Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: So You Want To Draft A QB?
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
Pages: 1, 2
nephillymike
There have been 40 QB's drafted from 2006-2012 in the first three rounds of the draft.

20 have been drafted in the 1st round, 12 in the 2nd, 8 in the 3rd.

Rating the QB's on the following scale:

1. Multi Year Pro Bowl Player
2. Very Good Starter w/ occassional Pro Bowl
3. Solid Starter
4. Weak Starter or Backup
5. Bust.

If you are drafting a QB in the first three rounds, anything less than a "3" is a blown draft pick IMO. A 1 or 2 would be a home run pick IMO.

Here are the results by round of the 40 QB picked since 2006. I only rated 38 as two, Mallet and O'Connell, both 3rd round picks of the Patriots, have gotten no playing time b/c of Tom Brady's health and excellence.

Rating...#1st......#2nd.......#3rd.#Tot.....%1st...%2nd.....%3rd....%Tot
1............2............0............0......2........10%.....0%........0%......5%
2............4............0............1......5........20%.....0%......12.5%...12.5%
3............4............2............1......7........20%....17%......12.5%..17.5%
4............6............4............2.....12.......30%....33%......25%......30%
5............4............6............2.....12.......20%....50%......25%......30%
TBD........0............0............2......2.........0%......0%......25%.......5%
Total......20...........12..........8.....40.......100......100......100........100

So the blown pick ratio is 50% 1st round, 83% 2nd round and 60% 3rd round.
The home run pick ratio is 30% 1st round, 0% 2nd round, 12.5% 3rd round

Lends credence to two things: #1, the bust rate for QB's is very high and #2, if you want to hit a home run, get one in the 1st round. Two ends of the spectrum working the same problem.

I'll detail of how I had everyone rated in a later edit.
D Rock
Nice post. I'd be curIous to see how these % compare to players at other positions. Is the whiff rate similar for WRs, CBs, PassRushers? The old cliche re draft = crp shoot applies universally, not just to QBs.

Also interesting to include would be how a particular pick was drafted compared to his consensus ranking. Blaine Gabbert for example, was projected as a 2nd/3rd rounder. Jax reached and took him at #10. Does his failure (or that of the Jags front office) screw the numbers disproportionately down for first rounders?
nephillymike
QUOTE (D Rock @ Apr 1 2013, 09:48 PM) *
Nice post. I'd be curIous to see how these % compare to players at other positions. Is the whiff rate similar for WRs, CBs, PassRushers? The old cliche re draft = crp shoot applies universally, not just to QBs.

Also interesting to include would be how a particular pick was drafted compared to his consensus ranking. Blaine Gabbert for example, was projected as a 2nd/3rd rounder. Jax reached and took him at #10. Does his failure (or that of the Jags front office) screw the numbers disproportionately down for first rounders?



I know the home run ratio is very good for OT in the first round. I have a post a while ago that has some numbers in it if I can find it. I heard that the failure rate for QB's is higher than other positions but I have never analyzed it personally. Maybe the reach factor contributes to it.
nephillymike
Here's how I categorized the QB's drafted in the first three rounds since 2006. With Luck, RGIII and Newton, I think you'll get one Multi year PB player and two VG starters with occassional PB's out of the three.

Multi Year Pro Bowl Players

1st Round - Griffin, Ryan
2nd Round - none
3rd Round - none

Very Good Starter w/ Occassional Pro Bowls

1st Round - Luck, Newton, Stafford, Flacco
2nd Round - none
3rd Round - Wilson

Solid Starter

1st Round - Tannehill, Ponder, Bradford, Cutler
2nd Round - Dalton, Kapernick
3rd Round - Foles (a projection on my part, but his yr 1 stats are historic for rookies)

Weak Starter/Backup

1st Round - Weedon, Locker,Gabbert,Sanchez, Freeman, Young
2nd Round - Osweiller, Henne, Kolb, T. Jackson
3rd Round - C. McCoy, Edwards

Bust

1st Round - Tebow, Russell, Quinn, Leinhart
2nd Round - Clausen, White, Brohm, Beck, Stanton, Clemens
3rd Round - Whitehurst, Croyle

TBD - 3rd Round - Mallet, O'Connell

You may be able to argue to move this guy up and this guy down etc, but overall I think the distribution is pretty close.

