Draft Check: Current Top Ten 1/9/2008
Here’s a quick look at ESPN.com’s top ten on both the Scouts Inc. and Kiper’s boards.
68 Responses to Draft Check: Current Top Ten 1/9/2008
-
will says:
Last year I was hoping the Jets would draft Harrell, who was picked earlier by the Packers (in retrospect, the Jets got a phenomenal player in Revis). This year, at this spot, I think the best bet for the Jets (assuming no trade, which would be best) would be an excellent college DT who projects as a 3-4 DE. If Balmer or Ellis are candidates then thats the direction I’d like to see the Jets go with the sixth pick. They need disruptive D-linemen.
Laurinaitis would fit nicely next to Harris at ILB, and there seem to be some offensive linemen that project high (and someone will lift alot of weight and shoot up the draft boards in feb), but the Jets need to get much firmer on the D-line. Its the key to everything the Pats do on defense – Seymour, Wilfork and Warren stuff everything at the line and make life for NEs older and too slow LBs to make plays.
Then, if the Jets can score a pass rusher in the second round they will have seriously impoved the defense. I would fill the holes on the O-line with a 3rd or 4th round draft pick (quality guards in particular seem to slip) and through FA.
I would use the other first day pick to draft a CB and try to sign a big. fast WR in FA. There are several good FA WRs.
If the Jets can convert Vilma and/or Pennington into first day picks or a guy like Suggs then the team can fill all of its major needs this offseason and have some depth in each of the defensive units.
-
Kiper does a good job of not enticing kids to come out early by posting them up there (scouts seems not to have the same compunction) so I think that after the 15th when the final underclassmen list is tied up (which seems to be growing daily) then he’ll add those underclassmen.
-
david i says:
Depending on free agenacy, the draft focus needs to on strengthening the interior on both sides. This draft has some depth on the O-line, some good o-lineman can be had in rounds 2-4, expecially if Tannenbaum is able to get some value for Vilma. The first round needs to go defensive tackle/end. Gholston is a multi-talented player who can do many things on the field. He will be a good outside backer in 3-4. Laurinitis looked overwhelmed vs. LSU o-line that has a couple of projected draftees. I think he is overrated due to padding stats against sub-par competition OSU played against all last year. On some plays, he was getting pushed 7-8 yards down field and late to the point of attack. Let him fall to the Pats, who will pick him to replace Bruschi and then we can run up the middle against them if we can move Wilfork’s fat ass out of the way.
-
Chase says:
What’s the story with this Balmer kid? At 6’5 / 298, he seems to have the perfect build for a 3-4 DE.
I haven’t heard much about him.
-
mbi says:
I think a 3-4 DE would be nice…but I think Ellis and Coleman can get the job done for now – the run defense seemed to be better at the end of the year. I still think the jets need a game changing pass rusher. If Chris Long is there at 6 you cant pass him up. He can rush the passer and is big enough to stuff the run. At 6, I think you want a game changer I dont see any of the highly projected DT’s who can play end being game changers.
-
Bent says: will, I agree – that’s why I wanted Carriker last year. I’m not sure there is a guy that fits that description that would be good value where we pick.
I think Long is the closest guy to achieve what you want. Although the Jets would mainly use him at OLB, he could theoretically play on the line in passing downs and has the skills to dominate in the trenches. In an ideal world, he – or someone like him – would command a double team, because the Pitt game showed how dominant Robertson could be when not doubled.
Sedrick Ellis is not that guy though. He’s built like Robertson…too short for DE.
I have not seen much of Balmer, but once all the underclassman are included, he will surely drop so that his actual value is in the 12-15 range. Still, perhaps he is an option if we are able to trade down.
-
RK says:
Hi everyone.
I haven’t been here in a while – I’ve been spending all of my time blogging politics and I think it’s damaged my psyche so I need a lighter fare.
Anyhow this link is a good breakdown of options around the Jets picks:
http://www.fantasyfootballjungle.com/y/nfl-draft/teams/index.php?steam=NYJI hope you all have a great 2008!
-
SackDance99 says:
Get ready folks to get tired of my saying this: Matty Ice, Matty Ice, Matty Ice!!! There’s a reason that Scouts, Inc. put 3 QBs in the top 10, QB is the most important position in pro sports (besides NHL goalie in the playoffs). Also, it’s difficult to trade for a franchise QB. The only position player that can make a lasting impact for the Jets franchise is an elite QB. The way the draft is shaping up, the Jets will have their pick of the top 3 QB candidates (because I think Atlanta will have too much pressure to pick McFadden, they are desperate for a “new face” for the franchise and McFadden is the perfect pick).
If KC ends up being great (something that I doubt), then the Jets will have a great bargaining chip. But, if there’s one position that I would gladly take a chance on, it’s QB. For example, look at the top ten QBs and look at the playoff QBs, the top 8 all made the playoffs. Gholston looks like he has the versatility to be a DE/OLB, but I’d much rather get into the Terrell Suggs derby (and I wonder how different the cost would be between what it would take to get Suggs and paying Gholston top 6 $$$). And, no other top prospect that is likely to be at 6 seems like a “can’t miss” prospect. There’s no 2-gap NT, I’ve soured on Laurinaitis (and I like Rey Maualuga more anyhow) for ILB, the other OLB candidates are more projects (like Calais Campbell) and drafting an LG or RT at 6 would be ridiculous. So, if you’re a BPA disciple, Matty Ice may be it at no. 6.
-
RK–Glad to see that you had enough of politics and came back. Though I’d hardly call TJB “lighter fare.” This is serious.
-
SD99–Suggs will be franchised by the Ravens. And, we’re developing a young QB–KC. I’m a Gholston person now. Combo OLB/DE. Just what we need to wreak some havoc!
-
Bent says:
Maualuga is awesome, but also pretty reckless. Will often go for the big hit or overpursue. He should be an impact player and would be a good fit on a team which has the more disciplined Harris and guys with recovery speed like Rhodes and Revis.
I’m not knocking the pick, it’s a great idea. Maybe reckless is the wrong way of explaining it. Just thought I’d throw that out there. Guys like that are exciting, Polamalu for example, and you need players with that type of ability to have an elite defense.
-
Rich, are you really that confident that KC can develop into an elite QB? I’m not. Also, I could always say that the Jets have a realtively young OLB/DE combo in Bryan Thomas, and David Bowens started to come on at the end of the season. That’s why I view ILB as more of a need pick than OLB/DE, but I’ve soured on Laurinaitis. If I were certain that Gholston was a Shawne Merriman-type of force, I’d have no misgivings, but from what I saw, he’s good, but not great.
-
Bent, Maualuga in terms of size, speed and tackling ability would be a great complement to Harris, also he’d have more limited responsibility as a weakside 3-4 ILB, which might rein in his freelancing, and accentuate his blitzing ability. If he comes out, however, I’m not sure he’d be worth a top 6 pick, but he would wow the scouts at the Combine, maybe supplanting Laurinaitis and cracking the top 10.
-
KevT says:
To be honest, I’m willing to go the KC route for now because I don’t think this is a one year turnaround. There are so many holes to fill that QB just ends up last. Look at every team and turnaround and it starts at the line. Good d line makes DC’s smarter and CB’s get more picks. O line makes every QB significantly better. I don’t know enough about the d line prospects beyond Dorsey and Long, both of which I like. Is Dorsey an NT prospect if he did fall in our lap? (Not that he will…)
-
I agree with KevT. I don’t want to say that we’re “stuck” with KC, but let’s give him another year, and worry about QB in the 2009 draft, if necessary. There’s lots of holes to fill. Maualuga-Gholston-one of the Longs-even McFadden, all make a lot of sense.
-
jet4lif says:
SD, I totally agree with you on QB and a top pick. Even if KC fares well next yr it wud take time to develop Matty Ice. The only 3 other players i wud like at 6th are Dorsey, Chris Long and Ghoulston.
So go for Matty Ice. -
Nikolas says:
Maualuga seems to be the best ILB. Better than Laurinaitis.But I do not think that he is coming out and I do not think that Tangini is looking to waist the 1st pick on ILB. We have enough there. There are more glaring needs.
I expected them with the first pick to go either OT if and only if Jake Long is available, or OLB/DE with Chris Long or Vernon Gholston. Harvey is also an option but I do not know if he qualifies for the 6th pick.Sedrick Ellis is good but I do not see him to bring too much more than Dewayne Robertson… and Balmer is a late first or second round talent.
