Official 2020 QB Thread

[HoboRocket]

4 minutes ago, BigC421/ said:

For real? In comparison to what class exactly?  Burrow and Tua are as good of qb prospects that I’ve seen since Luck, both of them.  

They say that every year, and it's rarely accurate. I guess it might be weak in comparison to 2018. 

Off the top of my head, I'd say that the 2020 class is better than 2019, 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, and 2013.

2020 VS 2019: Burrow is a better prospect than Kyler Murray. Murray was a quality QB prospect, but there were still very serious questions about his desire to play football long-term, his size, his level of competition, and the fact that he was a one-year wonder. Burrow's only concern is that he was a one-year wonder.

The QB2s, presumably Tua and Daniel Jones, are a mismatch as well. Tua would be the #1 overall prospect many years despite his injury concerns. He's a special player and a very good prospect who doesn't carry any level-of-competition concerns, has terrific deep-ball ability, and isn't a one-year wonder. Daniel Jones had major questions about his ability to lead a team, his deep-ball ability, and a lack of any special traits. The main advantages that he had as a prospect were that he was coached by David Cutcliffe and that he's tall.

The QB3s, Justin Herbert and Dwayne Haskins, compare favorably to this year. Both have terrific arm-talent, but Haskins was a one-year wonder that lacks mobility. Herbert has started for years, has good mobility, and a bigger arm than Haskins. His accuracy isn't the same level as Haskins, but it's not far off. I'd give a very slight edge to Herbert as a prospect.

The QB4s, Jordan Love and Drew Lock, are more mixed. I really liked Drew Lock as a prospect, predicting last year that many people would be claiming the same thing this year. I liked how he was productive against a high level of competition and really enjoyed his deep accuracy. He was considered to be an extremely intelligent and tough, gritty prospect, but lacked ra-ra leadership ability. He had great mobility. In many ways, Drew Lock's prospect profile compared very similarly to Patrick Mahomes II's prospect profile. I had him as my QB1 for most of the process, but DID eventually slide Kyler Murray into that slot. However, the consensus had Drew Lock rated much lower than I had him. I'm also lower on Jordan Love than most, but the consensus believe's he has an argument as a top-10 draft pick. That's much higher than Drew Lock's draft slot and the general opinion on him. 

The QB5 this year is Jacob Eason, and he's expected to be drafted anywhere from the early teens to the second round. In general, he's a much better prospect than Will Grier, who had serious level-of-competition and arm strength concerns. Eason also has a much-worse supporting cast than Grier. Eason, to me, is very similar to Carson Palmer.

The QB6, Jalen Hurts, is loved by some in the scouting community and his grades range from late first-rounder to early day three. I like him much better than Ryan Finley last year.

[BigC421/]

Not gonna quote that all but in response to HoboRocket.  I agree with most of your assessments overall and I as well am pretty high on Lock.  His rookie success seems to have flown under the radar.  If they can land Ruggs at 15 look out for that offense, I’ll be targeting Lock in fantasy drafts.

However I really hate the “they say that every year” phrase that gets thrown around.  It lacks context and comes of as assuming all qbs that are drafted high are just generic prospects that shouldn’t be evaluated on there individual talents.  I’m not really concerned with “they say”. I know what my personal evaluations are and I’ve got these 2 above nearly every qb I’ve seen. Not to mention, they don’t actually always say that.  Every one always knows that qbs will go at the top of the draft due to positional importants but there rarely actually at the top of people’s big boards.  I’ve got these two at 1 & 2 on my board overall.

[BleedTheClock]

Love makes the most impressive throws out of any QB in the class. But he’s simply too raw to bank on. 

[BayRaider]

Yeah every year people say QB classes suck, they’ll they it next year too. This class is the best I’ve seen as a unit since 2011 or 2012. 
 

Last year for comparison, you didn’t have any “Generational” QBs although I loved Murray and thought he was worthy of the #1 pick. Burrow and Tua are very rare Generational QBs that are better than Murray. Both have potential to be Top 5 QBs at the next level. 
 

Then you have Love and Herbert who I’d easily take over Haskins, Lock, Finley, Grier, and Daniel Jones. 
 

I’d also take Jake Fromm, Jacob Eason, and Jalen Hurts over all of those guys except Lock. 

[HoboRocket]

1 hour ago, BigC421/ said:

Not gonna quote that all but in response to HoboRocket.  I agree with most of your assessments overall and I as well am pretty high on Lock.  His rookie success seems to have flown under the radar.  If they can land Ruggs at 15 look out for that offense, I’ll be targeting Lock in fantasy drafts.

However I really hate the “they say that every year” phrase that gets thrown around.  It lacks context and comes of as assuming all qbs that are drafted high are just generic prospects that shouldn’t be evaluated on there individual talents.  I’m not really concerned with “they say”. I know what my personal evaluations are and I’ve got these 2 above nearly every qb I’ve seen. Not to mention, they don’t actually always say that.  Every one always knows that qbs will go at the top of the draft due to positional importants but there rarely actually at the top of people’s big boards.  I’ve got these two at 1 & 2 on my board overall.

Right. I was saying "they say that every year" in response to people saying that this class is bad and next will be good.

I evaluate players on an individual basis. Always will. That's what allows me to tell whether a class is deep or not. How many players impress me? 