Zero
Interesting that you grade Ryan lower than Luck.
nephillymike
QUOTE (Zero @ Apr 2 2013, 07:51 PM) *
Interesting that you grade Ryan lower than Luck.



Huh? Ryan is the top grade, Multi PB, while Luck is vg starter with occassional PB's.
D Rock
Ryan has been the beneficiary of some very good teams. I think 10 years from now, Luck will grade out better than Matty Ice.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Apr 2 2013, 09:20 PM) *
Ryan has been the beneficiary of some very good teams. I think 10 years from now, Luck will grade out better than Matty Ice.


Agreed. Ryan is a very solid QB. Capable of winning it all. Luck is a superstar in waiting.
Zero
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Apr 2 2013, 08:25 PM) *
Huh? Ryan is the top grade, Multi PB, while Luck is vg starter with occassional PB's.
Oops, I flipped them. I would think Luck would have been rated higher than Ryan.
nephillymike
For all of Luck's success, he threw a ton of INT"s and his passer rating was low. Lower than Foles BTW.

I agree he could become the top tier. Out of the top three new guys, Luck, Newton, and RGIII, I estimated one "1" and two "2's"
D Rock
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Apr 3 2013, 11:41 AM) *
For all of Luck's success, he threw a ton of INT"s and his passer rating was low. Lower than Foles BTW.

I agree he could become the top tier. Out of the top three new guys, Luck, Newton, and RGIII, I estimated one "1" and two "2's"

He also played with a roster that "earned" the #1 overall pick the previous season.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Apr 3 2013, 11:14 AM) *
He also played with a roster that "earned" the #1 overall pick the previous season.

Who built that roster again?

Two can play at this game tongue.gif
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 3 2013, 05:14 PM) *
Who built that roster again?

Two can play at this game tongue.gif

Yeah. He clearly sucks. They just give away those "NFL executive of the year" honors. Sometimes, they give em away 6 times to the same undeserving folks. Did Bill Pollian kick your dog?

rolleyes.gif
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Apr 3 2013, 12:14 PM) *
Yeah. He clearly sucks. They just give away those "NFL executive of the year" honors. Sometimes, they give em away 6 times to the same undeserving folks. Did Bill Pollian kick your dog?

rolleyes.gif

Yeah man, he was great in the 90's. What we clearly saw in Indianapolis was a guy that lucked into a once in a lifetime QB and road that for a decade. The teams he built in Indianapolis were trash had it not been for #18. We saw that in 2011.

If you're impressed that he had the foresight to draft Manning over Ryan Leaf, that makes one of us.

He built one SB winner in a quarter century as a GM. Consider me unimpressed.

He's irrelevant.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 3 2013, 06:29 PM) *
Yeah man, he was great in the 90's. What we clearly saw in Indianapolis was a guy that lucked into a once in a lifetime QB and road that for a decade. The teams he built in Indianapolis were trash had it not been for #18. We saw that in 2011.

If you're impressed that he had the foresight to draft Manning over Ryan Leaf, that makes one of us.

He built one SB winner in a quarter century as a GM. Consider me unimpressed.

He's irrelevant.

laugh.gif
GQSmooth
QUOTE (D Rock @ Apr 3 2013, 02:40 PM) *
laugh.gif

Are you promoting the same GM that advocated trading away #18? is he the one you want to hitch youre argument on as infallible?http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Irsay-Polian-wanted-to-trade-Manning-in-04.html
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 3 2013, 01:29 PM) *
Yeah man, he was great in the 90's. What we clearly saw in Indianapolis was a guy that lucked into a once in a lifetime QB and road that for a decade. The teams he built in Indianapolis were trash had it not been for #18. We saw that in 2011.

If you're impressed that he had the foresight to draft Manning over Ryan Leaf, that makes one of us.

He built one SB winner in a quarter century as a GM. Consider me unimpressed.

He's irrelevant.

11 seasons of double digit wins. That's not irrelevant. He may not be God, but definitely not irrelevant. Also keep in mind that he had a hand in building the Bills teams that went to 4 straight Superbowls.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Apr 3 2013, 08:28 PM) *
11 seasons of double digit wins. That's not irrelevant. He may not be God, but definitely not irrelevant. Also keep in mind that he had a hand in building the Bills teams that went to 4 straight Superbowls.

