QB or not QB

[Boone]

He was the 'Senior Offensive Analyst' this past year, not the HC just to keep that in mind.

 

[Chris]

I believe he is referring to Caleb Williams.

 

[Boone]

Ahhh okay - my bad

 

[SkinsBusDriver]

I believe the draft chart to move up from 2 to 1 calls for a single 2nd round pick (at most). Chicago can ask for anything they want and some team will pay it. It shouldn’t be us.

Totally agree. The suggested number of picks necessary to complete such a trade seems out of line.

According to the trade value chart https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp. To flip the 2nd pick into Washington traded its second 2nd round pick - the total trade value would exceed the needed value. This being the case, Washington could theoretically trade up to get Caleb Williams for the cost on Montez Sweat.

In addition, I read a good post yesterday on “X” making a the following really good point. Kliff was interviewed a couple of weeks ago by the Bears for their then open OC position - you would have to imagine during this process they had to talk about their options with the number 1 pick. Thus, Kliff might have some insights about the Bears plans.

 

[DixieFlatline]

Isn't there a quote out there somewhere that essentially says you can make stats say anything you want?

 

[SkinsBusDriver]

Isn't there a quote out there somewhere that essentially says you can make stats say anything you want?

“…Stats lie and liars use stats…”

 

[MikefromOH]

If you take raw numbers and use them as comparison; they don't lie. If you decide to do something like "he's the first QB om a Thursday night when the sun sets at 7:49pm to do xyz" sure

But, Caleb has a terrible record against winning teams. It's raw fact.

 

[Boone]

Isn't there a quote out there somewhere that essentially says you can make stats say anything you want?

There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.

 

[Kel Varnsen]

Isn't there a quote out there somewhere that essentially says you can make stats say anything you want?

“Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything, Kent. Forty per cent of all people know that.” - Homer Simpson

 

[Neophyte]

I don't think the chart matters nearly as much when you are working at the top of the draft.

Remember, we traded our first and second, plus our first for the next two years to the Rams for their first to get RGIII. We are just moving up from 6th to 4th. By the chart, we paid 2 draft picks more than we should have.

Hell, I just looked at a draft chart that if followed would make the cost of swapping with the Bears this year a 5th round pick.

 

[tshile]

I’m someone that believes winning football games requires coaches to do well, and players; all the players. And sometimes it requires the ball bouncing the right way, the ref making (or not making) a certain call. Winning reliably over time requires a culture that brings in the right people and enables them to be their best. I laugh when people say a coach isn’t good enough cause they haven’t won the Super Bowl, despite being a legit contender making the playoffs and winning the division more often than not - that’s exactly what you want, to be in the dance every year so you have a shot. To me that’s all you can ask for.

So when I see something like “well he has a terrible record against winning teams” (sorry, not trying to pick on you, if’s just what’s on the current page) I always wonder - but was that his fault?

I get why people lean on numbers for their arguments. I’m a numbers guy - love numbers. But in a team sport where you’re evaluating an individual, there’s a lot of caveats and context required to make sense of them.

 

[Boone]

I don't think the chart matters nearly as much when you are working at the top of the draft.

Remember, we traded our first and second, plus our first for the next two years to the Rams for their first to get RGIII. We are just moving up from 6th to 4th. By the chart, we paid 2 draft picks more than we should have.

Hell, I just looked at a draft chart that if followed would make the cost of swapping with the Bears this year a 5th round pick.

Well there’s value and there’s free market value. You see what can happen when you confuse the two as we did with the move up to get Griffin.

 

[Neophyte]

You aren't wrong Boone. My point is that "over-paying" when moving into the Top 2 or 3 - especially when a QB is the target seems to be the order of the day. Perhaps that is tied to competition for the pick or maybe the chart no longer correctly reflects the value of top picks.

Last year, Carolina sent picks totaling 3062 points to the Bears for the #1 AND still threw in DJ Moore, a former first-round choice. The points alone made the trade balanced in terms of chart value.

The 49ers traded the #12 pick (1200 pts) plus two future 1st-round picks and a 3rd-round pick for the #3 pick (2200 pts). By the chart, that move is worth a single future 1st round pick.

The more I look at things, the more I think we would be dumb to actually pick at #2.

 

[Boone]

Didn’t work out very well for the 49ers and Carolina either. I obviously get demanding picks 4-5 x what the charts say you should get to move down routinely happens when a QB pick is involved. Doesn’t mean it’s not a very foolhardy deal to make.

I will always be opposed to moving down when you don’t have a legit franchise QB unless the brain trust doesn’t think anyone available can be that guy.

