Cam Ward

[Pragidealist]

4 minutes ago, Stevenths78 said:

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. 

And yes I did change it slightly to first overall pick .

 

If you just say the 1rst qb taken is usually not the best qb-  that's kind of an obvious statement just bc of the math. 

 

Since 2000. Only 24 qbs can be taken first. 300 qbs have been drafted AFTER the first qb.   It would be very surprising if the number of qbs taken first.. beat out all the rest. 

[Pragidealist]

1 minute ago, Stevenths78 said:

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. 

That's just math, man,    That means nothing. 

[Stevenths78]

3 minutes ago, Pragidealist said:

That's just math, man,    That means nothing. 

So your argument against my correct statement is essentially in a nutshell me saying  1+1=2 and you saying yeah but 2+2=4 so you’re wrong? 
 

Got it. 

Edited March 18, 2025 by Stevenths78

[scine09]

14 minutes ago, 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.   

You have to be careful with the Pro Bowl stat.  Mac Jones made the Pro Bowl….

[Pragidealist]

2 minutes ago, Pragidealist said:

And yes I did change it slightly to first overall pick .

 

If you just say the 1rst qb taken is usually not the best qb-  that's kind of an obvious statement just bc of the math. 

 

Since 2000. Only 24 qbs can be taken first. 300 qbs have been drafted AFTER the first qb.   It would be very surprising if the number of qbs taken first.. beat out all the rest. 

So  I checked.  91 qbs were taken since 2015.  

So yes..  the 9 qbs taken were not all better than the 91 taken later.  26 in the first round.   Just by the odds that was never going to happen.

 

Even hitting on first round qbs is 44%. pro bowl rate by itself.   

 

44% of 9 is 3 (rounded down).  44% of 17 is 7. 

 

So the first qb taken would have to hit 78% of the time. That's higher than first overall picks hit. 

 

So yeah... its hard to draft qbs. 

[Stevenths78]

Just now, Pragidealist said:

So  I checked.  91 qbs were taken since 2015.  

So yes..  the 9 qbs taken were not all better than the 91 taken later.  26 in the first round.   Just by the odds that was never going to happen.

 

Even hitting on first round qbs is 44%. pro bowl rate by itself.   

 

44% of 9 is 3 (rounded down).  44% of 17 is 7. 

 

So the first qb taken would have to hit 78% of the time. That's higher than first overall picks hit. 

 

So yeah... its hard to draft qbs. 

 

Lets look at first QBs taken since 2015: 

Winston, Goff, Trubisky, Mayfield, Murray, Burrows (only good one), Lawrence, Pickett, Young, Williams. 
 

is this what a 78% win rate looks like to someone looking to argue and not man enough to say they are wrong ? 

[scine09]

3 minutes ago, Stevenths78 said:

 

Lets look at first QBs taken since 2015: 

Winston, Goff, Trubisky, Mayfield, Murray, Burrows (only good one), Lawrence, Pickett, Young, Williams. 
 

is this what a 78% win rate looks like to someone looking to argue and not man enough to say they are wrong ? 

Goff has had a very good/excellent career.  Mayfield's been very good.  It's too early to write off Lawrence, Young and Williams.

 

The only misses there have been Winston, Trubisky and Pickett.

[Stevenths78]

Just now, scine09 said:

Goff has had a very good/excellent career.  Mayfield's been very good.  It's too early to write off Lawrence, Young and Williams.

 

The only misses there have been Winston, Trubisky and Pickett.

No that’s fair. My point was clear though, the best QBs in the draft have been mostly after the first selected since 2015. There are a few solid QBs here mainly Burrows. That said, to me none besides Burrows and Williams are franchise QBs. 

[scine09]

2 minutes ago, Stevenths78 said:

No that’s fair. My point was clear though, the best QBs in the draft have been mostly after the first selected since 2015. There are a few solid QBs here mainly Burrows. That said, to me none besides Burrows and Williams are franchise QBs. 

It's debatable on some of them but Goff has done everything he's been asked to do, Mayfield's been terrific in his two years in Tampa and the others are young (not including Pickett since I think the book is pretty much out on him).

 

You could do a lot worse than having Jared Goff or Baker Mayfield for 10-15 years.  

[Stevenths78]

Just now, scine09 said:

It's debatable on some of them but Goff has done everything he's been asked to do, Mayfield's been terrific in his two years in Tampa and the others are young (not including Pickett since I think the book is pretty much out on him).

 

You could do a lot worse than having Jared Goff or Baker Mayfield for 10-15 years.  

Yeah but again you’re missing the larger point I made to him. The year Mayfield for example was drafted first overall, Josh Allen went 7th and Lamar 32nd. Would you rather have Allen/Lamar or Baker Mayfield? 
 

 

[scine09]

1 minute ago, Stevenths78 said:

Yeah but again you’re missing the larger point I made to him. The year Mayfield for example was drafted first overall, Josh Allen went 7th and Lamar 32nd. Would you rather have Allen/Lamar or Baker Mayfield? 
 

 

Irrelevant.  Just because one guy isn't as good as another doesn't mean that a player shouldn't have been drafted where they were and also what happened in the past doesn't predict the future.  

[Stevenths78]

2 minutes ago, scine09 said:

Irrelevant.  Just because one guy isn't as good as another doesn't mean that a player shouldn't have been drafted where they were and also what happened in the past doesn't predict the future.  

Entirely relevant to the previous discussion. This board man.
 

The poster said that no one has Sanders above Ward like that’s some great point against Sanders. Which actually recent history shows it is a point for Sanders. If you were not privy to the original discussion, I would start a few pages back then circle back. No reason to argue to argue when I am 100% correct in what I said. There is no argument unless you like him just want to childishly argue. 

Edited March 18, 2025 by Stevenths78

[scine09]

Just now, Stevenths78 said:

Entirely relevant to the previous discussion. This board man.
 

The poster said that no one has Sanders above Ward like that’s some great point against Sanders. Which actually recent history shows it is a point for Sanders. If you were privy to the original discussion, I would start a few pages back then circle back. No reason to argue to argue when I am 100% correct in what I said. There is no argument unless you like him just want to childishly argue. 

Lol no it’s not a point for Sanders.  What happened in a different year is 100% irrelevant.  So you’re suggesting that a team should take a player they like less because in another year a player drafted second was better than a player drafted first?  That’s ridiculous logic.

[Stevenths78]

2 minutes ago, scine09 said:

Lol no it’s not a point for Sanders.  What happened in a different year is 100% irrelevant.  So you’re suggesting that a team should take a player they like less because in another year a player drafted second was better than a player drafted first?  That’s ridiculous logic.

No. I suggested Sanders is the best because he has one of the best Weight Average Target Percentages in the history of that stat. 
 

Then that guy said well no one likes Sanders more like that is some point against a very relevant and reliable QB statistic. Again, get your self caught up and read the previous articles and points I posted. If you want to discuss those, I am all ears. 

Edited March 18, 2025 by Stevenths78

[Pragidealist]

18 minutes ago, Stevenths78 said:

 

Lets look at first QBs taken since 2015: 

Winston, Goff, Trubisky, Mayfield, Murray, Burrows (only good one), Lawrence, Pickett, Young, Williams. 
 

is this what a 78% win rate looks like to someone looking to argue and not man enough to say they are wrong ? 

 

Then you get into what is a good qb or not a good qb.   I used probowls as a quick metric.  Man..  I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong.  I've done it a ton.  You don't have a point- at least not one useful in determining what a team should do in picking qbs.   You're basically saying.. picking qbs successfully is hard. Yep- sure is.     Doesn't tell us anything