And as I said, that was with a once in a lifetime QB at the helm who never missed a game. Once that guy went down, we saw what type of roster he built (which just so happened to be one of the worst of all-time.)

I'm curious how successful he would have been had his wish come true and he traded Manning in '04 as GQ pointed out.

Based on those sweet defenses he put together in Indy, I suspect not so successful.

Chuck Knoll had a lot of success coaching football teams in the 70's. That doesn't mean he's qualified to be doing so now.

Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 3 2013, 10:33 PM) *
And as I said, that was with a once in a lifetime QB at the helm who never missed a game. Once that guy went down, we saw what type of roster he built (which just so happened to be one of the worst of all-time.)

You're ignoring Polian's history as a GM. He also built those Bills teams that won a bunch of games and dominated their conference for a nice stretch. If I am not mistaken, their D was pretty good. he also drafted a couple of (great) offensive players to compliment his All-World QB
-Jeff Saturday -Edgerrin James -Dallas Clark -Reggie Wayne ... to name a few

QUOTE
I'm curious how successful he would have been had his wish come true and he traded Manning in '04 as GQ pointed out.

Despite Peyton's great regular season stats, he has a tendency to disappear in the post season. Lesser QB's won SB's while Peyton was throwing game losing INT's. A franchise QB is a great luxury, but it also has its pitfalls. Spending 20% of your salary cap on a single player should cause you to look at your options....even if that QB is Manning (or Rodgers this season)

QUOTE
Based on those sweet defenses he put together in Indy, I suspect not so successful.

It stands to reason that the hiring of a defensive genius, as your HC, it should amount into a better D than what we saw from Indy.

I get that you don't agree with Polian's assessment of Geno, but to disregard his accomplishments (over his career) and limiting it to the performance of the team in his last couple suggests a bias. 140+ wins in 13 seasons by the team you assembled is a great accomplishment.
D Rock
QUOTE (GQSmooth @ Apr 3 2013, 07:46 PM) *
Are you promoting the same GM that advocated trading away #18? is he the one you want to hitch youre argument on as infallible?http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Irsay-Polian-wanted-to-trade-Manning-in-04.html

I'm not hitching my wagon to anything.

I'm just laughing at the delusions of grandeur that leads mcnabulous to believe himself a more qualified judge of NFL talent than ANY 6 time NFL executive of the year winner.

It's fucking hilarious.

laugh.gif

mcnabbulous
I'm not disregarding his career accomplishments. I'm disregarding his "accomplishments" in Indy. Because it was there that he failed to build a defense in a decade while spending premium pick after premium pick on offensive talent. This despite the fact that Manning proved he could thrive with less. Those skill position guys benefitted from playing with Peyton more than the other way around.

As for the "defensive genius" coach, that should tell you everything you need to know on the subject. You can only do so much when your talent is garbage. And Indy's defense was consistently garbage. That's on the GM. As it has been in Philly.

All but one of those wins came with Manning behind center. When he wasnt, Polian's team went 1-15. That's undeniable.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Apr 3 2013, 10:58 PM) *
I'm not hitching my wagon to anything.

I'm just laughing at the delusions of grandeur that leads mcnabulous to believe himself a more qualified judge of NFL talent than ANY 6 time NFL executive of the year winner.

It's fucking hilarious.

laugh.gif
We are talking about one player. Based on the 2011 Indianpolis Colts, I would say Bill Polian has been wrong far more often than right in recent seasons.

I was literally the first person on this board that identified Andy as unqualified to be calling the college personnel shots in Philly. When everyone else thought he should be exclusively a personnel guy. We see how that ended.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 4 2013, 12:01 AM) *
I'm not disregarding his career accomplishments. I'm disregarding his "accomplishments" in Indy. Because it was there that he failed to build a defense in a decade while spending premium pick after premium pick on offensive talent. This despite the fact that Manning proved he could thrive with less. Those skill position guys benefitted from playing with Peyton more than the other way around.

When did Peyton have less to "thrive" with?

