|
|
Post by cdngfan on Apr 23, 2024 6:42:02 GMT -5
Bust” is subjective right?
Unique to the QB position, given how it’s valued, I’ve always defined QB bust as the drafting team choosing not to resign.
Of course that metric is flawed. At its most imperfect it says DJ isn’t a bust but Mayfield is.
But generally it aligns with a how GMs look at QBs.
Using that metric about 2/3rds of teams that take a QB in the first rd have the drafting team looking for a new starting QB when the rookie contract expires.
If we incorporated popular fan/analyst “opinions” of what a legit franchise QB is, the number of franchise QBs taken in 1st considered a success is going to shrink even further.
I think Dak is a legit franchise QB. I think even though he’s flawed he’s still better than probably 65% QBs in the NFL, if not a higher percentage. He ticks a lot of boxes other than playoff wins. But a tonne of fanbases would be furious if he was signed as a starter.
If you incorporated a “could win a championship with him” metric into evaluating QBs, there’s probably only 10 QBs out of the last 100 drafted that would be considered unrealistic to upgrade.
I think there’s a percentage of fans and GMs that will always be legend shopping, ignoring that 90% of their attempts will be wrong. The part missing from that equation is if you realistically want to draft the next Mahomes, other than hitting on a lottery number, you’re going to have to suck repeatedly, literally for a decade or more, and be content to do so which would give you multiple attempts to get into that rare 10% of QBs.
And I haven’t even touched on the fact that, even if you find that nearly unparalleled talent, does Josh Allen become Josh Allen playing for Judge -led Giants instead of Buffalo?
Things to ponder.
|
|
|
|
Post by GameTime on Apr 23, 2024 8:22:09 GMT -5
what? Drafting a QB ( in any round) is a high risk?
Another mystery uncovered!!
|
|
|
|
Post by IrishMike on Apr 23, 2024 17:53:41 GMT -5
It is not vague. I try based most of my conclusions at 35% of season / career snaps O, D or STs. "It's based on starts" is vague. "It's based on 35% of snaps O, D and STs" is not vague.
You can see that this system is very flawed though right? Of course 83% of OL hit at that requirement. It's a very low bar. Like I said Ereck Flowers was a good pick at that requirement. Heck Jamarcus Russell started 80% of his games, he was a massive bust. Surely there is a better method we can come up with.
|
|
|
|
Post by IrishMike on Apr 23, 2024 17:58:03 GMT -5
Bust” is subjective right? Unique to the QB position, given how it’s valued, I’ve always defined QB bust as the drafting team choosing not to resign. Of course that metric is flawed. At its most imperfect it says DJ isn’t a bust but Mayfield is. But generally it aligns with a how GMs look at QBs. Using that metric about 2/3rds of teams that take a QB in the first rd have the drafting team looking for a new starting QB when the rookie contract expires. If we incorporated popular fan/analyst “opinions” of what a legit franchise QB is, the number of franchise QBs taken in 1st considered a success is going to shrink even further. I think Dak is a legit franchise QB. I think even though he’s flawed he’s still better than probably 65% QBs in the NFL, if not a higher percentage. He ticks a lot of boxes other than playoff wins. But a tonne of fanbases would be furious if he was signed as a starter. If you incorporated a “could win a championship with him” metric into evaluating QBs, there’s probably only 10 QBs out of the last 100 drafted that would be considered unrealistic to upgrade. I think there’s a percentage of fans and GMs that will always be legend shopping, ignoring that 90% of their attempts will be wrong. The part missing from that equation is if you realistically want to draft the next Mahomes, other than hitting on a lottery number, you’re going to have to suck repeatedly, literally for a decade or more, and be content to do so which would give you multiple attempts to get into that rare 10% of QBs. And I haven’t even touched on the fact that, even if you find that nearly unparalleled talent, does Josh Allen become Josh Allen playing for Judge -led Giants instead of Buffalo? Things to ponder. The re-signing thing is a great metric. It takes into account the opinion of people that have something to lose. To be fair Mayfield was a bust for the Browns and Jones won the Giants a playoff game.
When I did my franchise QB metric years ago I said they must play past 5 seasons AND either make the pro bowl or win an award (MVP, SB MVP, OPOY etc). That means there is some skill there and the team feels he is worth keeping around.