However, what we will do in the draft will most likely depend on what we will do in Free Agency. If we sign a Terrell Suggs (which I doubt that the Ravens will let him go), or if we sign a couple of good OL or Nnamdi Asomugha the CB form Okland, the hole strategy of the draft will change.
-
PS: Mel Kipper’s board is USC biased. Sam Baker will be late first and Fred Daviswill be at best a second rounder.
-
seanmac says:
I’m all for taking the best available player, but Matt Ryan isn’t even the best quarterback in the draft (Brian Brohm is), and neither one of them is deserving of a top ten pick. The problem with taking quarterbacks is that the position gets overvalued to the point where players get pushed up the board well beyond their actual quality as prospects, which is how you end up with Jamarcus Russell or David Carr or who have you going at #1. There aren’t elite quarterback prospects every year, and this is one year where none of them are worthy of going at the top of the draft, which is different than saying none of them will. As I’ve posted previously, FO’s QB projection system does a pretty good job of picking out the quality prospects from the lemons, and Matt Ryan projects to have almost exactly the same career as…wait for it…Kellen Clemens. So we would be paying a ton of money for the privilege of adding a player who isn’t going to be any better than the one we already have who is making peanuts. Taking Matt Ryan at six would be about the worst possible move the team could make, but it’s not worth getting worked up over because it is almost a guarantee that the team will not take him or any other quarterback, not at the top of the draft.
Chris Long is sure to be Plan A, and there is an off chance that he’ll still be there, as he doesn’t fit the defenses of the teams drafting 1-5 (aside from Miami, who is more likely to go Dorsey or to trade down) as well as he does ours. Still, it’s safer to assume that he’ll be off the board.
It’s also safe to assume that the Jets won’t be able to trade down and will have to pick at six for the simple reason that no one will want to trade up. The top picks are simply not worth what they cost in terms of cap space and draft choices, and as a result you see very few trades taking place until around pick 11. Teams don’t want the picks, which is why all the fantasizing about trading down once or twice or three times needs to stop. No one is calling for the sixth pick, especially in a year when the quarterback crop is both deep and lacking in star power.
It’s way too early for me to have settled on a list of players who I’m interested in, but I would say that I came away from that game with a distinctly different take on Laurinaitas than others- I thought he played very well, and that the track record on top linebackers has been very good in the last few seasons. When you’re taking a LB at the top of the draft, you have a very good read on what you are getting, and while it would be preferable to upgrade the defensive line, David Harris showed what can be accomplished by improving the bulk and hitting power at linebacker.
-
Very interesting comments all around. I respectfully disagree with the pro-QB comments. Its hard to build a solid all around team when you draft a QB in the first ro second round every year there are just other spots that need the attention. As far as simply trading the drafted QB if KC works out doesnt sound like a solid plan either, it doesn’t seem like many teams would be interested in a QB who never started a game (does anyone really want to trade for Brady Quinn right now? I dont) especially when their salary will be inflated by being the top QB chosen.
There is one playmaker on defense (Rhodes). The two rookies might be at some point but just arent there. Everyone wants to sign Terrell Suggs when that flat out will not happen, they let Adalius Thomas go last year so they could pay Suggs, so why not draft someone that can be groomed to be that type of player.
-
First off, Mel Kiper is insane…just in general, not about anything in particular. Secondly, we need a big fat, young kid in the middle. I think that kid from UNC is really good. He is fast and fat.
We get killed in the middle on defense. Teams have no problem running on us.
*I also agree about not needing a QB. I dont think Clemmens is the answer in the least. Maybe make a trade for Brady Quinn and let Chad groom him.
Being a Jets fan sucks. I hate watching the Playoffs without my Jets there.
-
P in CO says:
seanmac — who are you and why don’t you become part of team TJB. Your stuff is GOLD!
I’m disappointed the Jets pick 6th since they have a history of doing well in the middle of the pack. Revis. Vilma. Ellis. Abe (everyone thought he was a reach). Pennington.
Kiper is not normal. He’s an analyst not a promoter. ESPN is lucky to have him and not Mike Mayock.
Overall the draft should be interesting. Plus they’re cutting the time down in the first round so it should move along. At least we have the SB and March Madness to keep things going.
-
GMARZ says:
I think you’ll jumping of the Empire State Building a little premature I’ve commented in the part 4 state of the jets series alittle bit what should be done on defense as free agent signings and cuts and thats thats.
-
Stevan says:
Some pretty solid comments, better now that were getting towards the draft than i’ve seen before. Anyways, the thing you have to take into consideration with Kiper is he always has a crazy bigboard and shakes things up until a few weeks before the draft. He does this in order to get people interested in what he’s doing etc.
I think picking at #6 could be a blessing in disguise potentially. We could still possibly get c.long, although i seriously doubt it or gholston (who i hope) with our pick. THe thing people tend ur to forget is the serious ramafications of paying a player top 5 money and having him not pan out or go down with injuries. I won’t go into the idea of giving these players such high money, because i think it’s terrible how it could handcuff a franchise for 4 or so years with a bust of a player making top dollar.
Anyways, I will also have to respectfull disagree with the pro-QB scenario. Drafting another QB without a solid offensive line, WR etc. is not a very good decision. You will be unable to evaluate him, just like we were really unable to evaluate Clemens this season. Additionally, i feel you need to give a QB 26 games in order to be full evaluated and this time span is the general consensus of most scouts.
The key cogs in a 34 defense is a NT and a pass rushing OLB; there are other important factors such as gap plugging DE and corners who are solid in man to man due to all the blitzing we’d be doing. Anyways, since there isn’t anyone in this draft who is worthy of high round grade for the NT position we should go for vernon gholston. This is right around where he should be drafted, because in my opinion he is much more polished than merriman was coming out. Merriman, Ware and Wimbley were all drafted 12th, 11th and 13th, respectively. BArring freak injury, Gholston seems like a very safe pick to succeed in the 34 olb position. His measurable are much easier to translate into the nfl, compared to a CB or QB. We already know he can bullrush a T that has good foot work that weighs 50+ lbs than him and also he can speed rush around the T who is strong enough to not be bullrushed. He is very solid against the run and can flat out get to the QB. His hips aren’t as fluid in coverage as a dback or regular lb, but he has just started to do that this year and he’ll get better as he does it; this also isn’t too important because he wont be asked to drop back that often most likely.
There are a few circumstances where he might not be around for us to pick; Parcells loves his OLB and has a great one at every team he’s been at. This, coupled with the idea that dorsey as a potential knee problem that some sports writers think could drop him out of the top 5, could have gholston be the number 1 pick. Now, i dont see this too likely, but there is a chance that he could be gone when he gets to us. My big board right now goes 1a. C.long and 1b. Gholston
I here a lot of people talking about Balmer getting drafted in the middle of the draft; I don’t see this happening. Before this year he was your classic underachiever and doesn’t have the greatest measurables in the world; i think he will end up in the bottom of the 1st round to a team like the Chargers who doesn’t have many holes. I do think it’s possible that he could drop to our 2nd rounder, considering it is a very high 2nd rounder. THere are a number of other DT’s who could fit our 34 DE; Kentwan Balmer, Pat Sims (although he isn’t your traditional gap plugger and is more of a gap shooter), Dre Moore and even a kendal langford.
I think we have to adress our Oline in FA, my top pick is definately Stacy Andrews; he has the ability to play LG and RT, both of our positions of need. He is also a monster at 6’7 342 and extremely athletic. Also, if we don’t go DE in the draft, which i don’t think we will because our run d was solid at the end of the year, but our Oline was pitiful. There are some top notch tackles who will most certainly fall to us in the top of the 2nd round. Guys like Chris williams and a Gosder Cherillus. Guys in the later rounds for OG such as Duke Robinson (who is probably the best OG in the draft as far as potential and is pretty polished) will probably be had a bit earlier, Roy Sheuning and a Jordam Grimes.
What we do in free agency will have a lot of baring on what we do in the draft, i think we have the possibility to adress a number of our glaring needs this offseason and draft and be a contender to make the wild card spot next year.
-
Bent says:
KevT, the answer is no. He’s a 4-3 DT. Not a good fit in a 3-4 at all, as he has a similar build and skillset to DeWayne Robertson.
Guards? I like Branden Albert, who actually used to play alongside D’Brick, but I think we’ll address this through free agency. I actually see Duke Robinson as pretty raw, but his size and mobility are impressive.