QUOTE
As for the "defensive genius" coach, that should tell you everything you need to know on the subject. You can only do so much when your talent is garbage. And Indy's defense was consistently garbage. That's on the GM. As it has been in Philly.

That's the argument I used to support Brian Billick (offensive genius), yet you have no problems with calling him a hack.

QUOTE
All but one of those wins came with Manning behind center. When he wasnt, Polian's team went 1-15. That's undeniable.

It doesn't help a franchise when you have to use 20% of your available cap on a single player. These big name franchise elite QB's get the big money and then they also need support around them in order to produce. The team went 1-15 without Manning under center got the #1 pick (with a franchise QB waiting to be drafted) and then released Peyton. It smelled like a tank job which makes Isray's comments (regarding Polian) seem like a cover-up.
HobbEs
PFT adds more fuel to the fire. It's getting hot at Geno's...

Linky
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Apr 4 2013, 08:04 AM) *
When did Peyton have less to "thrive" with?
Peyton made everyone around him look better. Pierre Garçon, Dominic Rhodes, etc.

QUOTE
That's the argument I used to support Brian Billick (offensive genius), yet you have no problems with calling him a hack.
Two things: the Colts defense did improve under Dungy and were a capable unit. Not great, but capable. The fact that you cited 3 players above as proof that Polian knew what he was doing is telling enough. Sure Dwight Freeney and Bob Sanders (when he could stay on the field, too). If you think that haul over the course of 13 years is something to write home about, that makes one of us.


QUOTE
It doesn't help a franchise when you have to use 20% of your available cap on a single player. These big name franchise elite QB's get the big money and then they also need support around them in order to produce. The team went 1-15 without Manning under center got the #1 pick (with a franchise QB waiting to be drafted) and then released Peyton. It smelled like a tank job which makes Isray's comments (regarding Polian) seem like a cover-up.


You have to use that amount of money cause they are worth it. Or teams wouldn't do it.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 4 2013, 09:46 AM) *
Peyton made everyone around him look better. Pierre Garçon, Dominic Rhodes, etc.

That's subject to interpretation. No man is an island.

QUOTE
The fact that you cited 3 players above as proof that Polian knew what he was doing is telling enough.

I only cited the obvious players, because a GM is usually fortunate to draft 1 HOF player....when you draft a half dozen or more, you are doing a great job and have an eye for talent.

QUOTE
If you think that haul over the course of 13 years is something to write home about, that makes one of us.

I think their record over the the 14 year span is something to write home about. If you feel the GM had nothing to do with it, that makes you wrong....

QUOTE
You have to use that amount of money cause they are worth it. Or teams wouldn't do it.

Teams do it because it is the common thing to do. It takes a strong and powerful GM to decide not to play ball, because the adverse affects can be more damaging to the long term success of the team than the potential of losing a franchise QB. It also creates an alarming trend that has a negative impact on the game as a whole.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Apr 4 2013, 09:24 AM) *
I only cited the obvious players, because a GM is usually fortunate to draft 1 HOF player....when you draft a half dozen or more, you are doing a great job and have an eye for talent.

Those are the only obvious

QUOTE
I think their record over the the 14 year span is something to write home about. If you feel the GM had nothing to do with it, that makes you wrong....

Like I said, we saw what happened when they didn't have Peyton. 1-15.
QUOTE
Teams do it because it is the common thing to do. It takes a strong and powerful GM to decide not to play ball, because the adverse affects can be more damaging to the long term success of the team than the potential of losing a franchise QB. It also creates an alarming trend that has a negative impact on the game as a whole.

Which "strong and powerful" GM are you referring to? I can't name one SB winner in the past 10 who did so without a franchise QB. If you want to pretend they're not the biggest factor in determining whether a team has a chance to win a SB, that makes you wrong....
Phits
QUOTE (HobbEs @ Apr 4 2013, 09:20 AM) *
PFT adds more fuel to the fire. It's getting hot at Geno's...

Linky

Maycock also liked Mark Sanchez...correction "loved him some Mark Sanchez". Rating him higher than Freeman and Stafford in the '09 draft.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Apr 4 2013, 09:35 AM) *
Maycock also liked Mark Sanchez...correction "loved him some Mark Sanchez". Rating him higher than Freeman and Stafford in the '09 draft.

