IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

Haha...it was less of an actual idea than a point.

Damnit. I was hoping we'd engage in a Gut-Tripp battle. But you can't even humor me there

[GTripp0012]

The toughest obsticle for a late-round prospect to overcome is a lack of height. I don't think being short is a deal breaker if you go high and you find a coaching staff and organization that believes in you: Brees' 67% completion mark with NO proves that you can create a system that shorter players who are accurate can excel in. But you don't have that advantage if you are short and have to come in and take your lumps backing up in a pro-style offense behind a more traditional quarterback.

So in the later rounds, I look for taller players who have quick releases and can project well. In the earlier rounds, I want the entire package with very few flaws.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Damnit. I was hoping we'd engage in a Gut-Tripp battle. But you can't even humor me there

I'd like to go 6,000 words on the existence and role of the draft fairy, but only if you'll oblige.

[BuckSkin]

Newton with the 10th this year and Pryor with the 13th next year, slap #2 on both. I feel like Matt Millen now!

[wilsowilso]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

In the earlier rounds, I want the entire package with very few flaws.

The bust rate for top tier NFL prospect QB's has always been and will always be high.

Why is that?

Professional evaluators f this transition up at an astronomical rate.

Me thinks the evaluation PACKAGE for half of these talent projecting clowns is terribly flawed.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I'd like to go 6,000 words on the existence and role of the draft fairy, but only if you'll oblige.

I'm afraid you actually would

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

I don't think much of Taylor's success as a QB in the NFL. I've watched enough of both he and Newton to realize the two are quite indistinguishable from each on the field other than their height.

But taking a flyer on Taylor in the 4th (I knew and know we don't have one) seems like a helluva better deal than drafting Cam Newton at 10. We don't have the luxury of drafting players with gigantic potential downsides like he does.

Your bottom line is why Newton probably isn't a good investment at number ten. We have one other example of a Gus Malzahn QB going to the next level, with Mitch Mustain going from high school to division I college. Mustain couldn't get to the top of the depth chart at two different schools.

Newton, from the pocket, is probably the strongest player in the draft. He's got a quick release, and is accurate. He does not make particularly great decisions, and for a guy who played in a one-two read system in college, he's not as good before the snap as I would like. I think he's good enough, but if I'm using the 10th overall pick, I'd like more than "good enough" to possibly make it at the pros.

Gabbert, to me, gives me everything I'm looking for in a top ten quarterback. If he's gone, I think we need to look elsewhere. Ryan Mallett would be a small reach at no. 10 and I see no reason to think Shanahan interested, but Mallett would be defensible if Gabbert is gone. I'd find it hard to get too excited if we drafted Mallett. I'd rather have Ponder.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by wilsowilso

The bust rate for top tier NFL prospect QB's has always been and will always be high.

Why is that?

Professional evaluators f this transition up at an astronomical rate.

Me thinks the evaluation PACKAGE for half of these talent projecting clowns is terribly flawed.

Methinks you're right.

Some guys who are drafted high were just poor college players (Ryan Leaf, David Carr, Matt Stafford). QB Demand usually exceeds the number of quality prospects. That's the other reason.

There are good prospects in this draft. I just feel like of the 3 or 4 first rounders, you're really going to take 1 or 2 who deserve to go that high, and 2 others who just don't measure up because teams NEED someone who can be the face of their organization and can't wait.

Which is to say, there are better players later on in the draft, but those players aren't always distinguishable from each other (and I think teams know this), and so teams with needs shrink the supply to just 3 or 4 guys, and don't give anyone else a chance. I could say "Cam Newton's body of work says third-fourth round pick", and I'd probably be right. But you take one look at Cam Newton, and you KNOW he's going in the first round. Some team will fall in love with him. He brings tangible skills that you can't get later.

That's why a draft is usually only going to produce 1, maybe 2 guys who get second contracts with their teams.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by Lotus

I wonder if we should be thinking about the 3rd or 4th rounds, where we have no picks. Certainly we might get more picks in trades. But with the CBA uncertainty, there is a chance that there will be no trading of players until after the draft. What this means is that we might get only 2012 draft picks in trades.

All I was really responding to was the fan upset that we could not simply answer the question as posted with out all the extra diatribe. Unfortunately the QB I like and would like to see the Skins pick up was not on the list. Which is why I originally gave a diatribe about what I'd do with the #10 pick. So I gave him the simple answer .... I'd take Andy Dalton.

On another note I mention taking a OL cause we have need there and people say that's too high. I mention taking a NT and other people say that's too high. I mention LB/DE and people say that's too high.

So can anyone please tell me what's appropriate to take in the first round without saying WR, CB, and RB? Is FS a safe answer cause we have need there also.

