Draft Analysis: "A massive value-destroying error"?

[L-TownCat]

3 hours ago, TheCasillas said:

this article cracks me up.... look at this table... not sure they could say the wrong decision was made when you have a lot of talent on this table that was taken over a QB. For example the most destructive pick is Saquan Barkley and he was taken in front of Sam Darnold. Then you have Devin White who was taken in front of Daniel Jones and Dwayne Haskins..... I mean cmon! Can you really call these "errors?"

 

 

 

Flawless Victory.

Finish Him.

[TheCasillas]

30 minutes ago, stbugs said:

I sort of understand, but it’s not just Barkley over Darnold, which we hopefully prove was an error, but Barkley over Allen and Jackson too or CMC over Mahomes and Watson.

If you just jump to specific names then you miss the point. I agree with the point that QBs just have so much more value that if you need a QB you are making a mistake. If TB hadn’t gotten Brady, was White really going to get them to a SB? Is Barkley really helping the Giants more than Jonathan Taylor or James Robinson or David Montgomery? Not really. On the flip side are Allen, Mahomes, Watson (pre-2021) and Jackson helping their teams more than any LB or RB taken before them. Absolutely.

Anyway, it’s pretty obvious to know that the best QBs in a draft are way more valuable than any other position. The error isn’t really that the actual bust QB taken later was better, but that the opportunity cost to the QB needy team to miss on a potential franchise QB is huge.

fair argument but those QBs werent slated as top5 picks. The QBs you mentioned went exactly where they were projected. There was not enough evidence for the Giants to take Allen at number 2, defintiely not Jackson.

I am not sure you can use CMC because we werent in need of a QB. We had a 27 year old Cam Newton on the roster who was just two years removed from MVP.... CMC isnt on that chart....

[CRA]

6 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

fair argument but those QBs werent slated as top5 picks. The QBs you mentioned went exactly where they were projected. There was not enough evidence for the Giants to take Allen at number 2, defintiely not Jackson.

I am not sure you can use CMC because we werent in need of a QB. We had a 27 year old Cam Newton on the roster who was just two years removed from MVP.... CMC isnt on that chart....

Cam wasn't actually deemed the top prospect in the 2011 draft either though.  Don't think he was even slated as one of the top 10 prospects by most.   We simply picked him #1.  We opted for the calculated gamble because we needed a QB. 

 

[Mr. Scot]

1 hour ago, rayzor said:

But what if they traded for (or even picked up in FA) their guy instead?

Pretty much.

They started off with a narrative and set out to back it up rather than actually analyzing anything.

It's crap, but most offseason speculative articles are, so no shock.

Edited May 13, 2021 by Mr. Scot

[TheCasillas]

Just now, CRA said:

Cam wasn't actually deemed the top prospect in the 2011 draft either though.  Don't think he was even slated as one of the top 10 prospects by most.   We simply picked him #1.  We opted for the calculated gamble because we needed a QB. 

 

huh? Cam, Marcell and Von Miller were clear cut favorites to go in the top 3. Cam would NOT have made it past the Bills.  If google "nfl 2011 mock draft" majority of the links have Cam going #1 overall

[CRA]

20 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

huh? Cam, Marcell and Von Miller were clear cut favorites to go in the top 3. Cam would NOT have made it past the Bills.  If google "nfl 2011 mock draft" majority of the links have Cam going #1 overall

I'm not talking about mocks.  Mocks aren't BPA (top prospect rankings).  Mocks factor in a lot more stuff.  Needs and what they know teams are looking to do.   BPA in a draft could be a RB and he be mocked at 7. 

Cam got mocked to #1 once it was widely believed we would do it.   But Cam was a pretty risky pick at the time.  For many reasons.  One that many people were okay with given our need.  I thought it was a no brainer and lobbied for him before the nation was cool with Cam at #1 talk.  

Tony Pauline: Top 50 draft prospects heading into combine - Sports Illustrated

Updated 2011 NFL Draft Big Board - SBNation.com

2011 NFL Draft Prospect Rankings (footballsfuture.com)

2011 NFL Draft: Mike Mayock Unveils Top 32 Prospects - Buffalo Rumblings

2011 NFL Draft: Critiquing Mel Kiper's Top 25 Big Board | Bleacher Report | Latest News, Videos and Highlights

* Mel Kiper did have him at #10.  

in terms of prospects, Cam was almost unanimously viewed outside the top 10.    Same with the other QBs that also went in the top 10.   

I mean you are what you based on who picks you.   Cam was the #1 overall pick.  He wasn't viewed as a top 10 prospect in that draft.   Neither were the Gabbert and Locker.  There just happened to be teams in the top 10 with massive holes at QB. 

[AU-panther]

It is pretty clear that a lot of the people criticizing the article either didn’t read it or don’t understand it.

 

 

[glenwo2]

3 hours ago, CRA said:

If Horn becomes a Pro Bowler and Fields becomes a Pro Bowler.....it becomes a massive and epic failure.  Just because of the impact positionally.  Doesn't really have anything to do with the specific players mentioned. 

