I was going to post this in a couple of other active threads, but I didn't want it to get buried in talking about the specifics of Darnold, Lawrence, Fields, et. al. Anyway, for all the "expert" opinions touted in the media, the NFL, and here on TGG, there is actually very little accurate info about how to evaluate QBs. Some, like Br4d claim that the odds of drafting a great QB are with taking one in the draft range of 12-44, as a "sweet spot". That claim is actually what launched me on a quest to see if he was right (he might be). Along the way I came across a couple of articles that tried to look at assessing QBs differently than what is generally used. Despite the huge change in how the game is played now - relying on passing over running - QB evaluators - including the supposed professionals in the NFL - still use criteria developed decades ago. These articles depart from that rigid mindset and I believe they're onto something: This first article argues that most QB evaluators rely way too much on physical attributes like size, speed, and arm strength, and too little on mental and mechanical skills (primarily accuracy). This article also suggests that Br4d's theory that QBs taken in the 12-44 range have the highest degree of success: https://www.businessinsider.com/nfl-draft-quarterbacks-2019-4 This next article is very stat heavy (and somewhat confusing). Using college stats and NFL stats for years 2-4 of NFL QBs, it tries to correlate the specific stats that have a high order of correlation to determine which stats can predict overall success. You should read the whole thing, but to cut to the chase, he claims that the four highest predictors of NFL success based on college/combine stats are: college fantasy points, total touchdowns, total yards, some of the rushing data, and ball velocity at the NFL Combine. Everything else largely doesn’t matter. That includes height, weight, hand size, and interceptions. https://www.rotoworld.com/article/numbers/nfl-draft-analytics-qb?src=rss I know it's a lot to digest, but if you look at the QBs who have most recently succeeded in the NFL, most of them were surprises...if you only went by traditional scouting strategy, but actually were predictable. Okay, fire away!
Excellent reads, liked the first one better. The one question I have and it would be directed at JD, how does he determine mental acumen of college QBs?
That is the "million dollar question" of course. But, I do believe there are ways to test for this that go beyond just observations and measurements during games and practices. The thing is that I don't think evaluators are even looking at this aspect really. I think there's an over-reliance on physical - and therefore more easily measured - aspects than on mental aspects which are much harder to quantify. But using these methods is what makes me think that Mac Jones might be a very good bet to succeed in the NFL. No, he's not very mobile which is out of favor these days, but he reportedly possesses very high processing ability - reading the field and making the right decision. On top of that, he has outstanding accuracy - although TBH, playing on that team with that OL and weapons, it's hard to really say how much is due to him. But, accuracy is accuracy...when I've watched him he's hitting guys right where they need it, he's not making them be acrobats or have to go into contortions to make the catch. IDK enough about the offense that LeFleur and the Niners run but IDK if Jones would be a good match for it or not. OTOH, I hear LeFleur is very flexible and can adapt to the QBs he has so maybe it would work. Anyway, I thought these ideas were good ones.
It's such an inexact science, especially because the majority of us (including the media) are not and will never be involved in the pre-draft interview process. I think it reveals an immense amount of information about a player in terms of coachability and the potential for improvement along with leadership characteristics. All we can do is watch and read about someone's character. I think it's one of the things that sold the Seahawks on Russell Wilson and the rest of the league has probably learned from their mistakes in overlooking him. The Seahawks just traded for Matt Flynn and all reports were that Wilson instantly took that starting job in camp and made that his team. That interview needs to be weighed with a quarterbacks physical ability to make plays though which is what makes it so tough. Hackenberg was obviously a dreadful pick for us but is there any doubt that he checked all the boxes in the interview process? Granted we had a coffee guzzling airhead conducting that process but still.
I feel like Josh Allen and L. Jackson are recent examples which refute the first article. Allen scored extremely high on the Wunderlic I believe however.
QBs most likely have a better rate of success on teams from 12-44 simply because those teams are better than teams picking in the top 5. Plus top 5 pick QBs are under enormous pressure to lead a franchise as a young man. Whereas picking 12+ that QB possibly is sitting for a year like Lamar and Mahomes as of late
The problem with that argument is the teams picking 33 - 44 are the same teams that would be picking 1 thorough 12, so essentially you are including every team in the 12 - 44 range.
I’d like to see the proof in the pudding on that... because I can’t remember any 2nd rounders in the top 12 hitting on a FQB besides Derrick Carr as of late.
I’m saying teams are better from 12-32 that’s why QBs work out better for them. I think after 32 that stat is insignificant as there weren’t many examples of FQB taken in the top 12 picks in the 2nd round
I don't know whether that's true or not. But if you have Fox on right now you're watching one of them.
In what way do they refute it? It just says that the mental aspect should be considered more than the physical, but it doesn't mean the physical should be ignored, or that a QB can be high in all aspects.
Just took a look. In addition to Bridgewater, Carr and Brees, Dalton and Kaepernick were also taken at 35/36 in 2011. Jake Plummer was taken at 42 in 1998. Brett Favre was selected 33rd overall. Obviously not the greatest examples as most of these guys had mediocre careers (some at best mediocre). It's tough to pigeon hole any round or pick number as the place to get a franchise quarterback given the amount of top 5 busts there are and outliers such as Russell Wilson, Kurt Warner, Tom Brady, Joe Montana, Tony Romo, Warren Moon, etc.
The QBs who succeed these days seem to have: 1. Mobility to outright dual threat ability. 2. Either a big arm or an accurate one (or both!). 3. The right mentality and worth ethic.
We're talking Jets here. They fit into a whole nother category of analysis. The one whatever can go wrong will. Butt fumble, injuries, Dan Marino torching them for over a decade, Ken O'Brien.
