Frankie2Gunz Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 41 minutes ago, Jeremy408 said: I agree with everything you said(because we generally agree on the philosophy of how to build a roster)but Id take Penix at 13. We as fans are not privy to the proper information to make and educated determination in regards to QB's. It is the most difficult position to evaluate in all of sports. Interviews, digging into past, work ethic, film study, grasping of playbooks, concepts, taking to coaches and former players etc. The list goes on and on as to what information needs to be complied in order to make the most educated guess as to who will be good and who will be a bust. Watching a few highlight reels and making a determination as to who will be good is laughable. What I do know is that most QB's in this draft will bust and this team is not is a position to mortgage the future for a QB unless our front office is convinced that player is a superstar. We need an influx of young talent and need to obtain good value for whoever we select... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agarcia34 Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 Picking Penix is as ballsy of a pick you could ever make at 13. AP and Telesco don’t survive if it doesn’t work out. Both could be gone in two years. Flip side to it if it works out then you’re celebrated. Nuts on the table type of pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big_palooka Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 2 hours ago, OldManWillis said: I'm leaning toward adding more talent to the team if the targeted QB is not available at 13. Teams know we're desperate and will try to screw us in a trade. Let other teams trade up for a QB, making other talent fall to us. IMHO I'm liking the idea of adding a unheralded QB prospect like Pratt in the 3rd and adding talent with our 1st and 2nd. Pratt competes with AOC and Minshew, and best man wins the job. Worst case scenario is we are looking for another QB next draft, but have built a more talented roster and there are fewer QB needy teams to compete with. Best case scenario is one of the QB develops into a legit starter,and we still have added talent to roster. Either way we're not trading away future draft capital which is a win. To me, there is no sense in adding a day 3 QB prospect like Pratt. You're already developing AOC, no need to get another developmental guy. There are only so many reps to go around. Personally, I'll never understand this fan bases aversion to trading future draft capital after 20 years of terrible drafting. I advocated trading up for a QB when they had multiple firsts. How'd the roster develop with all those picks they made again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steins Gate Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 7 minutes ago, big_palooka said: To me, there is no sense in adding a day 3 QB prospect like Pratt. You're already developing AOC, no need to get another developmental guy. There are only so many reps to go around. Personally, I'll never understand this fan bases aversion to trading future draft capital after 20 years of terrible drafting. I advocated trading up for a QB when they had multiple firsts. How'd the roster develop with all those picks they made again? That was under Grudock. They weren't picking a QB and you know it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big_palooka Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 1 minute ago, Steins Gate said: That was under Grudock. They weren't picking a QB and you know it. Instead, they drafted 13 top 100 picks and the only came away with Josh Jacobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich7sena Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 20 minutes ago, agarcia34 said: Picking Penix is as ballsy of a pick you could ever make at 13. AP and Telesco don’t survive if it doesn’t work out. Both could be gone in two years. Flip side to it if it works out then you’re celebrated. Nuts on the table type of pick. To be fair, if they pick any QB at 13 and he doesn't work, they will get fired unless the team miraculously finds another answer at the position like the 49ers did with Brock Purdy. That's why picking a QB in the top 15 is risky business. I've been like a parrot this offseason with the amount of times I've repeated this, but even Belichick couldn't survive a top 15 QB bust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steins Gate Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 4 minutes ago, Rich7sena said: To be fair, if they pick any QB at 13 and he doesn't work, they will get fired unless the team miraculously finds another answer at the position like the 49ers did with Brock Purdy. That's why picking a QB in the top 15 is risky business. I've been like a parrot this offseason with the amount of times I've repeated this, but even Belichick couldn't survive a top 15 QB bust. Belichick used a DC and a Special Teams guy to coach the offense..... I don't put that on Mack Jones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich7sena Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 Just now, Steins Gate said: Belichick used a DC and a Special Teams guy to coach the offense..... I don't put that on Mack Jones. There were things you could isolate outside of scheme, like accuracy and decision-making, that showed Jones was not playing well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy408 Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 2 hours ago, Frankie2Gunz said: We as fans are not privy to the proper information to make and