-
I do not disagree with the notion that the Jets need an LG, RT, ILB, DE/OLB, speedy WR, or 2-gap NT. What I disagree with is why just focus on the first round pick for all of these positions? There are rounds 2 through 7, trades, UFA signings, etc. The first round should be BPA + need. When the Jets pick, it is likely that Ryan will be the consensus BPA. Plus, the Jets need a QB. Also, when the hole is at the QB position, it is the biggest possible hole. Bigger than LG, RT, NT, etc. With few exceptions, it is exceedingly unlikely for a team to succeed without an elite QB, but teams can win without an elite player at LG, RT, NT, ILB, etc. So, why can’t the Jets fill all their other holes in other ways and still take Ryan at 6?
At the 6th pick, the Jets will have their pick at QB and I respectfully disagree with seanmac’s FO analysis, mainly because it does not reflect certain exogenous factors for why certain QB’s, who are deserving of top consideration, don’t fit into the X number of starts and 64% completion percentage matrix (and Tom Brady didn’t fit this matrix, neither did Romo and many, many other elite QBs). Matt Ryan was in the first year of a new offensive scheme this season, BC’s running game was poor, the second worst in the ACC, and his offensive line was porous; yet, by almost any other measure Ryan had a superb college career and senior season. We can all pooh-pooh Mel Kiper, Todd McShay and Scouts Inc., but each places Ryan as a top 5 pick. Seanmac is a smart guy, but why believe him over Kiper, McShay or Scouts Inc.? And, let’s say he grades out as someone like KC, but Ryan is 3 inches taller, has better pocket presence, a higher football IQ, was more durable and had 3 Bowl wins. Maybe that’s the difference between a mid-second rounder and a top-ten pick.
I agree that this discussion may be academic, but if I had to choose from among Laurinaitis (IMO, Maualuga is a better fit, if he comes out, and he will if Carroll goes to the Falcons), Gholston (IMO, I’d take a flyer on Calais Campbell over Gholston, Campbell has “freak” written all over him, with a huge upside) and Ryan, I’d take Ryan. QB is too important a position to just gloss over. But, I’ll reserve judgment until after the Combine and pro days.
-
But Sack, if Ryan is 3 inches taller, has better pocket presence, and a higher football IQ, why is he churning out an identical statistical line to Kellen Clemens? The whole idea of looking for predictive statistical trends is to avoid overemphasizing the soft factors and concentrating on what the player actually did on the field. Ryan’s frame, his pocket presence and his football IQ all added up to 32 starts and a 61% career completion percentage (and while the career percentage is more predictive than a final season percentage, it should be noted that Ryan was at either 60 or 61% for the season, too)- anything that they added to his performance is already in there.
As for pooh-poohing Kiper or Scouts, Inc, or whoever, that’s not my intention at all (although I prefer Mike Mayock to any of them, the same Mike Mayock who is very high on Monsieur Clemens). NFL scouts and college football personnel evaluators are historically very good at identifying prospects and placing them in their proper round based on skill sets. On the other hand, they have proven to be no better at placing talent within each round or vis-à-vis each other than flipping a coin would be. (And that’s been statistically demonstrated.) Let’s say there are four first round quarterbacks in this year’s class- Ryan, Brohm, Woodson and one other guy who makes a late rise. Even if you’re picking first, there is a 3/4 chance that you’re not going to take the best player, and that’s just within the position group. But you’ll be paying him like the best player. That’s assuming you are going by scouting profiles. If you are using the scouting profiles as your baseline and then letting the predictive stats whittle the soft chaff away, you’re going to do better.
This year’s top ten quarterback performances provides a nice symmetry and (hopefully) a healthy measure of perspective. Two of the top ten Qbs were #1 overall picks (Manning and Palmer), two were first round picks who were the third quarterback taken in their draft (Roethlisberger and Cutler), two were second round picks (Favre and Brees), and the other four were draft afterthoughts (Brady, Hasselbeck, Gerrard, Romo). There is more than one way to skin this particular cat.
-
Sackdance99 I think there are good examples of teams not having great QBs and excelling. Tampa Bay with Trent Dilfer is the first that comes to mind, and Doug Williams in Washington (I don’t think anyone thought he was great) or our buddy Neil O’Donnell (who didn’t win but was right in it to win) Rex Grossman, Matt Hasselback, Brad Johnson…but I think everyone agrees that is the most important position on a team. Drafting a QB will add potential but it looks to me like the team can rally around Kellen like they did for Chad. More than anything I just don’t think this is the year for it and also the FO will want to see what they’ve got without potentially throwing a wrench into the works or implying that Clemens isn’t the future.
Perhaps the FO will think about QB being too important to pass up a potentially huge draft pick. I wouldn’t mind it but the salary cap implications might dissuade them. Signing away all that money for someone not projected to start for a while is a tough shot to take.
Plus you also argued your own point somewhat by saying Ryan didn’t do well without a running game and the O line was porous. One might think he’d need them in place before he can succeed.
-
Lets get it on like Donkey Kong I hear a lot of big talk and thats great but it’s just what Uncle Colin says don’t over think the room, the top tier teams don’t run just a 34 they run it all, and both of the OSU guys are over rated look at Schleigel and A.Clarke and AJ Hawk isn’t really tearing it up, so on that note Quentin Groves of Auburn 6-3 250 lbs. runs in the sub 4.5 range and played in the SEC the fastest college conference the next fastest is the NFL and I’m a Big East homer, were did Patrick Willis go to school U of Miss.
-
MS says:
Pennington to KC to swap picks and take McFadden. We need some explosion on ofense. We need somebody who can break a big run or make a big play. Right now we have nobody. We would be able to deal Jones for some defense as well. Crazy thought: What about Vilma for Calvin Johnson. It almost happened in last years draft.
-
Bent says:
Nice ideas, but trading Jones = 9m cap hit.
Can’t see why Detroit would give up CJ either.
I agree we need more playmakers though, although the likes of Leon Washington and Cotchery might have more effect if the OL was better.
-
Ilan says:
I hear a lot of talk about ILB being a need but I disagree. Can the position be improved? Yes. But I would say that the Jets have more pressing needs at maybe five other positions. If the Jets do draft an ILB it won’t be in the first round.
-
Do the homework if you go to the roster’s of all the playoff teams they average about 8-9 players from the SEC and most of them are intergal parts of their respective teams.I mean there are other excellent players but the facts are the facts HELL the Pats. have 13 on their roster thats alot folks guess how many Ohio St. 1 thats right 1, and a total of 6 from the Big Ten so whats that tell us players from the SEC are just better, do the math the last 8 teams avg. 8.875 players from the SEC of which 7 are major factors of their teams while Big Ten player’s avg. a surprisingly high 7.875 but here’s the kicker only 4 are major contributers. This is my 2008 JETS opening day line up: starting at LT D.Brick., LG Alan Fanaeca, C N.Mangold, RG Floyd “PorkChop” Womack, RT Max Starks, TE Chris Baker, Tamme Jacobs Kentucky 6-4 232 4.57 40, QB K.Clemens, RB T.Jones and Ju.Jones, WR Bryant Johson 6-3 213, Bernard Berrian 6-1 185 fast, and in the Slot L.Coles??? and a few more surprises through the draft, on defense LDE S.Ellis, RDE Tommy Kelly 6-6 300 DT/NT Corey Williams 6-4 314, DT/NT D.Rob, LOLB Terrell Suggs 6-3 260, LILB J.Vilma\ E.Barton, RILB D.Harris, ROLB B.Thomas\ Quentin Groves Auburn 6-3 250 4.46, FS K.Rhodes, SS maybe if he pans out D.Bing, CB D.Revis\ Marcus Trufant or Randall Gay\ J.Miller\ A.Dyson\ D.Barrett and Rex Ryan the new D coridinator show him the money and all of us fans that have been suffering for years with an ownership thats cheap and FO that has no idea on which way is up
-
A draft primer:
There are four basic concepts that need to be applied to each and every draft pick in the salary cap era. The first is simply the quality of the prospect. If you are looking to match up draft grade with positional need, that’s fine, so long as you move yourself up or down the board to select each player at roughly the appropriate point in the draft. Passing over players with higher grades to address areas of need is guaranteed to degrade the quality of your core over time. It is important to remember that you are not drafting to fill holes for next year but to field the strongest possible team in 3-4 years when this draft class steps to the fore.