Yep. Every one of these "experts" has been wrong more than they've been right.
mcnabbulous
From the middle of the season. But does this sound like a guy that isn't going to work to get better every day?

He's not perfect, as few prospects are, but he's got nearly everything I could want in a draft prospect.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/845335...rite-geno-smith

I'm still waiting for someone to point out how he is a lesser prospect than Donovan was coming out of Syracuse.
mcnabbulous
Kiper mocks Geno to the Eagles:

Link

QUOTE
"There are two realities the Eagles must face in evaluating their future at quarterback," wrote Kiper. "One is that Michael Vick, while an intriguing fit under Chip Kelly, isn't a long-term solution, even if we're optimistic. Two, there's no such thing as a useful free-agent market of starting quarterbacks in this league. If you have a great quarterback, or even a pretty good one, you're going to lock him up. In drafting Smith, the Eagles are in a good position to develop an athletic, talented thrower to succeed specifically in Kelly's offense, but without the requirement that he must start from day one. I don't like the idea of Smith as a Week 1 starter in 2013 -- but for a roster that's already in a good position to compete this season, he could be a great fit for the franchise in 2014, and most importantly, a great fit for the coach."


Couldn't agree more.
D Rock
QUOTE (HobbEs @ Apr 4 2013, 01:20 PM) *
PFT adds more fuel to the fire. It's getting hot at Geno's...

Linky

yup
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 4 2013, 06:06 PM) *
Kiper mocks Geno to the Eagles:

Couldn't agree more.

Yeah yeah yeah. . .

We know.

Agreeing with you = genius.

Kiper? Really? I'm betting if I look back on this board, I can find at least a half dozen examples of you dismissing Kiper too.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 4 2013, 04:53 PM) *
From the middle of the season. But does this sound like a guy that isn't going to work to get better every day?

He's not perfect, as few prospects are, but he's got nearly everything I could want in a draft prospect.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/845335...rite-geno-smith

I'm still waiting for someone to point out how he is a lesser prospect than Donovan was coming out of Syracuse.

At the middle of the season, he had only begun shitting the bed. He was still in the heisman conversation. Alas, he had only just begun his 5 game losing streak.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Apr 4 2013, 01:47 PM) *
Yeah yeah yeah. . .

We know.

Agreeing with you = genius.

Kiper? Really? I'm betting if I look back on this board, I can find at least a half dozen examples of you dismissing Kiper too.

What the hell are you talking about? I think you're going crazy. I never said anything about anyone being a genius. I don't think Kiper's opinion is any more or less valid than any of the other talking heads.

I've met the dude, and he's actually really nice, but I don't treat any of these draft pundits as anything more than talking heads.

I agree with him on his assessment of Geno though. I don't necessarily think I would want to roll him out as our starter in 2013. That shouldn't be the lone criteria for drafting a guy at the top though.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Apr 4 2013, 01:50 PM) *
At the middle of the season, he had only begun shitting the bed. He was still in the heisman conversation. Alas, he had only just begun his 5 game losing streak.

So 18TD's to 6INT's is shitting the bed?

I could make a pretty strong argument that giving up 49.6ppg contributed more to that 5 game losing streak than Geno's play.

Edit: Over that 5 game streak it was actually 11/5 TD/INT. The 18/6 was how he finished the season after his 25/0 start.
HobbEs
Kiper? Seriously?? ROFLMAO

Has helmet head gotten anything right in the last few years? But FWIW I saw a mock that has Smith going to the Jags at 2. Could be the only way to get him is to trade with KC.
mcnabbulous
Trent Dilfer must be a genius!!!!!

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=9117467
Jeromesfriend
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Apr 1 2013, 09:37 PM) *
So the blown pick ratio is 50% 1st round, 83% 2nd round and 60% 3rd round.
The home run pick ratio is 30% 1st round, 0% 2nd round, 12.5% 3rd round

Lends credence to two things: #1, the bust rate for QB's is very high and #2, if you want to hit a home run, get one in the 1st round. Two ends of the spectrum working the same problem.