I'm working on something for OL now.
|
|
|
|
Post by giants8493 on Apr 23, 2024 21:16:02 GMT -5
Let me spare you the click, someone named Maurice Moton believes: 1. There's 10% chance that Caleb Williams is a bust. 2. There's 20% chance that Jayden Daniels is a bust. 3. There's 33% chance that Drake Maye is a bust. 4. There's 51% chance that JJ McCarthy is a bust. 5. There's 65% chance that Michael Penix is a bust. 6. There's 75% chance that Bo Nix is a bust. Who is that and why? |
|
|
|
Post by Jomo on Apr 24, 2024 7:20:49 GMT -5
What is the meter for Jones success in 2024? It is not more than or less than or an approximation then of the values calculated to be approximately 22/7 somewhat % ...you left out "for what it's worth." |
|
|
|
Post by Jomo on Apr 24, 2024 7:25:54 GMT -5
Bust” is subjective right? Unique to the QB position, given how it’s valued, I’ve always defined QB bust as the drafting team choosing not to resign. Of course that metric is flawed. At its most imperfect it says DJ isn’t a bust but Mayfield is. But generally it aligns with a how GMs look at QBs. Using that metric about 2/3rds of teams that take a QB in the first rd have the drafting team looking for a new starting QB when the rookie contract expires. If we incorporated popular fan/analyst “opinions” of what a legit franchise QB is, the number of franchise QBs taken in 1st considered a success is going to shrink even further. I think Dak is a legit franchise QB. I think even though he’s flawed he’s still better than probably 65% QBs in the NFL, if not a higher percentage. He ticks a lot of boxes other than playoff wins. But a tonne of fanbases would be furious if he was signed as a starter. If you incorporated a “could win a championship with him” metric into evaluating QBs, there’s probably only 10 QBs out of the last 100 drafted that would be considered unrealistic to upgrade. I think there’s a percentage of fans and GMs that will always be legend shopping, ignoring that 90% of their attempts will be wrong. The part missing from that equation is if you realistically want to draft the next Mahomes, other than hitting on a lottery number, you’re going to have to suck repeatedly, literally for a decade or more, and be content to do so which would give you multiple attempts to get into that rare 10% of QBs. And I haven’t even touched on the fact that, even if you find that nearly unparalleled talent, does Josh Allen become Josh Allen playing for Judge -led Giants instead of Buffalo? Things to ponder. It is a tough one to define and probably should only refer to quarterbacks taken in the first round. I think being signed to a second contract by the drafting team is an important marker. That gets us to the most important marker of all which is winning. It is also the toughest to gauge. The very special few who can put a team, any team on their back and win are obvious. It's the next tier of starters with marginal winning records on bad teams that are the toughest to judge. That's where we here at the boards come in, since we are without a doubt the ultimatr arbiter. |
|
|
|
Post by ratbastich on Apr 24, 2024 8:00:14 GMT -5
I think people are trying to find a way to quantify something that isn't exactly quantifiable in order to find the "secret" pattern. Yes, you can put together statistics based on past quarterbacks and how they succeeded or failed and maybe an expectation on the current crop, but there are a lot of variables. Coaching, talent, drive, injuries, etc. There is no formula. It is completely random.
For those who have been managers or even mentors, how many times have you had someone you saw a lot of potential in, give them a shot and found out that they may have had potential but they lacked desire...or even the opposite...lots of desire but no ability?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rangers13 on Apr 24, 2024 8:23:12 GMT -5
I think people are trying to find a way to quantify something that isn't exactly quantifiable in order to find the "secret" pattern. Yes, you can put together statistics based on past quarterbacks and how they succeeded or failed and maybe an expectation on the current crop, but there are a lot of variables. Coaching, talent, drive, injuries, etc. There is no formula. It is completely random. For those who have been managers or even mentors, how many times have you had someone you saw a lot of potential in, give them a shot and found out that they may have had potential but they lacked desire...or even the opposite...lots of desire but no ability? i think that’s why the interviews are so important. |
|
|
|
Post by Jomo on Apr 24, 2024 9:18:32 GMT -5
I wonder if DG interviewed Eli Apple? Probably not but if he did, how could he miss the immaturity in that mama's boy? He could have found out the same thing by talking to any of his college teammates.
|
|
|
|
Post by GameTime on Apr 24, 2024 9:49:06 GMT -5
As much as I like Jones as a NYG player, pulled for him since day one, realized his shortcomings, was all on board after 2022, busted his ass after 2023 he is now considered a bust unless he has an epiphany in 2024, remains healthy for 5 years and keeps the NYGs competitive as div winners and wins playoffs games.
|
|