The second concept is aligning the pick with the established understanding of the worth of each position and the difficulty in attaining a player at that position through alternate means. Some positions are simply harder to play than others, or have a smaller pool of athletes who can play them. Left tackle is perhaps the best example. Guys with franchise left tackle skills are immediately identifiable, are taken off the board almost immediately, and are just about never available through free agency. If anything, premiere left tackles make it to the free agent market even less than quarterbacks do. This means looking not only at how quickly each position group comes off the board, but also at what the tactical difference ultimately is between fielding an elite and an average player at that position. If you wanted to argue against the worth of taking a left tackle high, you could look at the offensive production of teams that have invested in premiere players and say that the perceived value hasn’t translated into real production. (I’m not stating that as a fact, but as the only real way to debate the wisdom of taking guys with LT skill sets high in the draft, because you can’t say “We can find one anywhere in the draft.”)
The third concept is length until impact, and it is of particular importance when you are drafting high. The downside to picking high is arguably greater than the upside- whoever you take, you’ll be paying them like a premiere player, so the best you can hope to do is have them turn into a premiere player, in which case you are breaking even. If you draft a bust, you’re paying top dollar for the privilege. Ideally you want to maximize the amount of production that you are getting on the dollar, which means having your pick play and produce for as much of their rookie contract as possible. D’brickashaw Ferguson hasn’t been a stud, but he’s been an average-to-good player who has taken every snap for the first two years of his contract. Had the team taken Matt Leinart, it’s possible that they would have gotten the same number of starting snaps that they got out of Clemens (or less), and Leinart would have had a bigger cap number than Ferguson. If you’re not getting any production out of a top player, his salary hit is basically dead weight against the cap. This mitigates strongly against drafting quarterbacks in the top few picks, as a quarterback likely won’t play at all for at least a season and probably won’t play at a level commensurate with his salary for three seasons, if ever. (Going against this is the concept of scarcity, which is what drives so many teams to take quarterbacks high in the first place.)
The fourth concept is production per dollar, and it’s a unique concern of the salary cap era. The most successful teams of the salary cap era—New England, Philadelphia and Indianapolis—have all been extremely good about streamlining their cap so that they are getting maximum production per dollar up and down the roster. That can mean having players with the versatility to play multiple positions, finding guys who outplay their contracts for several years in the row, avoiding guys who underplay their contracts, and finding positions and points in the draft where talent has been undervalued. Two examples of this, both from New England. The Patriots have drafted more tight ends than any other team in the league over the past five years, including multiple first rounders. They’ve done so because they’ve identified tight end as a position that is undervalued. A tight end serves a dual function as blocker and receiver, allowing for formation versatility, and they generally make less money than linemen or receivers. Prior to this year, the Patriots were able to field a highly effective offense with virtually no quality receivers, but with 2-3 tight ends who were dual threats. Another thing the Patriots have done is become very good at is targeting a specific group of players and then trading their way into position to take the last available one. If there are five defensive tackles with similar grades, they don’t want to take the first one, they want to take the fifth one and save their money and cap space. So they’ll slide down, slide down, and then move up as soon as the second to last player is off the board, so that they make sure not to miss out altogether. That’s how they were able to build the deepest and strongest rotation of defensive linemen in the league. The Jets showed that they were able to play the game to perfection when they skipped over Matt Leinart and Jay Cutler, moved down in the second round to accumulate more picks and then moved up to snag Kellen Clemens, who many people had rated as highly as any of the first rounders. Is it going to work out? Maybe. Maybe not. But if it doesn’t work out, it will cost the team infinitely less cap space over the next three seasons than if they had swung and missed on a first round quarterback. Clemens’ strongest quality right now isn’t his youth or his leadership or the fact that he isn’t Chad Pennington- it’s his ratio of skill set to cap hit. He has the tools to be a starter, but he’s being paid less than your average backup. The money that the team isn’t spending on him can be used to upgrade the quality of the team around him, allowing him to grow into the position. Drafting a quarterback at six would completely negate this advantage, and it, along with the relative lack of quality in the class, is as strong a reason as any for why the quarterback option is almost certainly not on the table. A first day quarterback, possibly. A first round quarterback, almost certainly not. -
GMARZ- Great points. I, too always thought the Pats should have sat Tom Brady for Rohan Davey. Didn’t they know he played in the SEC???
-
Bent says:
Hopefully our list of needs will have reduced dramatically by draft time. It seems like a wasted effort to speculate on who we might pick until then.
-
excellent points seanmac, I think alot of jets fans are ready to jump off the Brooklyn Bridge or remember Blair Thomas, I think D.Brick. can be better with Fanaeca next to him, the FA pool at O-Line is deep this year, go to football futures.com they have the top FA listed in each position. and the jets FO can make some serious changes on both sides of the ball if their willing to shell out some money and restructure some others they’ll have the money to do exactly what I posted early.
-
SEANMAC – I didn’t say that all Big Ten Players stink what my point is that everybody is clamouring for Gohlston cat lets hold on before making him the savior for the jet defense also he got shut down against top flight team not kent state,youngstown or bowling green
-
Liam says:
GMARZ, you write that: “everybody is clamouring for Gohlston cat lets hold on before making him the savior for the jet defense also he got shut down against top flight team not kent state,youngstown or bowling green”
Actually, Gholston was phenomenal against Michigan with 3 sacks, including one against some guy named Jake Long who is projected to go in the top 5 of the draft and did not surrender any other sacks during the entire season. Also, against LSU he had a sack and multiple quarterback pressures. Do you even watch the games, or do you just make this stuff up?
As per your 2008 Jets lineup, yes, I think we all agree it would be nice if we could add: Berrian, Julius Jones, Johnston, Suggs, Trufant, Starks, Womack, Faneca, Kelly, and Williams. Unfortunately, standing in the way of adding ten solid to premier players like that are two things: the salary cap and reality.
-
Seanmac, an interesting analysis that I generally agree with, except that I do not think that KC has what it takes to be an elite NFL QB. RK, my point about Ryan’s senior season was that DESPITE a porous OL, bad running game and new offensive scheme, he excelled. Contrast that with KC, who is in the second year of the same offense, but often times looked lost on the Jets. Also, there are far more examples of Super Bowl winners with elite QBs, than the exceptions, like Doug Williams or Dilfer…Montana, Staubach, Brady, Favre, Manning, Starr, Bradshaw, Namath, etc. It’s a virtual who’s who of Hall of Fame QBs.
Seanmac, your draft primer is very interesting and is strong on “value” drafting, which I entirely believe and why McNeil at LT in the second round in ’06 was a great pick, while Brick at no. 4 was a poor pick. But, on this Jets team, I am coming from a point where I do not believe the Jets have a franchise QB on the roster. Chad’s skills have eroded to a point where his salary is not commensurate with his on-field ability…he’s a millstone around the franchise’s future. KC just has not flashed enough consistency for me to conclude that he is a franchise QB. If he had just one game where he played great, like Eli’s game against the Steelers his rookie season, I would be on the no-QB bandwagon. And, I’ve said this before, but he lost me in the Cleveland game. Against his high school rival, facing a terrible defense, and having all his weapons, KC laid an egg. It’s hard to judge the heart of a competitor, but KC failed that test, big time. Since you have to concede that QB is a scarce position, and the fact is that the Jets could face several years of mediocrity, and mid-level draft picks, while the QB carousel turns, now might be the best time to draft a franchise QB.
As for KC’s statistical line versus Ryan’s, I will venture to say that there have been many college QBs with similar statistical lines, but disparate NFL success. The reason for this is that there is more to being a good QB than just plain numbers. Bill Simmons interviewed Malcolm Gladwell (of “Blink” and “Tipping Point” fame) and asked him if there is any way to train a QB to be like Tom Brady…have that almost uncanny ability to avoid sacks and make excellent decisions in nano-seconds. Gladwell joked that maybe having a drill where QBs have to complete their passes while having a pit bull unleashed would help. There’s the rub, seanmac, there’s no way to quantify that extra innate mental abilty that makes an average QB great. Ryan had the burden of a ranked team, played in bowl games and had to do this without a running game and a porous line. Unless you place KC and Ryan in the identical situation and come up with an adequate statistical sample, even FO’s quantative analysis is guesswork. I watched a lot of Matt Ryan and all of KC, and the difference in their pocket presence is night and day. That’s my opinion, and it’s not a popular one, but so be it.
