Your analysis is flawed because it doesn't properly smooth the data (you should be using a regression, not breaking the sample into arbitrary groups), which makes it highly influenced by the variance of the sample. Also, it isn't surprising that late first rounders do well, as they tend to get drafted by winning organizations. But that doesn't mean the late first round QBs are inherently better, nor does it mean that a losing organization should pass on a QB higher in the draft.
You know, this is a very interesting thread, but I can’t help but chuckle when I remember a funny quote from Tony Siragusa, if y’all remember him. He was doing his sideline gig and someone asked him about the defensive scheme. And his answer was roughly like “you know, there’s a three technique and a five technique and about eight other technical terms, and then he said...yeah....just go tackle the guy with the ball” in his heavy accent. Made me laugh out loud. I just chuckle because I love this discussion and we have stats and draft history and team building philosophy etc. But in the end...it’s really very simple. if JD truly believes that say, Fields or Wilson are FQBs, he’s gonna take him at 2 and not fuck around. If he doesn’t believe in them, he’s probably gonna trade down and maybe take a QB later. simple as pie. do you believe in Wilson or Fields or not?
I get all about statistics and future probabilities based on the history on past NFL drafts. But the results are merely a reflection of how good or bad the selection was by the team, years after the fact, and not the value placed versus ranking at the time. Was Barkley a good pick at two when Josh Allen was available, right now hell no. Would Mahomes, Watson, Jackson and Brady have been a massive home run at two? Hell yes. So past stats are just that a grade on past selections. Also past performance has zero guarantee of future results. So at this point value is only a factor based on how good our assessment of the player is, and if JD and RS think Sam is not the future, but there is a QB in the draft that is, then all the statistics go out the window and you go with your insight. There isn’t a chance in hell JD would say, Wilson is our guy, but the value is high so let’s trade down a bit and find someone else. There are only two criteria IMO that we should use A- Is Sam our long term solution yes or no? If yes then trade down B- Is there a low risk, high probability solution better than Sam in this year draft, yes or no? If no then trade down If the answer to B is a strong yes you run to the podium and never look back.
I don't understand the underlying attitude of some people like its now or never. Like if we don't take a QB now then were doomed to Hackenberg's forever. Nobody had heard of Wilson's before this season. Due to the opt out, with so many teams sitting, there will probably be 3 Wilson's in next years draft. And maybe by then we will have an actual decent team for them to develop with and take over. Like someone said earlier. Part of the reason later round QBs have a good success rate is that they go to good teams. Lets work on the good team part first.
No one is saying "Now or never". What I and others have said is "Now, better than later". See the difference? And again, you still haven't addressed the issue of "How will the Jets get one of these QBs, even assuming they're as good or better than this year's crop"? Given that the Jets have been working for over 50 years on "getting the 'good team'" right and haven't yet, how about we try something different like getting the good QB and building the good team around him?
the QB position has risen to such absurd prominence in today's game.....when you are fortunate enough to land a top 2-3 pick.....you almost HAVE to roll the dice on the BEST QB you can draft in the hope of landing an elite future HOF QB, BC if you do hit upon the right guy, the trajectory of your entire organization changes for the next 10-15 years. You can't say that about any other single positional player.
If you go with either B or C you really have to go with A also in some capacity (trade Darnold for whatever pick you can get). The two big questions are how much does JD and Saleh like Wilson or one of the other qbs on the board, and just how many picks are teams willing to offer to trade up? I don't think you can responsibly turn down a trade like C, which would give us 6 first round picks over the next 2 years as well as a shitload of other picks. It really all depends on the trade offer in my opinion.
Just out of curiosity, why do you also have to go with A? Also C only gives 5 first round picks over the next 2 years.
One can easily turn that offer down from the Bears. All those picks don't equal a FQB, and that's what Wilson is going to be.
If I'm the Jets' GM, I'm trading Darnold, signing C.J. Beathard in FA, then taking Wilson at #2. I wouldn't even consider trading down unless I learned that something was hinky with Wilson medically. If I did trade down, it wouldn't be far, and I'd take Lance and sit him in 2021.
Fuck Derek Carr and Andy Dalton. We’re getting Zach Wilson. And you’re gonna love the living shit out of him.
Reading is fundamental. I addressed this by saying he is always hurt but he plays through it. Stafford's taken an absolute beating throughout his career. Not for anything either but Stafford plays bigger than what he's listed at. You're crazy if you think these dudes are the same size.
I think this is my ideal scenario too. The issue is that I don't know how far you can realistically trade down and still get Lance. Maybe I'm falling for the QBs 1-4 thing, but as much as I like the rumored Panthers trade, I'd be very nervous about him still being there at 8.
How do you know unless you draft one? I like the Ron Wolf theory draft one every year until you find one or two. You can always unload the lesser one off in a trade. Saleh has no allegiance to Darnold he may want his own QB. Or they could draft one and keep Darnold around to see if real coaching can work on him.
