Clausen and the Problem of Picking Second-Round Quarterbacks

[guyinchesapeake]

All the article shows is what we all know already, that drafting QBs is the biggest crapshoot in football! My criteria is not who becomes a starter, mine is who is the most successful in leading their team(s) to the postseason.

[Cap'n]

So he's saying that if you draft a QB in the second round he might be good, but he might not be? Interesting.

lol exactly. ESPN's John Clayton reports that Clausen may or may not be good. We will find out as early as today. Sources close to him said

[pantherclaw]

Wow, that sure was waste of time.

[panthers55]

Looking at all the first and second rounders over the past 20 years has little to do with whether Clausen will be successful or not. Frankly we have done pretty good with guys like Jake and Matt who weren't even drafted. I expect that Clausen will do fairly well when he gets a chance. It really doesn't matter how other guys in the second round did in the past. There really is no relationship between them and him. Just like the possibility of getting a heads when you flip a coin is 50% even if the last 20 flips all came up tails.

[Razeyfingers]

I sure its been mentioned on these boards that in addition to the "GM's draft via BPA" that the bringing in a young QB seems to be more of a statement than bringing in any other player of another position. It makes you ask more questions. For example, if we had brought in another monster RB, you may say well it looks like we'll be divvying up the carries a little more. You wouldnt be thinking "Oh SNAP! Who's gonna be THE guy". It's not a great example and there are exceptions, but the bottom line is that when you bring in a young QB, people begin to wonder "Hey what are those Panthers up to over there? Are they going to change up their offense now? Hmm are they gonna have proper leadership?"

As far as BPA goes, it seems to me that some GM's do draft leaning towards a BPA and some dont. Also, that could change based on their respective agendas given the state of a particular franchise.

[Wither]

There really is no relationship between them and him. Just like the possibility of getting a heads when you flip a coin is 50% even if the last 20 flips all came up tails.

Well, technically it's 50%, but I would wager that it is more like... 97.5% (I made that number up). I'm sure the reasoning is obvious: since there was a 50% chance the past 20 times, it stands to reason that the chance of heads is even greater since -

Why am I even bothering with this? It wasn't even your point.

As far as BPA goes, it seems to me that some GM's do draft leaning towards a BPA and some dont. Also, that could change based on their respective agendas given the state of a particular franchise.

I mean, you are bringing up a good and very valid point, but my main response is: no poo!

[Swarly]

Quarterbacks taken past the 1st round have won 5 out of the last 10 super bowls.

The whole "2nd round QB's are usually busts" thing is bullshit. For every star 1st overall QB, there is a bust 1st overall QB. For every elite perennial pro bowler/hall of famer/etc taken in the draft, there is a bust that was taken at that same pick.

No risk, no reward.

[Razeyfingers]

Well, technically it's 50%, but I would wager that it is more like... 97.5% (I made that number up). I'm sure the reasoning is obvious: since there was a 50% chance the past 20 times, it stands to reason that the chance of heads is even greater since -

Why am I even bothering with this? It wasn't even your point.

I mean, you are bringing up a good and very valid point, but my main response is: no poo!

Haa, nah I was really just posting that in reference to:

It's kind of funny that Clausen was a 2nd round pick with a 1st round grade by everybody in the whole world...except for 31 out of 32 general managers.

Its not like 31 out of 32 wouldnt have drafted him if they didnt already have 2 QB's they were comfortable with. Not to mention it seemed that this draft was very deep so everybody was busy trying to load up rather than draft Clausen.

[Mr. Scot]

Any number of factors can put a guy in the second round, need being a big one.

It's been said, but I'll reiterate that it's not really true that 31 teams passed on him. Some of those teams didn't really need a quarterback, and certainly not in the first round. Lord knows the Panthers have passed on QBs before too, and some of them succeeded just fine.

With that said, there were indeed teams that needed him - or at least could have used him - that chose to pass for one reason or another. Of course, plenty of GMs passed on Randy Moss too.

[Cyberjag]

Looking at all the first and second rounders over the past 20 years has little to do with whether Clausen will be successful or not. Frankly we have done pretty good with guys like Jake and Matt who weren't even drafted. I expect that Clausen will do fairly well when he gets a chance. It really doesn't matter how other guys in the second round did in the past. There really is no relationship between them and him. Just like the possibility of getting a heads when you flip a coin is 50% even if the last 20 flips all came up tails.

Each individual flip is 50%, but if you're looking at an element of an entire data set then the other results do influence your prediction. Based on the last 20 years, it looks like there's a 1 in 4 chance that any QB taken in the first two rounds becomes an eventual quality starter.

Quarterbacks taken past the 1st round have won 5 out of the last 10 super bowls.

The whole "2nd round QB's are usually busts" thing is bullshit. For every star 1st overall QB, there is a bust 1st overall QB. For every elite perennial pro bowler/hall of famer/etc taken in the draft, there is a bust that was taken at that same pick.

No risk, no reward.

I agree with this. But I think that a lot of posters here are assuming that Clausen's going to be a hit. I think that there's a good chance of it, base on what I've read about his work ethic and on his situation (he would probably crash and burn if he was in St. Louis, for instance). But based on history it's still more likely than not that he'll fail.

There are still people here who are sold on Dwayne Jarrett as a receiver, right? It just doesn't always work out, especially at skill positions.

So I'm glad Moore's around. And I really hope Clausen's for real.

[panthers55]

Each individual flip is 50%, but if you're looking at an element of an entire data set then the other results do influence your prediction. Based on the last 20 years, it looks like there's a 1 in 4 chance that any QB taken in the first two rounds becomes an eventual quality starter.

So does that mean that Clausen has a 25% chance of being an eventually starter? Absolutely not. That is like looking at how many teams have an UDFA as their starting quarterback and extrapolating about how successful Moore will be. That data is fine to use to evaluate the past but not relevant in predicting the future.

[Cyberjag]

It means that the probability he's an eventual starter is around 25%, and even less so that he's an eventual starter for the Panthers. As an individual, he's got as much chance as the next guy to make it, whether that guy's the number one overall pick or someone off the street.

I want to believe. I wanted to believe in Eric Shelton and Dwayne Jarrett too. I think the difference is work ethic, and hope that it all works out. But I don't think I'll be getting too excited about him yet.

[panthers55]

It means that the probability he's an eventual starter is around 25%, and even less so that he's an eventual starter for the Panthers. As an individual, he's got as much chance as the next guy to make it, whether that guy's the number one overall pick or someone off the street.

I want to believe. I wanted to believe in Eric Shelton and Dwayne Jarrett too. I think the difference is work ethic, and hope that it all works out. But I don't think I'll be getting too excited about him yet.

No it doesn't predict anything about him in particular or about his chance to start. For example do you think that Matt Ryan had a 25% of being the starter in Atlanta 2 years ago? He was named the starter before the season started. The likelihood that a first or second rounder in general will be a starter is a far different matter than saying that a particular guy will be a starter for his team at some point because looking at all the first and second rounder over the past 20 years there was a 25% success rate. And that is the point. For example saying that over 50% of running backs never make it to their 4th year doesn't mean that Stewart for example only has a 50% to make it to his fifth year. One is descriptive while the other is predictive. They are very different. The difference is extrapolating a general statistic which assumes everything is equal to a specific scenario with a particular player.

[Razeyfingers]

If that 25% number came from where I think it did you might be a little off, my friend. I think you need at least 1000 (10000 would be more accurate) different draftees to look at for your data for an assumption like that to pass for accurate probability. Also those statistics dont represent or include in any way, modern changes in the NFL (Like QB's in the 50's needing to be able to run and take hits more so than pass)

To me, Clausen will have every chance in the world to shine here in Carolina for many reasons. I would say Im optimistic but I guess what Im really saying is that players who have been drafted in the past have exactly 0 to do with that. The variables you want to be looking at or the ones that are right here right now. Does he have a run game? Does he have a good O line? Does he have a receiver? etc. That being said, I am very grateful for having Moore on this team at the moment.