The Jets have many needs, but the most glaring one, until it is filled, is at QB. Period. Improving the defense at no. 6 is logical and maybe the defense and special teams will be able to make up for poor QB play, but good or excellent QB play has a ripple effect that is unlike any other position. Seanmac, you have said that you would never sign a Colts OL because Peyton makes things too easy for them. Maybe Brady has, too. Nobody talks about Joe Andruzzi anymore. That’s quite a disparate impact, but that’s why QB is so important. Quick and correct decisions help the O-line; scoring points or, just staying away from 3-and-outs, helps the defense. So, I hope KC is a great QB, but if the Jets pass on Ryan, we all will have to hope Ryan fails, because passing on a potential franchise QB, when you don’t have one, is an extreme error in judgment.
-
On an unrelated note, forget Max Starks. He lost his starting RT position to Hofstra’s Willie Colon, then took over the LT position because of injury and then got injured himself (and seanmac who has been covering the AFC North has stated that the Steelers OL was weak, so a benched and injured Steeler might not be the best target). Given that background, there’s a lot more UFA RTs to consider, including Seattle’s Sean Lochlear, who had a real good game against the Redskins. Let’s see what he does against the Pack.
-
I’m not arguing that a team should ignore the quarterback position or seek out ways to compensate for inferior play at all. If you have the option of building your team around Peyton Manning, you should do it 10 out of 10 times. The problem is deciding that you are going to build your team around Peyton Manning when there is no Peyton Manning available. That quickly devolves into, “We’ll take this guy and hope he’s Peyton Manning. Wait, he’s not? Okay, get rid of him! We’ll take THIS guy and hope he’s Peyton Manning.” And so on and so on. You need to pick your spots and give yourself the best shot at an elite prospect. When there are no elite prospects, you need to be able to see that and act appropriately. In that situation, the riskiest thing you can do is spend the maximum amount of money on a quarterback prospect who hasn’t demonstrated that he is deserving of it. Look at the playoffs and who is left. Two of the quarterbacks were high first round picks, and they were deserving high picks. Peyton Manning started 45 games and completed 62.5% of his passes. Philip Rivers started 51 games and completed 63.5% of his passes. They were low risk, high upside picks. The rest of the bracket is filled out by a second round pick (Favre), a fourth round pick (Garrard), two sixth-round picks (Brady and Hasselbeck) and an undrafted free agent (Romo). Those teams didn’t assume that their choices were Peyton Manning or Trent Dilfer, and they went out and pursued quality quarterback play through alternate means and did so successfully. What you don’t see are any teams that recently sunk all their cap space into bust first round quarterbacks, because those teams are stuck being bad. (Of course, then you have Eli, which means…well, which means you have Eli.)
You posted earlier that Kiper and Scouts Inc have Ryan as a top 5 pick and that they should be taken at their word. I don’t have their archived rankings (they keep those smelly bones buried in the back yard), but I do have archives for The Huddle Report, which is a fine scouting site and whose talent board is put together by general consensus rather than their in-house evaluations and is thus very likely to reflect what the Kipers and Scouts Incs of the world felt about the prospects. Here is how they graded versus how the FO Projection System graded the prospects 2001-2006.
2001: Michael Vick #2 overall. Drew Brees # 19 overall.
FO Projection: Brees 4.68 (very good Pro QB) Vick: .041 (barely above replacement level)2002: David Carr #2, Joey Harrington #7, Patrick Ramsey #40
FO: David Carr 3.62 (average player), Joey Harrington 1.28 (barely above replacement level) Patrick Ramsey 3.16 (average at best).Ramsey, incidentally, started 32 games and completed 58.9% of his passes, which is a pretty close match with Matt Ryan.
2003: Carson Palmer #1, Byron Leftwich #6, Kyle Boller #12, Rex Grossman #26.
FO: Byron Leftwich 5.74 (franchise QB), Carson Palmer 5.17 (franchise QB), Kyle Boller 0.55 (replacement level QB), Rex Grossman (3.73) average quarterback2004: Eli Manning #1, Ben Roethlisberger #7, Philip Rivers #14, JP Losman #28
FO: Philip Rivers 7.59 (elite franchise QB), Ben Roethlisberger 6.32 (franchise QB), Eli Manning 4.57 (good QB), JP Losman (2.02) below-average QB2005: Alex Smith #5, Aaron Rodgers #6, Jason Campbell #32
FO: Jason Campbell 6.18 (franchise QB), Alex Smith 4.20 (above average QB), Aaron Rodgers 3.33 (average QB)2006: Matt Leinart #4, Vince Young #10, Jay Cutler #11, Kellen Clemens #89
FO: Matt Leinart 6.24 (franchise QB), Jay Cutler 4.51 (good QB), Vince Young 4.17 (good QB), Kellen Clemens 3.88 (average-above average QB).Offhand, I’d say that looking at the starts and completion percentage of the prospects has done a better job of properly evaluating them than whatever factors the evaluators were using to rank them. So again, evaluators are generally good at placing prospects in more or less proper rounds, but are not to be trusted at all to rank them within those rounds or to determine which order they should come off the board. So if Mel and Todd McShay like Matt Ryan the best, that doesn’t really mean much to me. What does mean something to me is that he started 32 games and completed 59.9% of his passes, while Brian Brohm started 33 games and completed 65.8% of his passes, and with a much higher yards per attempt to boot. I have my concerns about Brohm, but on the face of it he’s a far superior prospect to Matt Ryan, much as Brady Quinn was a far superior prospect to Jamarcus Russell last year.
You come up with a lot of soft reasons for why Ryan is the cat’s meow. But what statistical study has shown is that those soft reasons don’t mean anything. I’m sure it was very hard on Ryan having no running game as he battled valiantly against Army and UMass and whoever else was on what passed for BC’s schedule. But those things come out in the wash- while there are adjustments made based on historical quality of play at the program (which is what boosted Jay Cutler’s numbers) and a bit for guys who played primarily in the spread, for the most part, the numbers are left alone and they spit out good results. You would think that playing in the SEC would be better than playing in the MAC, but it hasn’t proved to be the case.
None of this is meant to be a knock on Ryan, per se. He’s a fine player and a fine prospect, and if I had the 23rd pick in the draft and a guy with his statistical profile on the board, I wouldn’t think twice about taking him. You’re talking about taking him at #6 overall because you want a franchise quarterback and you’ve decided he’s the steely-eyed-iest of the bunch. Maybe it would turn out that way, but what you would be gambling ($50 million worth of cap space and 3-4 years of your roster as they wait for him to develop) isn’t worth considering the historical evidence says there’s a good chance he’s Patrick Ramsey, or Aaron Rodgers, or Kellen Clemens, for that matter. No one drafted in the first two rounds in the last ten years with his statistical profile has gone on to become a franchise quarterback. A draft strategy built around Matt Ryan at 6 is one based on hope for salvation, not on playing the percentages.
-
Good call on Sean Locklear, btw. He’s been better than Walter Jones this year. He would be a terrific addition.
-
Interesting statistical analysis, as always, seanmac, but I’ve watched both Brohm and Ryan and looked at their stats and came to the opposite conclusion. Brohm had the better offense (a seanmac mantra is that a QB is a creature of the system, that’s why an inaccurate and fungible Joe Montana became an accurate legend in Walsh’s offense). Louisville was 18th in offense, BC 56th. With the inferior offense, Ryan passed for more yards, more TDs and was sacked fewer times. So, I am left to wonder what they would’ve done if their situations were reversed? Also, Ryan’s team was a surprise national title contender with an 11-3 record; Brohm’s team was a disappointing 6-6. Another interesting stat, Brohm had 17 of his 30 TDs against Murray St (4) (1-7 in the Ohio Valley Conf. in Div. I-AA), Middle Tenn. State (5) (4-3 in the Sun Belt Conf.), Syracuse (4) and Utah (4). No denying that Brohm beat up inferior opponents better than Ryan. But, as I explain, there was a reason for that. Unfortunately for him, Ryan’s Div. I-AA game against U. Mass (7-1 in the CAA) did not go as well. But, his one cupcake game against Bowling Green (which was 6-2 in the MAAC) yielded 5 TDs and a 75% completion percentage.
Also, I cannot emphasize how bad BC’s OL was. Just by way of example, BC should have killed Div. I-AA U. Mass. Here’s a little description of that game:
Ryan was sacked once, roughed once illegally, forced to scramble three times and knocked down on a half-dozen or more other plays, but he picked apart the UMass defense when he needed to.
And, that pretty much summarizes Matt Ryan. His poor OL made few games easy. Yet, he had the knack for overcoming a bad OL and poor running game to lead his team to an 11-3 record. IMO, without him, that team would’ve been lucky to be .500. Specifically, because the Jets have similar problems, Ryan would be a good addition. I won’t change your mind, seanmac, because stats are stats. But, to quote “The Wire,” Brohm’s stats were juked.
-
Brohm also beat up NC State better than Ryan. Brohm went 20 of 33 for 261 and a 60.6% percent completion percentage against them. Ryan went 15 of 34 for 142 and a 44.1% completion percentage against the Wolfpack. That’s the only common opponent for the two. Ryan also churned out gems like a 48% completion percentage versus Va Tech, a 49% completion percentage against Florida State, and a 46.8% completion percentage against Michigan State, which is to say, if you put a halfway decent D-IA defense in front of him, Ryan couldn’t complete half his passes. Meanwhile, Jay Cutler completed 57.2% of his passes. Playing for Vandy. Against the SEC. When the guys before him average a 47% completion percentage. The reality is that Matt Leinart and Jay Cutler were better prospects than Matt Ryan, and the Jets passed. You can debate the wisdom of that move (and I was against it at the time), but it’s hard to look at how the team operated when confronted with a better crop of quarterbacks and a more uncertain QB situation on their own roster and then think they’re going to turn around and use the sixth pick overall on a lesser prospect. They’re going to try to fix the offense and give Clemens (or Pennington) a legitimate chance to perform. If it doesn’t work? They won’t have used up a ton of cap room, and maybe they’ll be in position to take a franchise quarterback when there’s a franchise quarterback to take.
-
Bent says:
At least seanmac has relaxed his stance on Ryan from “terrible pro prospect” to “fine prospect”, so you must have had some impression on him, sackdance!
Ryan was great in the first half of the year, not so much from the VT game onwards. BC’s line has been good the last few years, so it is interesting that he had his best year as they regressed. They run a zone blocking system and require everyone to be big and mobile. Godser Cherlius was considered a day one pick.
In terms of NFL prospects, Kellen Clemens offensive teammates in his last season were arguably no better than Ryan’s last year, although I accept that isn’t everything.
-
I do not buy into the sanity of drafting Matt Ryan at 6, let alone any of the three QBs, but since the debate is officially on, I wanted to share my thoughts.
One of the stats that i find sheds the most light on the success of a college qb in the nfl, is interceptions measured against attempts (especially downfield) and completion percentage, and similarly int to td completion. It is amazing when you go back and look at the numbers, how the top nfl passers of recent years had established outstandingly low int numbers by their senior year if not earlier. So, assuming that a QB does not lack an obvious defect that makes success in the NFL highly doubted (think Colt Brennan or Harrell of T Tech) you will be amazed at how consistently these numbers translate for today’s elite passers. For example, I believe that Peyton Manning still holds the NCAA record for lowest rate of int’s in a single ncaa season. Brady in his senior season only threw 4 ints. Roethlisberger had a career 3 to 1 int rate. McNabb threw 6 in his entire senior season. This gets us back to Matt Ryan. If you’ve ever watched him play, he is, well, scary at times with his decision making. He has a good, not great arm, and he has courage, but he makes some stupid decisions. Even his most famous highlight against Va Tech is at best a “gutsy” attempt – throwing back across the field- and at worst a foolish decision that more often than not would have cost his team the game. He also lacks in accuracy, overthrowing many of his targets (is this sounding familiar- kind of like a certain cowboy named Kellen . . . ). His senior year he finished with a 59% completion precentage and 19 intercentions against 31tds. This does not translate into a very promising NFL career, certainly not elite.
The point of all this is that: Matt Ryan has not performed at the supremely high level that seldom warrants taking a qb so early in the draft- I believe an unemotional review of the three top QBs in this draft readily lends itself to this obvious conclusion that none of them are elite prospects, with the possible exception of Brian Brohm, but even that is debatable. I echo my man seanmac’s rational analysis, a pick of Ryan at 6 is one based on hope, not empirical evidence.
Interesting tidbit, BC’s head coach was not long ago an assistant coach with the Falcons . . . just saying
-
Liam-big deal about Michigan game and a sack along with a couple of hurries, pressure’s, whatever, does’nt constitute a high 1 round draft pick its easy to get primed for a big game when you play 2-3 during the season, what will he do when every game he is going up against guys of Jake Long caliber and much better or when the tackle is getting help from a TE chip block thats the problem I have with Gholston is this and Gholston is that, he went up against an SEC team and got 1 sack and a few hurries well then who was he up against ??? whom ever it was he did a better job than Jake Long and that does’nt bode well for him doe’s it
-
Liam – Another thing Tommy Kelly, Max Starks, IR list Bryant Johnson & Berrian don’t have the #’s to go for big $ as for J.Jones he has become expendable in Jerry Jones eye’s and also is nothing to write home about the one’s that will cost us are Fanaeca, Trufant, Willams, & Suggs if thats not doable go for Gay instead of Trufant he’s only 25 with a little restructuring of some big contracts they could pull it off and reality there building a new stadium and sign 1 or 2 of these guys’ and the rest could fall into place plus does’nt the FO have 1 of the best capoligists in the league so they say and seanmac you were talking about how the Pats. have alot versatile players thats another reason I like alot of these guys’
-
Ryan and Brohm are not worth top-10 picks. They would be reaches in the mold of a David Carr, Alex Smith, Joey Harrington reach. If you take a QB with a top 10 pick you’d better be getting a potential franchise guy and neither of those two QBs strikes me as a franchise QB. Woodson on the other hand is raw but is the one guy who I think could develop into a good NFL quarterback. However, he is also not worth a top 10 pick. Lets put it this way, in a draft where the overall talent is potentially better than the 2005 draft where many have claimed both Cutler and Leinart were better prospects than any of the QBs coming out this year, many are advocating using a #6 pick and all the money that comes along with it on inferior talents because we need a QB. Cutler and Leinart both went after pick six in a draft with inferior overall talent. How can you claim in the face of that evidence that the Jets should still use a #6 pick on a QB. It’s ludicrous. There is better talent out there and it would be a mistake to use that pick on a mediocre QB.
-
Bent says:
Let me throw a spanner in the works here. How about instead of drafting Matt Ryan, the Jets were to trade for Brady Quinn?
Bear with me…
If they did this, they would take on Quinn’s huge salary, but his guaranteed money will have all gone into Cleveland’s cap hit. Therefore, if he busted, you can cut or trade him without any cap ramifications. Draft Ryan and give him a huge salary and then HE busts (which might just be injuries or something, rather than his potential) and you have a cap nightmare on your hands, perhaps even being forced to stick with him longer than you otherwise would.
If I understand seanmac’s point of view, I would imagine that he would prefer this move because of the flexibility it gives you down the line. The potential rewards are arguably just as high.
Sackdance is smitten with Ryan in particular, so may be harder to convince, but can you at least see the logic behind my proposal in theory, sack?
By the way, I am not a big Brady Quinn fan for reasons I have gone into in the past and I am not suggesting that this is in any way likely to happen, nor that I would do it (or even that Cleveland will go down this route, although some sources are suggesting it might happen). However, he is as much of an unknown as Ryan and so unless you have strong views on who is the better prospect (with Quinn having a year’s experience on an NFL roster), Quinn is clearly the better option financially and overall it would be a lower risk move.
Since his skillset is perhaps more similar to Chad’s than Kellen’s I would assume they keep Chad in this scenario (which may be reason enough not to do it for some of you).
-
GMARZ- I have no response. You have convinced me that Gholston is not worth a top pick by your thorough and reasoned analysis.
You have also convinced me that we will land ten potential starters via free agency including several of whom will get HUGE contracts.
I think what put your arguments over the top was your reliance on statistics, in game analysis and reason.
-
Bent,
I’m not in love with Quinn, either, but his 45 and 57% make him a significantly safer projection than Ryan, and he would cost a lot less money. He also wouldn’t cost the sixth pick overall (it would be terrible business to take last year’s 23rd pick and convert it into the sixth, so presumably the most it would cost the Jets would be a swapping of picks, or perhaps a lesser package). But it’s all purely academic, as Brady Quinn isn’t available. If the Browns trade a quarterback, it will be Derek Anderson (they’re not stupid), and I wouldn’t have any interest in Anderson, certainly not for what Cleveland would be asking for him.
-
Bent says:
I thought so too, but made the post in response to reports that DA is getting a contract extension.
I was more interested in your opinion of such a deal in theory than in reality anyway! I think your views backed up what I had thought.
-
I think it’s fair to say that I think focusing on Ryan’s completion percentage and interceptions fails to take into account a porous OL that couldn’t even keep a Div. 1-AA defense from sacking and harassing him. Seanmac, you never really responded to my argument that over half of Brohm’s TDs came against cupcake competition or the fact that Ryan was sacked less or that Brohm was in the better offensive system, all of which, IMO, moots your “common opponents” theory. Also, in those terrible completion percentage games you cite, Ryan won 3 of 4…that tells me a lot, but to you it’s something that isn’t statistically significant. I am willing to bet a lot of money that NFL scouts will think differently. I guess the notion that there are “winners” and “losers” isn’t something that is quantifiable. Yet, I think, almost all of the top ten QBs this season came from winning college programs. Maybe learning how to win is a skill, too. One that, apparently, Jay Cutler has yet to acquire.
The sacks differential is what I think counteracts the decisionmaking criticism that Liam raises. Under duress, Ryan made many more good throws than bad throws, but he did throw some terrible picks, what QB doesn’t? He had a ton of attempts (654)…by my math, Brohm had 2.5% of his passes picked, while Ryan had 2.9%…I find it kind of hard to believe that’s statistically significant, but I don’t know. For instance, Peyton Manning had the lowest career INT percentage in Vols’ history of 2.39% (33 out of 1381). Ryan’s is 2.75% (37 out of 1347). Don’t you think the raw numbers are pretty close? And, yes, Ryan did take chances that’s why he won more games than Cutler, Brohm, etc.
This brings us to Brady Quinn. I was never a fan because Brady could not throw certain passes (especially the deep out, which, IMO, separates the men from the boys in the NFL) with what I would consider NFL-accuracy; whereas, I don’t think there’s an NFL throw that Ryan can’t complete (I’ve seen different accounts from scouts about Ryan’s arm strength from above-average to excellent…the Combine should be interesting). Also, size matters. Ryan is 6-5 (I know, Ryan Leaf was tall, too and Drew Brees is short, etc. It’s just, in a perfect world, you want your QB to have good sightlines while the pocket is collapsing), while Brady Quinn is 6-3 (and, he looks a tad shorter). I, personally, rate Ryan as a better prospect. But, Bent, I like the notion that you agree that QB should be on the Jets’ radar.
Clearly, as I have conceded, QB isn’t a popular or cap friendly choice. But, I think Ryan is an excellent pro prospect and I’m tired of the Jets letting franchise QB’s get drafted by other teams when the Jets need a franchise QB (in ’06, whether Chad could still play was the X factor…I actually think that the risk that KC can become an NFL quality QB is even more speculative). So, I hope all the Matt Ryan haters who think that he is the second-coming of David Carr (a notion that I think is ridiculous) are right because I will take zero solace from posting “I told you so” over and over. I want the Jets to win a Super Bowl and right now, without a franchise QB, I think we will be in perpetual wild card competition until Brady retires, which won’t be on the horizon for a long, long time (at least I think there is zero chance that the Pats will draft their hometown favorite, but the thought of Ryan being tutored by Brady is too horrible to consider).
-
Sack- You can dig around and pull up whatever you like, but it’s not relevant. Every college quarterback operates under unique circumstances. It’s very simple. People have pored over all the statistical footprints looking for what successfully projects college prospects to the pro level. Among guys who the scouts have okayed their skill set- i.e. first and second round picks- the quality of supporting cast has no predictive value unless the quarterback plays at a significantly higher statistical level than his predecessors at the same program. Size has no predictive value. Quality of opposition has no predictive value. Wins has no predictive value. Touchdown to interception ratio has no predictive value. None of what you are bringing up has predictive value. What has predictive value? Starts and completion percentage. Period. That’s it. And Ryan’s numbers suggest that he is likely to be an average quarterback at best and that he has virtually no chance of being a franchise player. Drafting him at six would be a monumental error.
-
Seanmac, Peyton’s completion pct. was 62.49% for his career, Ryan’s is slightly over 60%. It just seems highly unlikely that 2% over 1,300 pass attempts could possibly make such a difference. Nor could the number of starts…Ryan has a decent amount of starts, but under FO’s analysis only 4-year starters could have the necessary amount of starts. As a predictive factor, that’s ludicrous because it cuts out way too many deserving candidates (how about injuries, suspensions, playing understudy to a stud, etc., etc.). Wouldn’t a better statistical model capture guys, like Tom Brady, who should’ve been given serious draft consideration, rather than re-shuffle the same top prospects?. FO’s predictive analysis seems arbitrary and failing to take into account exogenous factors is a fundamental flaw. Crack any graduate level book on statistical analysis for case studies in business school and you’ll see quotes like this: “To ensure that statistical results are meaningful, due allowance must be made for exogenous factors which may distort … comparisons.” But, I’m just being practical, I know treating sports analytics like business ones probably also isn’t “relevant.” Moreover, if Ryan were way off, like at 56% completion percentage for his career, then maybe I’d think your points are valid. Netting out wins, IMO, is specious. There should be a factor in the algorithm for wins. Name for me an elite NFL QB that came from a losing college program…I tried to come up with one, but I failed…I’m sure there is one, but who? I guess you will not, but you should, concede that the overwhelming majority of elite QBs come from winning college programs. Wins, size, quality of competition all not relevant? Okay, sure, whatever. Let’s see which team makes the “monumental error” in drafting Ryan, because I think you would place him a late-first round or second-round pick. Unless he performs poorly at the Combine or the other dog-and-pony shows, there is a ZERO chance he’ll last that long. ZERO. Period.
-
Sack,
There are limits to what you can hope to accomplish with statistical analysis, just as there are clearly limits to what tape evaluation can accomplish. There is no point in trying to put together a model that accounts for Tom Brady, because Tom Brady’s success is a monumental fluke. To even attempt it would be counterproductive. The idea behind the projection system is to keep teams from making drafting errors at the top of the draft, when the cost of a mistake is enormous. It doesn’t matter if you whiff on 27 6th round quarterbacks in a row, but if you draft Ryan Leaf #2 overall, your franchise is screwed for five years.
I know it doesn’t seem like it should matter to you, but starts are by far the most important predicator of NFL success among top picks, and yes, it means that seniors and four-year starters almost always project as better players. The importance of completion percentage remains static, but the importance of starts is greatest for guys picked in the first half of the first round. For picks 1-16, the formula has a 70% predictive value. So the fact that Peyton Manning had a higher career completion percentage is important, but the fact that he sustained it over an additional 13 games is very important in terms of projecting future success.
You may think that netting wins out is specious, but that’s because you are making the assumption that there is a mystical association between heroic quarterback play and wins. There isn’t. Wins don’t belong in the algorithm because it has been studied and they don’t predict anything. You know who won a higher percentage of his games than Matt Ryan? Ryan Leaf. Michael Vick’s winning percentage blows Ryan’s out of the water. Joey Harrington’s, too. Wins predict nothing. In fact, it’s wins, and the assumed steely-eyediness that comes along with them, that causes casual fans to be so extraordinarily bad at personnel evaluation to begin with. (I wish I could have taped WFAN back in 1996 when Jets fan after Jets fan was insisting that Peyton Manning was a loser and the team should use the #1 pick on Danny Wuerffel. Because, you know, he was a winner, while Manning was a loser.) You say that the vast majority of elite quarterbacks come from winning programs? So do the vast majority of busts. People have looked at it, and wins are not relative to quarterback projection.
You’re right on Ryan, there is a zero chance that he’ll last until the end of the round. There was a zero chance that Jamarcus Russell wasn’t going at the top of the first round last year. But there is a very good chance that Brady Quinn and Kevin Kolb will both be better than him. The goal isn’t to determine where players will be drafted, it’s to ensure that your team doesn’t make a mistake and draft the wrong player. If the Jets take him, I’ll hope he turns into Troy Aikman, Dan Marino and Steve Young wrapped into one. But I’ll be much happier if the Dolphins take him.
Again, I’ll just post the numbers of elite players and of players who look like Ryan, and you make of it what you will.
Guys projected to be elite players based on a 5+ DPAR/G projection.
Ben Roethlisberger 38 65.5%
Peyton Manning 45 62.5%
Carson Palmer 45 59.1%
Chad Pennington 51 63.3% (And Chad was actually outperforming his projection before the injuries. Pretty tragic, all in all.)
