultimately a sinking vs. floating turds argument. I honestly thought Dalton was going to be the floater but it's obviously Bryce. One day, I just hope to not have turds at QB.

His contract isn't that bad. We can get out after 2026 and before the cap hits go up substantially.

Yeah, I was still on the 4-7 wins and have been the whole time. I am just upset by the utter ineptitude that Canales displayed.

It's nice that we signed Moton to that massive contract given his health. Typical for us. Big contract = immediately injured. You ride Corbett until you can't. You obviously cannot afford to have him at center. He cannot snap the ball properly at all. However he solves a big problem at OG. The problem is going to lie in who backs up Mays, though. Our coaching staff is a crowd of absolute morons, so anytime Mays goes out, it's gonna be Corbett at C. So we will get both worse at OG and WAAAAAY worse at C.

Well he quickly deflected the question about Rico's "almost 7 YPC." He is very polished and he transitioned well to non-answers and side steps. I can see why a guy like him was able to pull the wool over on guys like Tepper.

The only way to help NCAA football is for it to finally break. It is coming.

That is because they have leadership that isn't complete morons. So could Ryan Leaf and JaMarcus Russell. You guys gotta stop simping for attributes with no thought to actually ability or passion to play football. That's Fitterer/Rhule BS.

He was "special" alright. If you think Bryce stinks.....good lawd.

We will see if it matters. Especially if Bryce sticks around for several years. It may always be "help Bryce at all costs."

Nothing like taking a RB in a weak RB class as a 2nd round draft pick. Tepper your expectations.