This is pretty cool stuff. The first round is clearly boom or bust. I'm of the opinion the Eagles should draft Geno Smith. I think since the installment of the rookie wage scale, drafting a QB is less risky than it once was (so busts are less costly). And the 2014 QB class is supposedly stacked with talent, so could serve as a very good Plan B for the Chipper. I'd be interested to see if there was a difference in your percentages from pre-CBA to post-CBA.
HobbEs
QUOTE
This is pretty cool stuff. The first round is clearly boom or bust. I'm of the opinion the Eagles should draft Geno Smith. I think since the installment of the rookie wage scale, drafting a QB is less risky than it once was (so busts are less costly). And the 2014 QB class is supposedly stacked with talent, so could serve as a very good Plan B for the Chipper. I'd be interested to see if there was a difference in your percentages from pre-CBA to post-CBA.


By the same token...if the QB class of 2014 is stacked then I'd rather wait until 2014. I would take the BPA and see how Foles or Vick fare. We have holes all over this team and you don't gamble with a pick this high.
Jeromesfriend
QUOTE (HobbEs @ Apr 5 2013, 03:27 PM) *
By the same token...if the QB class of 2014 is stacked then I'd rather wait until 2014. I would take the BPA and see how Foles or Vick fare. We have holes all over this team and you don't gamble with a pick this high.


BUT... The QB class of 1999 was also "stacked". If an opportunity presents itself in the NFL (like having the 4th pick in the draft with Geno Smith the best available) then you have to take advantage of it now, else it be squandered. I don't think it would be wise to rely on a QB in next year's draft. But knowing there could be one next year lessens the risk. It's why I think if the Eagles don't pick Smith, they will draft another QB if they have the chance. Maybe EJ Manuel or Matt Scott.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HobbEs @ Apr 5 2013, 03:27 PM) *
you don't gamble with a pick this high.

Meh, every pick is a gamble. Taking the best Sr. QB with limitless potential is no riskier than drafting a LT from Central Michigan. It just has more upside.
Zero
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 5 2013, 03:43 PM) *
Meh, every pick is a gamble. Taking the best Sr. QB with limitless potential is no riskier than drafting a LT from Central Michigan. It just has more upside.

"... limitless potential"? I realize that the reviews are mixed by the pundits/professionals but I haven't read anything coming close to "limitless" about him.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Zero @ Apr 5 2013, 06:38 PM) *
"... limitless potential"? I realize that the reviews are mixed by the pundits/professionals but I haven't read anything coming close to "limitless" about him.

Runs a 4.59 40, has an extremely strong arm and has, at minimum, solid accuracy.

What else is there that people want in a QB prospect? No one questions this guys upside. The questions are about mechanics, which people that know him claim he will work relentlessly to improve...and his work ethic...which people that know him claim isn't an issue at all.

Seriously, the only thing I hear any of the talking heads say is that he, "missed a number of throws that he should have completed." This while also saying, "his footwork needs work."

So we are talking about a guy with all the physical skills that has never worked with an NFL caliber coach to teach him the mechanics necessary to play more consistently. It's about as solvable as a problem as you could ask for.

I grow more and more convinced on a daily basis that we'd be crazy not to draft this guy. And I have a good feeling that our FO feels the same. I just hope Jacksonville doesn't take him and spoil the party.
nephillymike
I don't know McN.

You say if he's Tannehill talent and results, you pick him at 4. (He's rated very similar to Tannehill last year)

I look at nine different sources of prospect rankings and his rankings are 24,19,48,9,15,30,19,12 and 5.

When compared to other prospects, he ranked 18th overall if you remove the high and low and 18th overall if you just take the average. I have not heard one person say he is a top four talent.

Also worth mentioning is that the opinions of him are very wide for a pick that high as the disparity of his rank is among the highest five of the top 25 picks.