What is the hit rate on first round DBs vs first round QBs? Pretty bad on both.  Like everything else.   But if you don't have a QB...the QB scratch off ticket is generally going to be the right call over any other spot in the first.  Hindsight is hindsight.  Hindsight can make anything dumb. 

But it's not a good article. 

He now plays for the CHICAGO BEARS.

The CHICAGO......BEARS.

 

What in the world makes anyone believe he'd be a Pro-Bowler on THAT franchise?  

Who is he going to throw the ball to over there?  Himself?

Edited May 13, 2021 by glenwo2

[TheCasillas]

4 minutes ago, CRA said:

I'm not talking about mocks.  Mocks aren't BPA (top prospect rankings).  Mocks factor in a lot more stuff.  Needs and what they know teams are looking to do.   BPA in a draft could be a RB and he be mocked at 7. 

Cam got mocked to #1 once it was widely believed we would do it.   But Cam was a pretty risky pick at the time.  For many reasons.  One that many people were okay with given our need.  I thought it was a no brainer and lobbied for him before the nation was cool with Cam at #1 talk.  

Updated 2011 NFL Draft Big Board - SBNation.com

2011 NFL Draft Prospect Rankings (footballsfuture.com)

2011 NFL Draft: Mike Mayock Unveils Top 32 Prospects - Buffalo Rumblings

in terms of prospects, Cam was almost unanimously viewed outside the top 10.    Same with the other QBs that also went in the top 10.   

I mean you are what you based on who picks you.   Cam was the #1 overall pick.  He wasn't viewed as a top 10 prospect in that draft.   Neither were the Gabbert and Locker.  There just happened to be teams in the top 10 with massive holes at QB. 

I am following - I dont disagree here. I think we were both defending different points.  Totally understand now.

[CRA]

11 minutes ago, glenwo2 said:

He now plays for the CHICAGO BEARS.

The CHICAGO......BEARS.

 

What in the world makes anyone believe he'd be a Pro-Bowler on THAT franchise?  

Who is he going to throw the ball to over there?  Himself?

they haven't had a losing season the last 3 years.  And they pulled that off with really bad QB play.   Worse places for a young QB to land.   

Allen Robinson is a legit stud WR IMO and they got a good TE group.  With a good defense providing aid and helping situational football.  I mean it isn't a bad spot for a rookie QB form a talent aspect.  He doesn't need to do that much early on.  And they could always improve the talent around him and add a weapons as he develops. 

 

[TheCasillas]

8 minutes ago, stbugs said:

Make it Fournette then, but I do agree it’s more for QB needy teams. That said since Cam started missing games and not being able to even throw deep, having CMC hasn’t helped us win. It’s not his fault, it’s the lack of a QB. Having Luke didn’t help us win either. I also think the point about Barkley is that it would be better to reach on Allen and Jackson or take a chance on Darnold than pick Barkley. It’s basically a don’t waste a first round pick on another position if you are still looking for a QB.

this is all hindsight 20/20.

What if the following occured:
Bucs : Haskins over White
Cowboys : Paxton Lynch over Zeke
Colts : Josh Rosen over Quinton Nelson
Giants : Josh Rosen over Barkley
Eagles  : EJ Manuel over Lane Johnson

Would those reaches qualify as worth taking a chance ? 

The one thing you will notice about that list... its filled with many great GMs who are still in the business running good franchises. Reaching rarely works in the NFL, and this includes reaching for a QB... which historically has most of the time failed.

 

 

Also, if you seriously think Luke didnt help us win.... actually Im not gonna touch that. There is no reason to even put effort into that pointless argument.

Edited May 13, 2021 by TheCasillas

[Peon Awesome]

2 hours ago, Toomers said:

Even if Darnold “pans out”, he’s going to cost 19M in 2022 and about 90M for the next 3. That’s 109M for the next 4 years. Fields will cost about 20M total. That’s where the “drop in value” comes in. This guy just presents it so poorly. With equal play level, you either get Horn/Darnold. Or Fields and 20M+ each year. 

Not quite. What's the going rate for a veteran cb1? Easily $15 million per season these days. Jalen Ramsey is making $20 million per year now. So you can't give credit for Fields being cheaper than Darnold and ignore the potential value of Horn over a veteran replacement. You obviously get more value with qb, but it's more like half what you're quoting. 

At the end of the day, the team didn't feel Fields was likely to be the answer or at the very least, Darnold was more likely to pan out than him. Time will tell if they were right. 

 

[ForJimmy]

We felt Darnold fulfilled our QB need as well or close to as well as Fields or Mac (I personally wanted Fields). Rhule has stated that one of our biggest issues was getting off the field on 3rd downs. Reddick will help add pressure with Burns, but we were in need of a CB. Rhule believed Darnold/Horn fulfill 2 major needs while Darnold/Fields would (maybe give a better chance) only fulfill one. If they make Darnold work they are geniuses, if they don’t and Fields lights it up we are going to start looking like the Bears have been on QBs...

[Michael G]

10 minutes ago, Peon Awesome said:

At the end of the day, the team didn't feel Fields was likely to be the answer or at the very least, Darnold was more likely to pan out than him. Time will tell if they were right. 

What he said...