2016 NFL Draft - The Quarterbacks

No, if they pass on QB at #2 and one of the top 3 are not there at #32, then it is on to Cardale in the 3rd. I don't want anything to do with Cook, Hackenberg, Prescott or any other QB in this draft.

I can't say I disagree with everyone and their Rd 2 evaluations...They are all 2nd Rd grade or lower..But for one this draft is fairly weak imho, and I don't see more than 15 or so players with a Rd 1 grade. That alone will elevate some of these QBs.

I will also have to disagree with your evaluation of Prescott's certain "better" game than Wentz in the Senior Bowl. Wentz had 4 miss's out of 10 and 3 of them were drops by his receivers in critical situations. He actually threw the ball pretty well in the game. Although the one that wasn't dropped, was either a really bad pass or the wrong route ran by Braxton Miller.

 

Good read as we continue discussing QB's: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2014/nfl-draft-round-round-quarterback-data

 

I used think as we got through free agency, we'd be able to sniff out more of what Cleveland's plan is heading into the draft. However, we almost have to another backup QB because Austin Davis is hot garbage. So really, you'll have Josh McCown and a freshly-signed free agent, regardless of the inclination come draft day.

Personally, (to answer my own question), I believe that if you think the guy is a franchise QB, you take him. The Browns, for as bad as they've been, haven't been picking at the very top of the draft since 2000. Barring a trade, they should have their pick of the litter with these QB's, and even if they're the #27 and #32 ranked prospects, you almost have to draft one if you believe they can be your long-term solution.

Partly because the other option of passing on them is not a great one. It would be tough to stomach passing on Goff and see him become even a competent starter elsewhere when we've never had that here.

Partly because if you don't, someone else will because of the premium placed on the position and now the relatively lower-cost of rolling the dice on a quarterback.

Partly because you're the Cleveland Browns and you haven't had a "franchise guy" since Tim Couch.

And partly because we need to rinse the bad taste of Manziel out of our figurative mouths.

Just stuff I've read. I didn't watch the game (or week of practice), so I can't say or evaluate anything based off it. I've just read that Prescott looked better, he's just less intriguing of an option and isn't getting the same media hype.

 

Do you ever get the impression these guys give such low grades on the QBs for page clicks? Surely they aren't grading them where they expect them to be drafted. If the entire country believes Goff is going to be drafted in the Top Ten doesn't he then have a Top Ten grade?

 

This time of year, I think just about everything written is for page clicks.

I agree with you, though, and think rankings should (and sometimes do) reflect all the other stuff -- such as position played, team needs, etc.

I think it's intellectually dishonest to rank players as some people do based on just an overall grade. There has to be weighted values to each ranking. If a punter is the absolute best, most perfect prospect, would he ever be ranked No. 1 overall?

 

That's a good question and I think it only can be answered by the individual scout or author, which you rarely see one stating what their criteria may be for making those grades.

Personally, if I give a player a round based grade it has zero to do with where I believe he will be selected. For myself that is a players current draft stock and not an indication of what I believe his talent level to be.

I believe Jalen Ramsey goes in the top 10, but I have him placed at 14 right now on my warboard so his current grade is the mid first range of this draft class. I don't know if that's how other people build their grades but that's how I build mine.

 

Yeah that makes sense for traditional positions but QBs are almost always drafted on potential and I'm not sure how you can work that into your rankings but it seems there has to be a way to do it. Maybe using comps from previous years?

 

Yeah, with quarterbacks you have to probably give more speculation and leeway then any other position, which is why there are 3 quarterbacks listed in that group of 14 on my board above Ramsey which helps to push him down some. Take the 'QB' out from in front of those players names and they fall down the board significantly. That's the real conundrum and as both SAS and yourself mentioned it changes the value because of the weight of the position.

 

The Browns wuld love 2 get their hands on Spence at #32

 

Yes, because after dealing with Josh Gordon and now Johnny Manziel, that is EXACTLY what they cannot wait to deal with...an Ecstasy addict.

Love the player, hate the issue.

 

My question is this SAS, Beach and Tim...Well, two questions..

I know Sam is high on Cardale Jones, how do you two feel about him?

I agree with Sam that Jones has the highest ceiling in this draft class, however he is also the biggest risk. We don't know if he will develop into a player that can even be a viable backup, but the tools are off the charts.

If Wentz and Goff are shaky prospects with upside and are considered top 5 picks...

Is it more risky to take a "second round grade QB" #2 overall, then fill out your draft? Or would it be a better plan to take the highest rated player on your draft board at #2, thus ensuring yourself a quality starter (if your evaluations are correct), then overdrafting a QB in the 2nd round to ensure you get him?