educated determination in regards to QB's. It is the most difficult position to evaluate in all of sports. Interviews, digging into past, work ethic, film study, grasping of playbooks, concepts, taking to coaches and former players etc. The list goes on and on as to what information needs to be complied in order to make the most educated guess as to who will be good and who will be a bust. Watching a few highlight reels and making a determination as to who will be good is laughable. What I do know is that most QB's in this draft will bust and this team is not is a position to mortgage the future for a QB unless our front office is convinced that player is a superstar. We need an influx of young talent and need to obtain good value for whoever we select... Sure your perspective makes sense when it it comes to QBs in general. It's true the bust rate is high. I think though that if you pick the right qb at 13 it makes sense. Trading up is the more dangerous situation imo. I don't see picking a qb at 13 as mortgaging the future. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steins Gate Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 1 minute ago, Rich7sena said: There were things you could isolate outside of scheme, like accuracy and decision-making, that showed Jones was not playing well. I will give you that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldManWillis Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 27 minutes ago, big_palooka said: To me, there is no sense in adding a day 3 QB prospect like Pratt. You're already developing AOC, no need to get another developmental guy. There are only so many reps to go around. Personally, I'll never understand this fan bases aversion to trading future draft capital after 20 years of terrible drafting. I advocated trading up for a QB when they had multiple firsts. How'd the roster develop with all those picks they made again? True, but that's because we had a bunch of idiots running the ship back then. Sure they coulda traded up with those multiple firsts, but chances are they woulda drafted a bust such as Zach Wilson and then we would have a bust and no future draft picks. (Their eye for talent sucked) Not adverse to trading up at all, I just want our front office to be smart about it. AOC is an alright prospect, but from what I've seen he's a backup at best. I'd rather go into the season with some hope in the unknown(Pratt or any QB we draft) to compete with what we have. Chances are the pick would be wasted on a prospect that may not amount to anything anyways, so why not take a QB? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie2Gunz Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 25 minutes ago, Jeremy408 said: Sure your perspective makes sense when it it comes to QBs in general. It's true the bust rate is high. I think though that if you pick the right qb at 13 it makes sense. Trading up is the more dangerous situation imo. I don't see picking a qb at 13 as mortgaging the future. It is if the guy is a bust. Sure it's not as catastrophic as trading three 1st's and drafting a bust but it's not good. If there is a stud CB on the board like Arnold and we overdraft a QB due to need and the guy is a bust that would be a pathetic move that will get the GM fired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steins Gate Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 5 minutes ago, Frankie2Gunz said: It is if the guy is a bust. Sure it's not as catastrophic as trading three 1st's and drafting a bust but it's not good. If there is a stud CB on the board like Arnold and we overdraft a QB due to need and the guy is a bust that would be a pathetic move that will get the GM fired. By that logic, the Raiders should never draft a QB. Any franchise should take a QB under two conditions: 1) They need one. And 2) They like the available QB. Being gun shy will get you nowhere. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big_palooka Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 5 minutes ago, Frankie2Gunz said: It is if the guy is a bust. Sure it's not as catastrophic as trading three 1st's and drafting a bust but it's not good. If there is a stud CB on the board like Arnold and we overdraft a QB due to need and the guy is a bust that would be a pathetic move that will get the GM fired. You can hit on any pick at 13 and you know what? It won't matter because the team isn't going anywhere until they figure out the QB position. AFC as a whole is too good. You have to have a QB if you're serious about competing. Otherwise, you're the Jets. Good defense, some good skill positions and still stuck without a QB to make it all go. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big_palooka Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 Just now, Steins Gate said: By that logic, the Raiders should never draft a QB. Any franchise should take a QB under two conditions: 1) They need one. And 2) They like the available QB. Being gun shy will get you nowhere. Exactly this. There are no sure things. The draft is a crapshoot. You have to swing at some point. The "perfect" QB doesn't exist. Waiting to swing, you're striking out. Might as well swing and hope you hit a home run. If he busts, so be it. Keep swinging until you get it right. You are not winning consistently without a top end QB in this league, period. If you believe in your staff, then draft the guy you think can they can develop into something special. No amount of all-pro CB, etc. is going to change a teams fortunes like hitting on a QB. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts