Cam Ward

[Stevenths78]

Just now, Pragidealist said:

You're misunderstanding me.  They are generally right on who is selected in the top 5-  not who the best qb is.  

Yeah that’s fair. But to my point outside of Burrows the best QBs taken are not the first QBs taken.
 

So you saying no one sees Sanders over Ward, isn’t really an argument at all against Sanders. If anything, it could be used as an argument for Sanders. They never get the top QB right again minus Burrows. 

[Pragidealist]

1 minute ago, Stevenths78 said:

Yeah that’s fair. But to my point outside of Burrows the best QBs taken are not the first QBs taken.
 

So you saying no one sees Sanders over Ward, isn’t really an argument at all against Sanders. If anything, it could be used as an argument for Sanders. They never get the top QB right again minus Burrows. 

 

It's neither.  Its saying that analysts by this time have a good feel for who the league likes more-   that means all the FO and the tv analysts start to converge.  

 

Everyone actually sucks (including all the analysts, data guru, and experts both on tv and in the FO)  suck on actually nailing it.   Its why this is so hard.   I don't think the correct answer is -  find out who everyone starts to like and pick the other guy.   

 

Its just means no one really knows. 

[TeamRamrod]

On 104.5 today Nate Tice’s comp for Cam Ward was “A jazz musician who reads sheet music”

 

And that might be the most beautiful player comp I’ve ever heard lol 

[Stevenths78]

1 minute ago, Pragidealist said:

 

It's neither.  Its saying that analysts by this time have a good feel for who the league likes more-   that means all the FO and the tv analysts start to converge.  

 

Everyone actually sucks (including all the analysts, data guru, and experts both on tv and in the FO)  suck on actually nailing it.   Its why this is so hard.   I don't think the correct answer is -  find out who everyone starts to like and pick the other guy.   

 

Its just means no one really knows. 

Nope that’s not the answer forsure and not why I prefer Sanders. I just continue to like Sanders more and more when I did into his numbers. 
 

That said, going against the grain to an extent is normally the right approach at QB in the draft. History does show that to be the case. There’s no argument there

[Pragidealist]

4 minutes ago, Stevenths78 said:

Yeah that’s fair. But to my point outside of Burrows the best QBs taken are not the first QBs taken.
 

So you saying no one sees Sanders over Ward, isn’t really an argument at all against Sanders. If anything, it could be used as an argument for Sanders. They never get the top QB right again minus Burrows. 

I mean look at the Vince Young draft..  It was debated mostly which was better Young or Leinert...    Cutler ended up the best option...  Its a position that no one has a handle on. The best course is humility on any preference. 

[Stevenths78]

Just now, Pragidealist said:

I mean look at the Vince Young draft..  It was debated mostly which was better Young or Leinert...    Cutler ended up the best option...  Its a position that no one has a handle on. The best course is humility on any preference. 

That’s entirely my point. 

[Pragidealist]

Just now, Stevenths78 said:

Nope that’s not the answer forsure and not why I prefer Sanders. I just continue to like Sanders more and more when I did into his numbers. 
 

That said, going against the grain to an extent is normally the right approach at QB in the draft. History does show that to be the case. There’s no argument there

Going against the grain is not the normal right path.  History just says that one one knows-  not that going counter to experts is right.     Its a lot easier to say the one guy who picked the first qb was wrong than the 3 teams who picked a different one.  The odds are already better for them. 

[Pragidealist]

1 minute ago, Stevenths78 said:

That’s entirely my point. 

Not exactly..  You cant' go and pick the ones that teams DONT like..  Or Levis would have hit.  There are many many more qbs who fail after the top pick than there are top picks who fail.   Just by the numbers. 

[IsntLifeFunny]

39 minutes ago, BudsOilers said:

Bear in mind I saw a number of his games at WSU so I don't buy into some of the over the top "he's elevated and won everywhere" fabricated claims.

I know. I'm just fucking around. I actually agree with one of your original points about how you were in on McNair knowing he was a project. I think the same of Ward. His rookie year will be rough and honestly I'd rather him sit for a bit but that isn't happening or we are trading out to the Giants who will also start him day 1.

[Pragidealist]

4 minutes ago, Stevenths78 said:

That’s entirely my point. 

Since the year 2000, 44 quarterbacks have been selected in the first round of the NFL Draft, with 19 of them earning Pro Bowl selections. This translates to approximately 43% of first-round quarterbacks making at least one Pro Bowl appearance.

 

 

If you're just going for best odds.. bet they both fail.   

[IsntLifeFunny]

45 minutes ago, BudsOilers said:

I don't hate Ward.  Just not confident he's worthy of 1/1.  Ball placement accuracy and decision making post snap.....and personally think a trade down haul is the best way of spurring the rebuild.

I disagree unless they're offering the premium we deserve. Even then I personally wouldn't take any offer unless it blows me away. The starting point for negotiations with the Giants is next year's first and this year's second. 

[Stevenths78]

2 minutes ago, Pragidealist said:

Not exactly..  You cant' go and pick the ones that teams DONT like..  Or Levis would have hit.  There are many many more qbs who fail after the top pick than there are top picks who fail.   Just by the numbers. 

You’re missing my point and looking to argue. The point which again is a fact and not an argument is for the most part the top QB taken in the draft since 2015 is not the best QB in that draft. There’s not an argument there unless you just want to create one. 

[Stevenths78]

Just now, Pragidealist said:

Since the year 2000, 44 quarterbacks have been selected in the first round of the NFL Draft, with 19 of them earning Pro Bowl selections. This translates to approximately 43% of first-round quarterbacks making at least one Pro Bowl appearance.

 

 

If you're just going for best odds.. bet they both fail.   

Yeah when did I say first round QBs are bad? I clearly articulated the first QB taken is normally not the best QB in each draft. That was a very clear articulation you need to grasp. 

[Pragidealist]

Just now, Stevenths78 said:

You’re missing my point and looking to argue. The point which again is a fact and not an argument is for the most part the top QB taken in the draft since 2015 is not the best QB in that draft. There’s not an argument there unless you just want to create one. 

This is not actually true. 44 qbs taken in the first round since 2000.  44% made the probowl.   16 qbs taken first overall and 10 made the probowl. 

 

Thats 62.5%.    That actually surprised me.  

[Stevenths78]

1 minute ago, Pragidealist said:

This is not actually true. 44 qbs taken in the first round since 2000.  44% made the probowl.   16 qbs taken first overall and 10 made the probowl. 

 

Thats 62.5%.    That actually surprised me.  

Dude you’re going to have to learn to read. For the tenth time, since 2015 (That was the date I said this entire thread) the top QBs taken normally were not the best ones in the draft. 
 

Yes pre 2015, it was easier to scout QBs. The reason for this is because of College Offenses making bad QBs looking better than they are IMO. 
 

To be crystal clear for the 10th time, my point which is not an argument, is since 2015 specifically, the first QB take  in the draft is normally not the best one. There are years they are, but mostly in the past decade that isn’t the case. Stay on the point I made, quit trying to argue something else entirely separate from my point.