While I don't believe most of the opinion of the PFW dude, I think I'm leaning against it. I'm not in the mood for a bunch of risk with the 4th pick in this year's draft. Give me the stud OT from Central Michigan, or Floyd, or Joeckel. Jordan if they're all gone.
Reality Fan
I like Mike Mayock alot so I do value his opinion more than most others I read and he is pretty damning on Smith. I started watching Gino this year because it was a great story and I got to see quite a few WV games. Personally I don't like him very much and much of what Mayock say s is my concern with Smith. While he does have some gaudy numbers I think a lot has to do with Rodriguez's system and some great skill players. I don't know if he will be a good or bad pick and he may be a better version of McNabb but if I was making the pick I would not take him. For everyone that hates Vick for the turnovers I don't get the thrill of taking Smith because for all his TDs and lack of INTs I see a ton of fumbles.
nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Apr 5 2013, 08:32 PM) *
I like Mike Mayock alot so I do value his opinion more than most others I read and he is pretty damning on Smith. I started watching Gino this year because it was a great story and I got to see quite a few WV games. Personally I don't like him very much and much of what Mayock say s is my concern with Smith. While he does have some gaudy numbers I think a lot has to do with Rodriguez's system and some great skill players. I don't know if he will be a good or bad pick and he may be a better version of McNabb but if I was making the pick I would not take him. For everyone that hates Vick for the turnovers I don't get the thrill of taking Smith because for all his TDs and lack of INTs I see a ton of fumbles.



FWIW, Mayock had him rated as the 19th best prospect, which is real close to my composite ranking of 18. Everyone needs to be careful. Depending on what "mood" you get a draft analyst in (or the person asking the questions), their words may not match their rank. I heard Mayock say the other day some less than flattering things about Smith. He didn't rip him but didn't praise him either. I just wanted the person who was interviewing him ask where did he have him ranked (19th) which would have put his criticism in context. I like Mayock too. One thing he said though which gave me pause, was that he (Mayock) still had a ton of work to do to finalize his opinions of the prospects. Really, a ton? College career is over, combine is over, Pro days are done. What is the "ton" of work he has to do? Interview with kindergarten teachers?? I'm watching the rankings to see how much they change between now and the draft.
Eyrie
QUOTE (HobbEs @ Apr 5 2013, 09:27 PM) *
By the same token...if the QB class of 2014 is stacked then I'd rather wait until 2014. I would take the BPA and see how Foles or Vick fare. We have holes all over this team and you don't gamble with a pick this high.

Spot on.

Let's solidify the rest of the team and bed in the new system on offense before adding a rookie QB to learn it. He'll have a better chance of success in the NFL if he's surrounded by players who know what they're doing than if all eleven guys are still working out their own roles.

It's another reason in favour of taking a T at #4, because having an elite OL will make life simpler for the rookie QB.

And who knows? Foles may show this season that he can be our QB of the future, or Vick may suddenly cure all his faults and either way we won't need a QB after all.
Zero
I am repeatedly frustrated by everyone who utters "Kelly's system." He may very well use the same type of offense he used in Oregon, but he also continues to tell us that he will adjust his offense to the talent. I submit that "we" don't know what his offense is yet ("we" encompasses everyone and probably includes Kelly to a large degree).

It was Andy who would draft players to fit his system and it is this new guy who claims he is going to do the opposite. We don't have any history to show what he will do, but I'm taking the man at his word and assuming he'll draft the BPA and find a way to fit the system to those talents. Kelly is not Andy.

Foles could very well be the Eagles' QB of the future. If Foles is smart, sees things quickly and reacts fast and if he can get the ball out fast isn't that what Kelly has said he wants in his QB? How mobile is Manning or Brady? I'm not saying Foles is that good, but a QB doesn't need to be a RB to play for Chipadoodle ... IMO. Didn't Kelly win with some unknown, stationary QB who ended up transferring to Montana?

I'm just puzzled by keeping Vick. Not because he can't play, although there are arguments to support that, but because he's older and more susceptible to injury. New coaches, many new and younger players and likely new offensive and defensive approaches. Why teach an old cat that won't be around for long when you've got a bunch of young players who likely will?
nephillymike
Sal Pal was on with Mikey Miss yesterday and chimed in with what could be alarming stats for Foles fans.

He said he went back and looked at the best offenses that Chip has had as HC or OC, and that those offenses averaged 125 runs by the QB. He said Foles does not provide the speed to do that and Vick does not provide the body to be able to last thru that. Vick ran 70 times recently and got hurt on more than a few of them.

So even if you reduce the 125 "ideal" to 75, which is a significant reduction, is their any chance Foles is the guy? With a clean slate of a new coach, is it likely that Kelly hitches his wagon to an offense that is not his ideal from his experience?

Didn't sound promisiing for us Foles fans.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.