Next year, we have one very good prospect (Lawrence), and another that might be very good if he continues to dominate (Fields). We also have Jamie Newman as a potential first rounder. POTENTIAL. I really liked him this year, but had he left school this year, he likely would have been in that Kyle Lauletta, Mason Rudolph-tier as a day-2 pick with good traits, but isn't rare or proven enough to the point that he gets pushed into the first round. He'll get that opportunity at Georgia this year. Anyways, they (at this point) are the top QBs next year and the only ones I have slotted in the first. 

Of course, almost every year there are prospects that seem to come out of nowhere to become first-round prospects (Burrow this year, Murray/Haskins in 2019, Josh Allen/Baker Mayfield in 2018, Mitchell Trubisky in 2017, Carson Wentz in 2016...). So next year very well COULD be better than this year. But as it stands right now, I like this 2019 QB class because I see seven QBs that could viably earn a shot to start in a QB competition and has the skill-set to have sustainable success at the QB position, provided they don't regress and can acclimate to the NFL game (Burrow, Tagovailoa, Herbert, Love, Eason, Hurts, Morgan). 

[BigC421/]

Agree, although I don’t particularly care about class depth when it comes to qb’s I judge the class on its elites because that ultimately what everyone’s looking for.  Truth is there’s rarely truly elite caliber franchise qb’s in any draft yet every once in awhile we get multiple in the same draft.  This past year we just happened to have 3 of the best in recent memory playing in college football at the same time.

[SmittyBacall]

Eat up, baby birds.

 

[Oregon Ducks]

Next Mahomes lol

[VanS]

19 hours ago, BigC421/ said:

For real? In comparison to what class exactly?  Burrow and Tua are as good of qb prospects that I’ve seen since Luck, both of them.  

2018 was significantly better.  Looking back now 2016, 2017, and 2019 are also better.  

Unlike most I don't get excited by collegiate statistical production.  I get excited by the physical traits of the prospects.  Its why I had Josh Allen and Lamar Jackson as my top 2 QBs in 2018.  Burrow and Tua are not impressive QB prospects in terms of their physical traits.  Neither has an elite arm, elite size, or elite athleticism.  

[VanS]

19 hours ago, winitall said:

On your actual point, Burrow and Tua are as good of prospects at the QB position as you will find. Opting not to draft him because maybe Trevor Lawrence grades out 1% better on your board next year is just madness. 

If you think Trevor Lawrence is only slightly better than Burrow and Tua then you're out of your mind.  He's worlds better.  Stop falling in love with college stats and success.  Neither Burrow nor Tua are physically comprable to Trevor Lawrence.  He's better than them at EVERYTHING.

[MagicMT]

33 minutes ago, VanS said:

2018 was significantly better.  Looking back now 2016, 2017, and 2019 are also better.  

Unlike most I don't get excited by collegiate statistical production.  I get excited by the physical traits of the prospects. 

And still, in the last 15 years who were the best Qbs in the NFL? Brady, Manning, Brees, Rodgers. 3/4 without elite physical traits. So while you get excited by physical traits, history have shown us that the best QBs usually aren't the elite athletes, but guys who are elite at processing the game and have good accuracy.  

32 minutes ago, VanS said:

If you think Trevor Lawrence is only slightly better than Burrow and Tua then you're out of your mind.  He's worlds better.  Stop falling in love with college stats and success.  Neither Burrow nor Tua are physically comprable to Trevor Lawrence.  He's better than them at EVERYTHING.

Everybody is entitled to their opinion. I personnaly think Burrow is going to be a better NFL player than T. Lawrence. 
Stop falling in love with physical traits at the QB position (see how that works?). 

[winitall]

38 minutes ago, VanS said:

If you think Trevor Lawrence is only slightly better than Burrow and Tua then you're out of your mind.  He's worlds better.  Stop falling in love with college stats and success.  Neither Burrow nor Tua are physically comprable to Trevor Lawrence.  He's better than them at EVERYTHING.

If playing quarterback was solely physical, you might have an argument. The problem is that isn’t the case. There is more to being a top QB prospect than just the physical. Lawrence has struggled at times with the other parts of it. That’s not to say he’s anything but a great prospect, he’s just not worlds away from Tua and Burrow. 

[SmittyBacall]

51 minutes ago, VanS said:

Unlike most I don't get excited by collegiate statistical production.

This is just completely ignorant. People aren’t excited about Burrow because of his statistical production. They’re excited about Burrow because he’s put together unbelievably dominant tape and demonstrated remarkable traits that translate to NFL success. I couldn’t care less about the numbers. You claim to be Mr. Tape - go watch the tape.

[VanS]

6 minutes ago, SmittyBacall said:

This is just completely ignorant. People aren’t excited about Burrow because of his statistical production. They’re excited about Burrow because he’s put together unbelievably dominant tape and demonstrated remarkable traits that translate to NFL success. I couldn’t care less about the numbers. You claim to be Mr. Tape - go watch the tape.

Oh I watched him.  I saw lots of throws that were open because of the scheme and his great receivers.  In fact, I was more impressed with Burrow as a runner than a passer.  I think many QBs could have done what he did if placed in that situation. 

[VanS]

25 minutes ago, MagicMT said:

And still, in the last 15 years who were the best Qbs in the NFL? Brady, Manning, Brees, Rodgers. 3/4 without elite physical traits. So while you get excited by physical traits, history have shown us that the best QBs usually aren't the elite athletes, but guys who are elite at processing the game and have good accuracy.  

How on earth did Manning not have elite physical traits?  Don't let the old version of him fool you.  Young Peyton Manning had a cannon.  Plus he was 6'5" 230 lbs.  The only thing he lacked physically was mobility.  He didn't go #1 overall just cause of his last name.