|
Post by myronguyton29 on Mar 20, 2024 10:51:59 GMT -5
i don't watch a lot of college ball and won't claim to be a draft expert by any means but I do watch some of the games some of the time. I watched some of about 4 games Caleb played this year and he sucked in each one lol. That's enough and plus USC's track record ( though sure some will say that doesn't mean one good won't evenatually come from there), but with all of that I'm good on him lmfao....... none of us are experts and I doubt any of us watch film and go about our lives doing the jobs of scouts for the sole purpose of posting online đ At least you have some info which is a nice contribution when compared to those who never watch yet are hell bent on reminding everybody they arenât experts and chalk up the draft as some blind crap shoot . . . followed by who they believe the Giants will draft and why lol. Canât make it up the hypocrisy. yessir indeedy and crazy crazy world we live in right lmfao... I just let them be man, can't help some folks...
|
|
|
Post by Danke Schoen on Mar 20, 2024 11:15:47 GMT -5
those who donât watch college football and only rely on approx Jan-April to learn about prospects get blindsided.  No different this year. There were many warning signs with Rosen.  Imo, there are too many warning signs with Celeb Williams to feel comfortable. i don't watch a lot of college ball and won't claim to be a draft expert by any means but I do watch some of the games some of the time. I watched some of about 4 games Caleb played this year and he sucked in each one lol. That's enough and plus USC's track record ( though sure some will say that doesn't mean one good won't evenatually come from there), but with all of that I'm good on him lmfao....... At least you can admit this. And not pretend you have have some sort of scouting superiority because you happen to watch games on TV. Thatâs how you end up scouting Daniel Jones as a great pick and then have to spend hours researching your own posts, creating a word document with links/quotes of your own posts, then having to pawn off on the forum that you were âjust kiddingâ and that it was all âtongue in cheek.â
|
|
|
Post by inthezone on Mar 20, 2024 11:31:38 GMT -5
i don't watch a lot of college ball and won't claim to be a draft expert by any means but I do watch some of the games some of the time. I watched some of about 4 games Caleb played this year and he sucked in each one lol. That's enough and plus USC's track record ( though sure some will say that doesn't mean one good won't evenatually come from there), but with all of that I'm good on him lmfao....... At least you can admit this. And not pretend you have have some sort of scouting superiority because you happen to watch games on TV. Thatâs how you end up scouting Daniel Jones as a great pick and then have to spend hours researching your own posts, creating a word document with links/quotes of your own posts, then having to pawn off on the forum that you were âjust kiddingâ and that it was all âtongue in cheek.â Just like he admits he doesn't watch many Giants games and gets most of his information from his child.
|
|
|
Post by IrishMike on Mar 20, 2024 11:34:38 GMT -5
Thatâs because youâre using SBs as the barometer and SB wins are a statistically irrelevant metric. For instance, using SBs as the metric will say you need mahomes or brady as your qb, and every other win is an anomaly. Additionally, using a sole metric as the barometer does not isolate the impact that good QB play on a rookie deal provides. It affords the team the ability to add more pieces in free agency and/or to retain who they already have. However, just because a team has this built-in advantage, doesnt mean they wonât have squandered it by signing bad players (i.e. solder and golladay), effectively using up the advantage gained. As for your example of Eli was getting 7 in 2004. Our first rd pick, this year, 20 years later of cap increases, will be getting roughly 10/yr. Peyton was getting 2x what Eli was getting⊠If we drafted a qb, the top qb contract would be 5.5x that amount. Thatâs a huge difference I used SBs because it's the easiest metric to find. You're taking a stance that having a QB on a rookie deal gives some kind of advantage but my original question still remains....does it actually give an advantage? Sure on paper "more money" is better than "less money" but we all agree having a better QB is worth more than anything. It seems to me that teams with long term QBs do better than with what ever they would have spent that money on.
Point is, no one is trading their stud vet QB making 20% of their teams salary for a rookie stud. So unless someone has some kind of actual evidence that "Qb on rookie deal leads to winning" I'm going to just assume it's non-sense. But by all means go dig up the stats that show those teams win more.
|
|
|
Post by IrishMike on Mar 20, 2024 11:39:18 GMT -5
âOne of, if not the highestâ doesnt mean âhighestâ. Sam Bradford, his second year in the league? He was the second highest paid player. Yes that is one player in the history of the NFL that was "almost" the highest paid player. I agreed we should look at things since the rookie wage scale was put in place, but my guess is you won't actually look at anything real and just assume the rookie QB pay leads to more wins, but I doubt it really does. We already see it doesn't lead to more SB wins.
I think it's one of those myths like OGs aren't valuable.
|
|
|
Post by imgrate on Mar 20, 2024 12:06:54 GMT -5
âOne of, if not the highestâ doesnt mean âhighestâ. Sam Bradford, his second year in the league? He was the second highest paid player. Yes that is one player in the history of the NFL that was "almost" the highest paid player. I agreed we should look at things since the rookie wage scale was put in place, but my guess is you won't actually look at anything real and just assume the rookie QB pay leads to more wins, but I doubt it really does. We already see it doesn't lead to more SB wins.
I think it's one of those myths like OGs aren't valuable.
Noone said a qb on a rookie deal leads to more wins. What has been said is that good qb play on a rookie deal is a huge advantage in ability to build a team. Its really that simple.
|
|
|
Post by imgrate on Mar 20, 2024 12:09:47 GMT -5
Thatâs because youâre using SBs as the barometer and SB wins are a statistically irrelevant metric. For instance, using SBs as the metric will say you need mahomes or brady as your qb, and every other win is an anomaly. Additionally, using a sole metric as the barometer does not isolate the impact that good QB play on a rookie deal provides. It affords the team the ability to add more pieces in free agency and/or to retain who they already have. However, just because a team has this built-in advantage, doesnt mean they wonât have squandered it by signing bad players (i.e. solder and golladay), effectively using up the advantage gained. As for your example of Eli was getting 7 in 2004. Our first rd pick, this year, 20 years later of cap increases, will be getting roughly 10/yr. Peyton was getting 2x what Eli was getting⊠If we drafted a qb, the top qb contract would be 5.5x that amount. Thatâs a huge difference I used SBs because it's the easiest metric to find. You're taking a stance that having a QB on a rookie deal gives some kind of advantage but my original question still remains....does it actually give an advantage? Sure on paper "more money" is better than "less money" but we all agree having a better QB is worth more than anything. It seems to me that teams with long term QBs do better than with what ever they would have spent that money on.
Point is, no one is trading their stud vet QB making 20% of their teams salary for a rookie stud. So unless someone has some kind of actual evidence that "Qb on rookie deal leads to winning" I'm going to just assume it's non-sense. But by all means go dig up the stats that show those teams win more.
Lol, thats because generally speaking, teams with long term QBs have great QB play and thats why they have kept them around. Great QB play is highly positively correlated with winning games. If you canât see the inherent advantage of having a good player on a cheap deal, then youâre always going to be lost on this subject.
|
|
|
Post by Sarcasman on Mar 20, 2024 12:10:40 GMT -5
I hear Josh Rosen may be available. If he's not busy working on his HOF induction speech. those who donât watch college football and only rely on approx Jan-April to learn about prospects get blindsided. No different this year. There were many warning signs with Rosen. Imo, there are too many warning signs with Celeb Williams to feel comfortable. That's quite an indictment of pretty much every football draft analyst there is.
|
|
|
Post by Rangers13 on Mar 20, 2024 12:20:06 GMT -5
those who donât watch college football and only rely on approx Jan-April to learn about prospects get blindsided.  No different this year. There were many warning signs with Rosen.  Imo, there are too many warning signs with Celeb Williams to feel comfortable. That's quite an indictment of pretty much every football draft analyst there is. 1st part or 2nd?
|
|
|
Post by TEM on Mar 20, 2024 12:25:47 GMT -5
I hear Josh Rosen may be available. If he's not busy working on his HOF induction speech. those who donât watch college football and only rely on approx Jan-April to learn about prospects get blindsided. No different this year. There were many warning signs with Rosen. Imo, there are too many warning signs with Celeb Williams to feel comfortable.So, I'm not the only one that has issues with him as a top 10 pick.
|
|
|
Post by Sarcasman on Mar 20, 2024 12:26:49 GMT -5
That's quite an indictment of pretty much every football draft analyst there is. 1st part or 2nd? Both obviously.
|
|
|
Post by Rangers13 on Mar 20, 2024 12:31:12 GMT -5
I havenât heard every analyst voice concern about Williams.
|
|
|
Post by Rangers13 on Mar 20, 2024 12:33:06 GMT -5
those who donât watch college football and only rely on approx Jan-April to learn about prospects get blindsided.  No different this year. There were many warning signs with Rosen.  Imo, there are too many warning signs with Celeb Williams to feel comfortable.So, I'm not the only one that has issues with him as a top 10 pick.  Idk where he should go. Wish we could hear the interviews.
|
|
|
Post by myronguyton29 on Mar 20, 2024 12:37:42 GMT -5
So, I'm not the only one that has issues with him as a top 10 pick. Idk where he should go. Wish we could hear the interviews. I think post #91 was intended for you lol.....
|
|
|
Post by Sarcasman on Mar 20, 2024 12:43:24 GMT -5
I havenât heard every analyst voice concern about Williams. Exactly. I'd be surprised if many or even several have, that's not the business they're in.
|
|
|
Post by Rangers13 on Mar 20, 2024 12:45:21 GMT -5
Idk where he should go. Wish we could hear the interviews. I think post #91 was intended for you lol..... I donât see post #numbers from an Iphone
|
|
|
Post by myronguyton29 on Mar 20, 2024 12:58:55 GMT -5
I think post #91 was intended for you lol..... I donât see post #numbers from an Iphone yeah the only way to see numbers are to scroll all the way to the bottom of the page and click in desktop mode. I don't know why in mobile mode it doesn't show. Desktop mode is a smaller font too and you have to spread the screen to enlarge smh. Sometime I'll go in desktop mode if I"m away from my pc or laptop if I want to see how many folks replied to a conversation, ect. Should have the same functions in either mode lmao.......
|
|
|
Post by Rangers13 on Mar 20, 2024 13:02:03 GMT -5
I donât see post #numbers from an Iphone yeah the only way to see numbers are to scroll all the way to the bottom of the page and click in desktop mode. I don't know why in mobile mode it doesn't show. Desktop mode is a smaller font too and you have to spread the screen to enlarge smh. Sometime I'll go in desktop mode if I"m away from my pc or laptop if I want to see how many folks replied to a conversation, ect. Should have the same functions in either mode lmao....... If itâs that important iâm sure it will find me.
|
|
|
Post by myronguyton29 on Mar 20, 2024 13:15:06 GMT -5
yeah the only way to see numbers are to scroll all the way to the bottom of the page and click in desktop mode. I don't know why in mobile mode it doesn't show. Desktop mode is a smaller font too and you have to spread the screen to enlarge smh. Sometime I'll go in desktop mode if I"m away from my pc or laptop if I want to see how many folks replied to a conversation, ect. Should have the same functions in either mode lmao....... If itâs that important iâm sure it will find me. lol
|
|
|
Post by IrishMike on Mar 20, 2024 17:47:03 GMT -5
Noone said a qb on a rookie deal leads to more wins. What has been said is that good qb play on a rookie deal is a huge advantage in ability to build a team. Its really that simple. If building that team doesn't lead to more wins then who cares?
|
|
|
Post by IrishMike on Mar 20, 2024 17:59:36 GMT -5
Lol, thats because generally speaking, teams with long term QBs have great QB play and thats why they have kept them around. Great QB play is highly positively correlated with winning games. If you canât see the inherent advantage of having a good player on a cheap deal, then youâre always going to be lost on this subject. Mahomes was an MVP and provided great QB play on his rookie deal. The team signing him to a bazillion dollar contract didn't make them skip a beat.
I can see how that would appear to give an advantage but I just don't think the facts back it up as being a drastic advantage. The reason for that is you are constantly rotating who you are giving money to. A simplified example, you have a rookie contract QB with vet WRs, then you pay that QB and suddenly can't afford those WRs but you draft new WRs to replace the high priced vets. The team doesn't skip a beat, you have to hit on draft picks though.
The reason I say this is because I hear people (talking heads, posters etc) state the "rookie contract QB" as if it's the magic pill and once you pay that QB you fall off a cliff. But that doesn't happen. Go compare teams winning % with QBs on rookie deals to those teams after the QB is on that deal.
|
|
|
Post by Morehead State on Mar 20, 2024 22:40:08 GMT -5
Lol, thats because generally speaking, teams with long term QBs have great QB play and thats why they have kept them around. Great QB play is highly positively correlated with winning games. If you canât see the inherent advantage of having a good player on a cheap deal, then youâre always going to be lost on this subject. Mahomes was an MVP and provided great QB play on his rookie deal. The team signing him to a bazillion dollar contract didn't make them skip a beat.