Daunte Culpepper 44 63.9%
Byron Leftwich 35 65.1%
Philip Rivers 51 63.5%
Matt Leinart 39 64.8%
Jason Campbell 39 64.6%
Kevin Kolb 50 61.6%Matt Ryan 32, 59.9%
And here are the players whose stat lines are most similar:
Rex Grossman 31 61%
Kellen Clemens 32 61%
Vince Young 32 61.8%
Patrick Ramsey 32 58.9%Draw your own conclusions.
-
Or he’s Carson Palmer without the extra starts. Poor Matt, if he had just started his whole sophomore year, when he completed 62.1% of his passes and not had to learn a new system, with a terrible OL and running game his senior season, he could’ve approached Peyton Manning’s stats. But, geez, that’s not random or arbitrary. Here’s some stats that you don’t like because they’re not predictive of success. He’s 4 inches taller than Rex Grossman and 3 inches taller than KC and Ramsey. That those 3 are undersized probably isn’t predictive of NFL success…well, it would mess up the FO model if it were, so forget it. Patrick Ramsey went to that football powerhouse Tulane. I tried to find the Green Wave’s record while he was there, my guess is that it probably wasn’t too good…he did not play in any bowl games. In my view, that’s two negatives.
Back to size, look at your list, what do Chad, Kolb and Culpepper have in common? They are the only QBs on your list that are not 6-5. And, I find it interesting that of the 4 that you consider similar to Ryan, only Young is 6-5. I am not saying that height, alone, is a predictive factor, but it should be accounted for somehow maybe as a plus factor, as should winning percentage, maybe a slight negative for a poor winning percentage? My argument isn’t that being on a winning team is predictive of anything, the comparison between Wuerffel and Manning was dumb, IMO, because they were both from winning programs besides Manning’s superior stats and obvious physical gifts. But, I’d be real concerned with any QB with good numbers from a losing program, like Cutler or Ramsey.
So, I’ve drawn my own conclusions from your stats, based upon your numbers, height, and being from a winning program, I conclude that Ryan is most like Carson Palmer. The Jets could use a Carson Palmer-like QB.
-
Bent says:
When you asked for an elite QB that came from a losing program, the first name to come to mind (although he is far from elite) was Trent Edwards. I realise that wasn’t what you were looking for, but at least it’s one example of a QB from a losing programme who might turn out to be pretty good?
I guess Cutler is the other example and the jury is probably still out on him.
How about Vinny? No, not when he was in Miami, when he in Tampa!
For another elite QB on a losing NFL team, Archie Manning sprung to mind.
I wasn’t necessarily suggesting we target Brady Quinn, but trading for a young QB is clearly less of a financial risk than drafting one and the rewards can be just as high. That was really my point.
If the Browns do trade Anderson, maybe he is an option if our QB situation is really that bad. Again, I am not endorsing this.
Who knows, maybe Josh McCown, Kerry Collins or Kurt Warner might have an amazing season next year and LaMarcus Russell, Vince Young or Matt Leinart will be on the block. (I do realise this is bordering on stupid given their ages!)
-
That’s an amazing argument, Sack. Amazing.
-
Bent, the NFL is a different kettle of fish. There’s a lot of elite QBs who toiled on, for the most part, poor teams and then ended their careers on high notes. The best example is Jim Plunkett, there’s also Doug Williams, Vinny T. For guys who were good and had little NFL success, the Cards have two of my favorites, Jim Hart and Neil Lomax. I also thought Steve Bartkowski was pretty good, too.
As I responded to seanmac, I’m not a believer in Cutler. He has a losing NFL record and I think that Denver team has really under-achieved. But, there’s no denying his physical gifts. Trent Edwards is an interesting QB. He would undoubtedly fail FO’s analysis with only 31 starts and a 56.3 completion percentage while at Stanford. He also had a pretty mediocre TD-INT ratio of 36 TDs to 33 INTs. He’s 6-4, which is tall enough, but from a losing program (although Stanford is a school known for excellent academics). Personally, I think Edwards’ flaws will be exposed over time…he’s Gus Frerotte to J.P. Losman’s Heath Schuler.
-
seanmac, thanks. maybe you learned something.
-
I did.
While we’re on the subject of starts and their predictive value, here’s a fun little exercise. This is what the 1997-2006 drafts would have looked like had NFL war rooms put away their scouting reports after they’d assigned their grades and simply drafted from the guy with the most starts to the guy with the fewest:
1997:
1. Jake Plummer (40)
2. Jim Druckenmiller (24)1998:
1. Peyton Manning (45)
2. Ryan Leaf (24)1999:
1. Donovan McNabb (45)
2. Daunte Culpepper (44)
3. Cade McNown (43)
4. Shaun King (39)
5. Tim Couch (25)
6. Akili Smith (19)2000:
1. Chad Pennington (51)2001:
1. Drew Brees (37)
2. Quincy Carter (29)
3. Michael Vick (19)2002:
1. Patrick Ramsey (32)
2. Joey Harrington (29)
3. David Carr (26)2003:
1. Carson Palmer (45)
2. Kyle Boller (40)
3. Byron Leftwich (35)2004:
1. Philip Rivers (51)
2. Ben Roethlisberger (38)
3. Eli Manning (37)
4. JP Losman (27)2005:
1. Jason Campell (39)
2. Aaron Rodgers (22)
3. Alex Smith (22)2006:
1. Jay Cutler (45)
2. Matt Leinart (39)
3. Vince Young (32)Neat, huh? A simple starts count takes quarterbacks off the board about six thousand times more accurately than actual NFL scouting departments. But don’t worry- for Matt Ryan, we add thirteen starts. Because really, how predictive are starts, anyway?
-
Moving on to things non-Matt Ryan…
It’s come to my attention that it is entirely possible that McFadden is there at six. Barring a trade (and it’s unlikely that anyone will trade up for a running back), he’s not going to Miami at one and he’s not going to St. Louis at two. Let’s say Dorsey goes one and Chris Long goes two. (I know most people have Jake Long slated to the Rams, but my feeling is Chris will eclipse him in the evaluation process.) That leaves Oakland, Kansas City and Atlanta. Kansas City’s not taking him after they just paid Larry Johnson; that would be a likely landing place for Jake Long. Oakland could take him, but they ran the ball very effectively last year and had a disaster of a defense. Let’s say they take Gholston. That leaves Atlanta to choose between McFadden and Matt Ryan. If they decide that they need a FRANCHISE QUARTERBACK and take Ryan…well, there it is, Adrian Peterson, part two.
By no means the most pressing need, but clearly the best player available. Basically, that’s why you want to address all your needs to the best of your ability before the draft ever starts, so you can scoop up whatever windfalls come your way.
-
Seanmac, it might be more interesting if you listed all QBs drafted, then indicated QBs that were in either poor programs or under 6’4″. Plus, I just think that 40+ starts is too limiting, how about a 30 cutoff? 30 gets rid of all the most egregious busts, add in losers and the only guy that we disagree about that isn’t a bust, yet, is Cutler. The only under 6’4″ guys that have been successful are Chad, Plummer and Brees, who I do not believe has won a playoff game, yet. And, these 3 are clearly not the top prospects. Cade McNown and Shaun King, for instance, are 6-1. Height just isn’t trivial for the QB position. The worst over 30 starts and 6-4 or better QBs are Leftwich and Leinart, both of whom have had their careers derailed by injuries, and Leftwich had a modicum of success. Height plus over 30 starts might be even more predictive of success than starts plus completion percentage. Just my 2 cents.
-
Bent says:
I know, sack. My point this time (I really must start being less abstract) was (reinforcing your comment) that it is indeed difficult to find a decent QB from a losing program, but then thinking about it QB is such a key position that obviously any college team with an NFL-standard guy is pretty much going to be successful anyway. (Cutler and Edwards being the exception because they both played on the weakest team in two BCS conferences).
What you say makes sense, but I just can’t see McFadden lasting to 6, Sean. Maybe someone like Dallas will trade up to three or four to grab him if you really don’t think anyone would trade up to number 1 for a RB.
Clearly RB isn’t the most pressing need, but you’d hope that McFadden could enchance the passing game (as a receiver) as well as the running game. His contract might be a little more palatable at 6, too. Like I say though, I can’t see it…
Interesting to see how different they are from 5-10, I am sure they will be pretty similar after the combine. Right now I am liking Chris Long and Vernon Gholston. I watched Gholston in the BCS Championship the other night and he definitely has some explosion and pass rushing abilities and I think he will rise after the combine as many people have said he is a true work out warrior (whether thats a good or bad thing i dont know).