Let's Talk QBs in the 2014 Draft

[Joshua]

IMO, there is no such thing as a reach for a QB, at least not within the 1st round; i.e., someone who was worth the 9th pick but not the 1st. If a guy can play, you can't pick him too early. The position is just that important. If he can't, well, he shouldn't be picked in the 1st round at any spot.

I think they have to decide who they think the best QB in this draft is and, assuming they don't think that even the best prospect is a longshot, they have to roll the dice with him and hope they get it right.

[Keith]

Originally Posted by Joshua

IMO, there is no such thing as a reach for a QB, at least not within the 1st round; i.e., someone who was worth the 9th pick but not the 1st. If a guy can play, you can't pick him too early. The position is just that important. If he can't, well, he shouldn't be picked in the 1st round at any spot.

I think this is a great point that is underestimated in the days of fantasy football fanatics. It takes two to trade, and there are no guarantees the QB is there x picks later. And if another team isn't trading up, then you wait 32 picks until it gets on the clock again. That is an eternity. If the Texans have a 1st round grade on a QB in April, then taking him 1.1 is the way to go.

Just hope they're honest about their grades internally.

As for QBs... Oregon game on later today...

[barrett]

I totally agree and think it is doubly true with the current rookie salary scale.

If Houston has a favorite QB he should be the pick. If there is no QB you want, then don't draft one period.

[nunusguy]

Originally Posted by Joshua

IMO, there is no such thing as a reach for a QB, at least not within the 1st round; i.e., someone who was worth the 9th pick but not the 1st. If a guy can play, you can't pick him too early. The position is just that important. If he can't, well, he shouldn't be picked in the 1st round at any spot.

Sure you can. For example if you have the 1st overall, but have another team setting on the 5th overall willing to give you that pick, their second round pick, and their 1st rounder for next year you'd be foolish not to strongly consider making that deal if you think your QB prospect wouldn't be picked any higher than 9th overall. Of course that's all very hypothetical, but Draft day situations like that happen every year.

[Joshua]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

Sure you can. For example if you have the 1st overall, but have another team setting on the 5th overall willing to give you that pick, their second round pick, and their 1st rounder for next year you'd be foolish not to strongly consider making that deal if you think your QB prospect wouldn't be picked any higher than 9th overall. Of course that's all very hypothetical, but Draft day situations like that happen every year.

But that's not a question of reaching for someone too early. That's getting the guy you wanted all along while being able to trade back and pick up some additional picks in the process. Of course no one disputes this would be a good outcome.

When people talk about reaching, they are talking about taking a guy X number of picks too early because of the purported value. My point is I can't conceive of a scenario where a QB would be "good value" at No. 5 but not at No 1. At either pick, the player only justifies his draft position if he turns out to be a good/great QB. I think this pretty much holds for the entire 1st round. If you take a QB in the 1st round, you think he's a potential franchise guy. If he turns out to be a franchise guy, he would have been worth the No. 1 pick. If he doesn't, he wasn't worth using a 1st rounder on no matter where he was taken.

[nunusguy]

Originally Posted by Joshua

But that's not a question of reaching for someone too early. That's getting the guy you wanted all along while being able to trade back and pick up some additional picks in the process. Of course no one disputes this would be a good outcome.

When people talk about reaching, they are talking about taking a guy X number of picks too early because of the purported value. My point is I can't conceive of a scenario where a QB would be "good value" at No. 5 but not at No 1. At either pick, the player only justifies his draft position if he turns out to be a good/great QB. I think this pretty much holds for the entire 1st round. If you take a QB in the 1st round, you think he's a potential franchise guy. If he turns out to be a franchise guy, he would have been worth the No. 1 pick. If he doesn't, he wasn't worth using a 1st rounder on no matter where he was taken.

I presented a very hypothetical situation where a team could have it's cake and eat it too, that's all.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

I presented a very hypothetical situation where a team could have it's cake and eat it too, that's all.

In your hypothetical it may look like a guy is slotted at 9, but all it takes is one draft trade in the intervening 4 picks and you end up without the QB you wanted. Now if your hypothetical is not only presenting a godfather trade down package, but also the gaurantee that the player we desired will still be there at 5, then I would absolutely hypothetically pull the hypothetical trigger (hypothetically speaking of course).

But even with an awesome offer like that we still would have no idea if the number 9 prospect will be there at #5.

[Joshua]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

I presented a very hypothetical situation where a team could have it's cake and eat it too, that's all.

Sure. But this hypo requires us to identify the best QB in the draft while everyone else in the league doesn't recognize that he's the best (why else would he be around in the middle of the first round?). Then, after outwitting the league in general, we have to outwit a specific team and convince them to make a godfather trade, presumably to move up to take some other QB other than the one we're targeting because no one makes that kind of trade for anyone but a QB. That's a whole lot to assume. I mean, if you're gonna be a bear, be a grizzly. Just hypothesize us getting a Tom Brady in the 6th round.

[Keith]

The arguments for waiting to get a QB later in the draft (look! plenty of examples!! Brady was a 6th! Foles was a 3rd!) have a lot to do with the flaws of the modern CYA scouting process, namely, guys (incl the GM) won't stand on the table for someone who doesn't pass an eyeball test in the first round.

They have to have all the PHYSICAL tangibles to go with the perceived intangibles. Sometimes, these unicorns truly appear (Elway, Luck, etc.). Oftentimes, great prospects slip because they aren't Adonis in gym shorts. That doesn't mean that if the right QB is there where he is graded (say Round 1), you pass if he isn't a unicorn. Hopefully if there is a Brady or a Wilson in this draft, the Texans recognize it and take him in round 1. If a Brady was in the 2014 draft, would you wait until the 6th round to draft him? Of course not.

On a different subject, I wish I could evaluate Mariota, but this gimmicky Ducks offense is making it quite hard. I could care less if he runs wild over the Longhorns; that's not happening in the NFL over the course of a full NFL season. Running QBs get hurt. Mariota has more going for him though beyond his legs... hopefully I'll see more of it later. Just watched him make a great move in the pocket to elude a rusher and find a receiver on the sideline in the 3rd Q... that's impressive. Need to see more of that.

[chuck]

Yes, it's impossible for me to tell if Mariota is any good. It's annoying as hell.