I can see how that would appear to give an advantage but I just don't think the facts back it up as being a drastic advantage. The reason for that is you are constantly rotating who you are giving money to. A simplified example, you have a rookie contract QB with vet WRs, then you pay that QB and suddenly can't afford those WRs but you draft new WRs to replace the high priced vets. The team doesn't skip a beat, you have to hit on draft picks though.
The reason I say this is because I hear people (talking heads, posters etc) state the "rookie contract QB" as if it's the magic pill and once you pay that QB you fall off a cliff. But that doesn't happen. Go compare teams winning % with QBs on rookie deals to those teams after the QB is on that deal.
That's because he's an incredibly great talent. He CAN carry an otherwise mediocre team. No one else is in that class, and therefor your example is moot.
|
|
|
Post by ocgiant on Mar 20, 2024 23:38:54 GMT -5
After all this time the Giants have the real opprotunity to finally draft a talented WR1!
Sure anything can happen but I believe this is what the Giants will do come draft day.
|
|
|
Post by krappdetector on Mar 21, 2024 0:43:30 GMT -5
After all this time the Giants have the real opprotunity to finally draft a talented WR1! Sure anything can happen but I believe this is what the Giants will do come draft day. I checked my crystal ball and it says you are right. It also says it won't matter much because the delivery mechanism will fail to get him the ball. Both balls are pessimists.
|
|
|
Post by Fletch842 on Mar 21, 2024 6:22:01 GMT -5
So MHJ decided to skip the OSU pro day, so he hasn't worked out at all after the season. Interesting. Maybe he'll slip a little. I'd take him in a heartbeat!!
|
|
|
Post by imgrate on Mar 21, 2024 11:25:44 GMT -5
Noone said a qb on a rookie deal leads to more wins. What has been said is that good qb play on a rookie deal is a huge advantage in ability to build a team. Its really that simple. If building that team doesn't lead to more wins then who cares? Because itâs about maximizing your allocation of a finite resources. One individual move wonât be the sole cause for wins, thereâs tons of variables.
|
|
|
Post by IrishMike on Mar 21, 2024 16:21:06 GMT -5
That's because he's an incredibly great talent. He CAN carry an otherwise mediocre team. No one else is in that class, and therefor your example is moot. True. He is incredible. So if a team that is trash like the Giants were to pay a QB $40m a year and that QB would only play 5 games surely they would have a drop off. But that didn't really happen, last year we had the second most wins since Jones was drafted and had he actually played probably would have had more. Either way there was not some drastic drop off, but maybe that's because we are so bad we can't get worse.
There just is not a bunch of evidence that having a QB on a rookie deal actually leads to more wins, even though we all agree it should.
|
|
|
Post by IrishMike on Mar 21, 2024 19:14:12 GMT -5
If building that team doesn't lead to more wins then who cares? Because itâs about maximizing your allocation of a finite resources. One individual move wonât be the sole cause for wins, thereâs tons of variables. Right and there are tons of different ways to allocate those resources as we have seen from the different teams that have won the Super Bowl.
|
|
miggs
Starter
Posts: 4,178
|
Post by miggs on Mar 21, 2024 19:39:05 GMT -5
Don't get those posters who hate Jones, but do not want the Giants to draft a QB, but instead prefer a WR. That makes sense only if you think Jones is good which they do not.
And given that there is talk of Jones possibly not playing this year, one would think Jones hater would be calling for the Giants drafting a QB high in the draft.
Starting to look like Schoen may well come close to filling the Giants many holes by creating CAL space that allows him to sign more free agents. Add in the draft and the Giants could be in good shape. However, the Giants having any chance to have a good season depends on Jones playing. But the Giants having success depends on Daboll demonstrating he's a good HC, and it's far from clear he is.
|
|
|
Post by imgrate on Mar 21, 2024 20:12:25 GMT -5
Because itâs about maximizing your allocation of a finite resources. One individual move wonât be the sole cause for wins, thereâs tons of variables. Right and there are tons of different ways to allocate those resources as we have seen from the different teams that have won the Super Bowl. Uh huh. And the better the resources are allocated, the better chance you have
|
|