Gabbert question

[Sword]

^ That's interesting..so now i have 2 points.

1. His name is Blaine Gabbert

2. Even Science proves he doesn't have mechanics for the deep ball

[mav1234]

http://atomic5.com/dr-yessis-analyzes-draft-choice-blaine-gabbert

hahaha, if you think that is bad, don't even look at what he has to say about Cam Newton.

if you watch the video he is analyzing film of him from last year.. He still notes how accurate he is, how good his footwork he has, and how with some improvements he could be great. Gabbert also looks different throwing the ball this year compared to last year. I think his throwing motion may have changed, though I doubt it changed as much as he says it needs to.

Compare this to what he said about Newton:

"He was not consistent."

"...really needs to work on his skill and his throwing ability... if a receiver received it, it wasn't because of his excellence in throwing..."

"position of his elbow is out in front... he's going to have to throw hard, snapping his elbow, this is what is going to create problems and he could get injured very easily."

He did say that Newton makes some great throws, and does have at least a somewhat solid base, he just is not at all consistent... which I think he repeated a million times, blech.

btw this guy's most famous understudy was apparently Todd Marinovich. >.>

Do not want either QB. Not that this guy made me like Gabbert or Newton any less though,.

[frash.exe]

^ That's interesting..so now i have 2 points.

1. His name is Blaine Gabbert

2. Even Science proves he doesn't have mechanics for the deep ball

depends on how you look at it.

if Shula's a guy that can teach the proper form and technique, then I think we should take the chance, but besides helping Garrard somewhat shed his reputation as a checkdown passer, I don't know a whole lot about Shula to automatically assume he is capable of teaching that, and I wouldn't draft this guy if my QB coach is Mike McCoy.

[panthers55]

There's nothing esoteric about using interception per attempt. It's a more useful metric than TD/INT ratio and it is used by various analysts and hell it even has a place in that retarded formula that claims Pike is a star sitting on our bench. Same goes for TD per attempt. If you want to talk about if a guy has good judgment and protects the ball, you'd have to look at ints per attempt. I'm not saying that you should parse every stat to compare guys to get who is better - hell, not at all. I'm just saying that if you haven't seen a guy play much (and I'm assuming you haven't based on the things you have said) and you're using stats to try to augment what you've seen and read, you might be more interested in a different way of looking at it.

Plus, comparing college stats mean absolutely nothing at the next level. They're fun to debate, but they really don't matter. What does matter is how a player will translate, what tools he'll bring with him. College and pro ball are exceptionally different. Sure, Newton had better college stats. I still am not sold he'll be a better pro.

Plenty of great college players - Heisman winners, national championship winners, people with amazing single seasons - have just not been able to translate to the NFL. So you can't really try to look at stats that much. Sure, Newton's were impressive, and he was fun to watch, but it's more important what he will do at the next level.

I watched Gabbert play more the second half of the year which is perhaps why I have a somewhat concerned viewpoint. after going 7-0 early, once teams figured out the spread he struggled quite a bit against mediocre competition.

As for that stat it is only really relevant when you compare Ints to Tds. If a Qb throws the ball away or dumping it short except when a guy is wide open his INT as a percentage of attempts is likely good but his TDs are likely not that high. And your likely yards per attempt are low like gabbert's at 6.7. Compare that to his main competiton who had 2 times as many TDs on half the throws for a Yards per attempt of 10.2 yards and you have a guy who is throwing it down the field and taking chances while still limiting Ints.

[Marguide]

People in this thread have made comments on Blaine's accuracy, and that it is the best of the QB's in the draft. My question is...based on what? His pro day? Is there some other evidence?

His completion percentages were 58.9 and 63.4 respectively in 2009 and 2010. These are not at the top of the class of QB's.

[chef17]

Once again you are getting out in left field. No one is saying this is a one man game or football isn't a team sport but lets get real here. When you are down by multiple scores and your quarterback goes on a tear and brings you back, yeah, he won it for you.

Some people here do act like Newton was a one man show and came back by himself. My point again, the WHOLE team stepped up, not just Cam.

[DaCityKats]

Some people here do act like Newton was a one man show and came back by himself. My point again, the WHOLE team stepped up, not just Cam.

Even with the team stepping up, take Cam away from Auburn and they lose.

[chef17]

Even with the team stepping up, take Cam away from Auburn and they lose.

Take away the defense and they lose as well. Take the Alabama game. Auburn defense allowed 24 1st half points, 3 2nd half points. Auburn won the game by 1. Without the defense stepping up in a major way they get blown out.

[DaCityKats]

i hate this, didnt realize this was a gabbert thread but the defense didnt score any points last i checked as well. so even tho they scored 3 points in the 2nd half they still would have lost if the O didnt produce.

[Lout]

I hear you and can't argue with most of that, but isn't "pocket presence" key in the NFL, and does it not also factor into the "intangible" category?

I don't claim to have the answer, but I hope our scouts and decision makers do, and I would rather they not draft a guy #1 overall with questions like that at large.

Yes, it's a very big red flag. I suppose when Mayock says his intangibles are off the charts, I think he meant Leadership and Toughness, among other things. But, yes poise in the pocket also falls under that category. He kind of contradicted himself.

[mav1234]

Yes, it's a very big red flag. I suppose when Mayock says his intangibles are off the charts, I think he meant Leadership and Toughness, among other things. But, yes poise in the pocket also falls under that category. He kind of contradicted himself.

Kind of, I think the thing you have to realize is that Mayock, McShay, etc... none of them think Gabbert is a #1 pick in this draft UNLESS a team reaches for a QB. They recognize he has issues.

ESPN's ScoutInc guys seem to think that the pocket presence this is a bit overblown and that it was mostly due to the fact he had lineman in his face all the time. I dunno.

[Lout]

People in this thread have made comments on Blaine's accuracy, and that it is the best of the QB's in the draft. My question is...based on what? His pro day? Is there some other evidence?

His completion percentages were 58.9 and 63.4 respectively in 2009 and 2010. These are not at the top of the class of QB's.

Everything I am reading is he has exceptional accuracy on short and intermediate routes, but struggles on the deep ball accuracy.. he showed during his pro day that he can throw the deep routes with accuracy as well. The funny thing is, Cam Newton's deep ball accuracy is even worse, but nobody is knocking him for it. And Newton could not dispell those woe's at his pro day or combine.

[Lout]

Kind of, I think the thing you have to realize is that Mayock, McShay, etc... none of them think Gabbert is a #1 pick in this draft UNLESS a team reaches for a QB. They recognize he has issues.

ESPN's ScoutInc guys seem to think that the pocket presence this is a bit overblown and that it was mostly due to the fact he had lineman in his face all the time. I dunno.

I have heard the contrary from Mayock. He said, Gabbert has all the tools to be the #1 overall pick if the Carolina Panthers believe that Clausen is not their franchise guy. He said Gabbert is worth the #1 pick if that's the case because a franchise QB trumps all. I do not follow McShay because I believe he is a tool, and does not have any real sources.. most NFL scouts despise the guy.

[Ricky Spanish]

I have heard the contrary from Mayock. He said, Gabbert has all the tools to be the #1 overall pick if the Carolina Panthers believe that Clausen is not their franchise guy. He said Gabbert is worth the #1 pick if that's the case because a franchise QB trumps all. I do not follow McShay because I believe he is a tool, and does not have any real sources.. most NFL scouts despise the guy.

if you think that a QB you are looking at can be a franchise guy, you take him as soon as you possibly can.