[Son Of Man]

Jake Locker

I think this guy will be our franchise QB and the undisputed leader on offense within a couple of years!!!

[SBXVII]

also for those who just don't get it, if you selected "other" we were to explain who and why. My other choice was Dalton, I explained why. He's clearly a 3rd or 4th round pick unless something changes. So I explained that I'd take a different position so I wouldn't get blasted with "that's too high to take him."

[Texanskin]

Originally Posted by cdskins26

Locker or newton will be successful on the redskins if they are properly coached by shannahans. If either are subject to what campbell went through, they probably will do the same thing, and be a mediocre starter. Start them when they are ready, and build the team around them.

hear hear...well...maybe not Locker...because he didnt perform well against top competition...while Cam Newton did.....See the Alabama game....on the road!

[skinsfaninok]

Studs and duds picked at No. 10

[30gut]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I don't think we can just ignore what Locker's statistics say just because they don't always match up with the film. It's hard to make any completely conclusive statements based on only statistics, but I would argue that "Jake Locker is not worthy of the 10th overall selection" is one of those statements.

The bolded underlined portion of your quote is another fundamental disagreement that we touched on earlier.
Evaluation isn't done by sitting around looking at stats.
Talent evaluators know this that is why they look at film its part of the reason for events like the Senior Bowl and the combine.
Its a controlled situation where the prospect can be evaluated independent of the talent or lack thereof around them.
I mentioned how one of the greatest QB talent evaluators didn't even mention college stats as part of evaluation criteria.

Everyone knows the QBs because of positional value are drafted higher then grade.
The question wasn't where should Locker get drafted the question was IF we take a QB at 10 who do you want?

I can isolate a single statistic from the rest of the picture and show how rare it is for someone who can't complete passes to be successful.

You think you can isolate a single stats.
Which once again is a blind reliance on the stats.
And you're assuming he can't complete passes based on his comp % rather then watching him play.

If a GREAT team were to take a flyer on Jake Locker and then tear him down and try to rebuild his mechanics, maybe you get a different player entirely.

This is another empty statement that could be used for any QB w/o support.
One could insert Gabbert's name in place of Locker above and the statement would still be valid.

BTW-You seem to value stats correct? Well look at the efficiency.
Gabbert and Locker despite the void in their team's talent levels have about the same efficieny rating.

I'm gonna let this discussion go b/c its pointless.
But, you strike me as someone that really hasn't evaluated Locker at all you maybe saw the Bowl game and looked at his stats and made your conclusions.

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

He does not make particularly great decisions, and for a guy who played in a one-two read system in college, he's not as good before the snap as I would like. I think he's good enough, but if I'm using the 10th overall pick, I'd like more than "good enough" to possibly make it at the pros.

Gabbert, to me, gives me everything I'm looking for in a top ten quarterback. If he's gone, I think we need to look elsewhere. Ryan Mallett would be a small reach at no. 10 and I see no reason to think Shanahan interested, but Mallett would be defensible if Gabbert is gone. I'd find it hard to get too excited if we drafted Mallett. I'd rather have Ponder.

Gabbert shares the same flaws as you mention for Newton.
Mizzou has a spread attack and Gabbert regularly only reads half the field.
Personally i don't view that as a knock b/c Sam Bradford and many other QBs only read half the field in the NFL.
But, if you're gonna knock one prospect for operating in 1 or 2 read system, you gotta be fair.
Also, college QBs in general don't make a lot of pre-snap reads.
Reading coverages is something they'll learn as they progress in NFL.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

All I was really responding to was the fan upset that we could not simply answer the question as posted with out all the extra diatribe. Unfortunately the QB I like and would like to see the Skins pick up was not on the list. Which is why I originally gave a diatribe about what I'd do with the #10 pick. So I gave him the simple answer .... I'd take Andy Dalton.

On another note I mention taking a OL cause we have need there and people say that's too high. I mention taking a NT and other people say that's too high. I mention LB/DE and people say that's too high.

So can anyone please tell me what's appropriate to take in the first round without saying WR, CB, and RB? Is FS a safe answer cause we have need there also.

This isn't rocket science. Players 5-15 on Mel Kiper's Big Board are:

5. Marcell Dareus, DE, Alabama
6. Prince Amukamara, CB, Nebraska
7. Robert Quinn, DE/OLB, North Carolina
8. Blaine Gabbert, QB, Missouri
9. Von Miller, OLB, Texas A&M
10. Julio Jones, WR, Alabama
11. Nate Solder, OT, Colorado
12. Akeem Ayers, OLB, UCLA
13. Ryan Kerrigan, DE, Purdue
14. Aldon Smith, OLB, Missouri
15. Cam Newton, QB, Auburn

And there you have it. 11 players will can realistically be available at no. 10, but wouldn't be a reach at the same spot. The internet can do this!