 

[Boone]

I suspect we are going to be having some intense conversations about what to do with that 2nd pick on the podcast before long… I’ll try and reign in my obnoxiousness knowing a) it doesn’t matter what we think, the front office will do what it’s going to do, and b) no matter who is giving an opinion it’s quite possible they are proven dead wrong down the road.

 

[tshile]

You’re both making good points.

To add - complicating it all is the reality of the NFL. A long time buddy of mine always joked that it stood for “Not For Long” referring to the “what have you done for me lately” way the league works. There are actually people suggesting Shanahan is on the hot seat for not having won a Super Bowl yet (which is something I was referring to in my last post) which to me is laughably ridiculous. But it is often the way this works (I think Lynch and 49ers ownership is smarter than that, at least I would hope, but it’s still a thing…)

The reality is Quinn has 3 years to establish that he’s running a team that’s trending in the right direction - it should be competitive by that point and is trending upwards.

That’s hard to do if you’re not committed to a QB year 1. Even harder if you’re not by year 2.

I’d love to find out our ownership truly has more patience and truly is dedicated to maximizing the % of correct decisions they make (as opposed to desperately reaching on one guy) but reality says that’s not usually how it works. Even the 49ers reached, as you’ve laid out. Their failure is masked by the fact they generally hit on their decisions. It affords you the opportunity to miss even when you miss big.

It would be super interesting if what they do is trade back and draft a bunch of guys and focus on that. If they’re willing to roll with Howell they’ll have a very cheap qb. To me that would say they are dedicated the patience.

If they trade up I’d be concerned. Only because we don’t yet have years of decision making to say - that’s ok, they hit so often on their decisions they can afford to miss and miss big once I a while.

But also because Kingsberry is known for being great with a long list of QBs. If they don’t feel confident they can do something with one of these guys without trading up … I’d be concerned.

As for points and draft trades - you gotta make an offer that’s better than anyone else, and is of more value than the pick to the team trading the pick away. Guessing what that price will be is kind of a fools game - we need to know how desperate everyone else is and what they’re willing to offer to get it, before we know what it would cost us.

 

[Chris]

I was once at a roulette table in Caesars Palace LV at 5 am watching a guy who owned a large hair-care company take a spin. 50k each on 0, 00, 23 + 24 (35-1) plus the splits (17-1).

He played 5 times, hit on 4 and won 9+ million.

My point is that gambling requires both capital and luck. Any draft choice or draft strategy is a gamble, only with better odds. The most important question for Harris, Peters, etal is…

Are you feeling lucky?

 

[Boone]

 

[tshile]

Funny enough I take the same approach to gambling that I think we should in player acquisition.

The best professional gamblers have a hit rate of around 60-64%. Anyone telling you they’re that good or better, that isn’t a legit professional gambler (and well known to the books) is a liar.

Their whole strategy is to take as many swings at bets as possible (draft capital)
To have a process that means most of the time they win or lose small, but win just enough to be over 50% and come out ahead
And hope that once in a while you hit it big
And that when you miss big, your overall strategy allows you to recover

Roulette is my favorite table game. If you go to the table with enough money, and you understand the board enough to cover your bets, you can play for a long time wining and losing small, and if hit big more often than you miss big you can win some serious money.

I bet sports the same way … it works great. It’s not flashy but long term it’s a successful way to stay in the game, giving yourself as many chances as possible to hit big.

 

[Utah]

My .02 or with inflation...actually I think I owe something....either way

The idea behind picking a player is not based on what he is showing on the field. He won't even be in the conversation if he didn't pass the eye and smell test. The quesiton really is how does that player fit in my offense or defense. What I mean by that is all of these young men can run, pass and catch. They have the physical ability to be mentioned at this pick. It comes down to can my coaching staff teach him what he needs to know to perform at the level I need. A good coach is not someone who knows everything about their speciality, that is an experience driven result. Its the ones that can get the player to know it at the same level. Its why you interview the players face to face and test their abililty to retain information that is thrown at them in a shotgun mentality. Its why you want to hire experience in teaching the sport in the higher positions more than not.

It is why sometimes people pass on a player that doesn't make sense. Generally, its because the coaching staff believes, right or wrong, that one player fits better than the other. The great roll of the dice.

However, when deciding who to pick, the team looks at all aspects and I guarantee one question that is asked is "can you get this player to do X" IF you have hired well in the coaching ranks, then you have confidence to make a pick that works for your vision of the roster. And, also why a coach will go with other coaches they have history with and can help make what they beileve to be the best, educated choice.

QB is the most important position on the field. No one argues that. Once you have evaluated what you have, then you can make the choice about who to pick. The detail of each of these evaluations of all parties, current players, FA and then draft picks, makes this one hell of a puzzle to put togther.