I other words a 2nd round graded prospect QB at #2, who is considered the top QB, with the lowest risk (I.E. Goff), or a 4th round graded QB, with the highest upside and the highest risk at #32 overall?


Of course, this all depends on whether you believe Jones is draftable or not. If you don't think he is draftable, then forget the exercise, if you think he is draftable, then does the position he is drafted really matter after the first round to ensure you get him? Second round prospects become less likely to become franchise changers at any position other than QB. Why not take the one player that has a chance to be a franchise player there, and take another franchise changing player at another position at #2 overall?

By the way..this question isn't JUST for those 3, they just seem to be the ones giving the most input on the QB position.

 

My two cents... it depends.

First off, I think we all agree that Cardale is going to need a ton of help at the next level before he gets it. So you first have to ask: "do you believe the Browns have the ability to coach him up?". And remember, Hue Jackson is going to be swamped with head coaching duties, so he won't be able to spend much - if any - time working with Cardale in that capacity.

So it will fall to whomever Hue tabs for that role (QB coach, offensive coordinator, special assistant, etc.). A quick history lesson or NFL-wide study would reveal right away that almost no team does well in this capacity. There were only four QB's last season drafted in the second round who took significant snaps under center (Brees, Carr, Dalton, and Osweiler).

Contrast that with 20 first rounders, three thirds, one fourth, two sixth, and two undrafted.

I think another component has to be how quickly the team thinks they can compete. We hear time and again how it's a "not for long" league, which is completely legit. You have to take a look at Cardale and think "how long until he can be an impact starter" and gauge that with your franchise's turn-around.

Given the state of the franchise, the Browns would be better served -- in my opinion -- to take two guys. Similar to Washington when they took Robert Griffin and Kirk Cousins. But then you also have to weigh that investment with how many needs this team has.

In a perfect world, I would be all on board with this. In fact, I've stated in a few other threads that I would take Myles Jack at No. 2 (who in my mind is the best player in this draft) and then fill in the roster behind him and pick up your developmental QB later on.

It all is going to come back to the ROI. If we spend No. 32 or a later pick on Cardale and he never "gets it" but pass Goff at No. 2 and he goes on to be a successful starter in the League - even if he's not the transformative guy like a Russell Wilson or Tom Brady, then we've essentially wasted two commodities: the pick and time.

 

I think it also realistically should depend on the ACTUAL time frame Haslem is giving this regime to get it right. I understand he says he is not going to have a twitchy trigger finger, I believe he said the same thing about Farmer and Pettine...

If he is REALLY going to give this regime 5 years to do it correctly, then I would say Cardale Jones could be in play. He needs to be honest with himself though, because they can't handcuff themselves if he is going to replace them after 2 years and no playoffs..

I don't know what state this team is really in though, because I believe the defensive coaches were the cause of many of the troubles in 2015.

If Horton can get them to play to potential, then I think we might have playoff aspirations in 2017. If That is what this time schedule is based on, then they may be better off getting someone like Goff ready now...

I think Cardale Jones has the most to offer a team, if he can reach potential. I don't see Goff as any more than a Andy Dalton. I don't think Dalton elevates any players around him, but he also doesn't seem to hold them back.

 

Honestly, I don't care who they evaluate to be the best in the draft. I trust their judgement on that, believe it or not.

I am more thinking about taking a QB at #2 overall, that probably should be taken in the 20's at the earliest.

The ROI, imho, is pretty low on any QB in this draft, with the POSSIBLE exception of Cardale Jones...but that ROI could be in the negative with him, just as much as the positive.

If it takes Jared Goff, simply a training camp to establish himself as a starter, but he never elevates a single player on this team...just does his job. The team may become a playoff contender, but does anyone think they will ever become perennial Super Bowl contenders? Not saying he won't become more than that, I just don't see much more than that.

Now, if Cardale takes 3 full seasons before starting his first game, but in those seasons, he learns how to read defenses, look off defenders and elevates the players around him. Then, I believe he has the tools to be a Super Bowl winning QB...problem lies in whether he can develop those tools, without playing in games. If he is thrown to the wolves, he may die off faster due to lack of production.

This is where I see your suggestion of a 2 QB draft a viable option, other than the fact SOMEONE will trust in their staff to develop Jones...I do not believe for a second that he will last to the 4th round, possibly not even the 3rd...so you would then have to take him in the second to be assured to get him...I don't see any analytical program showing a vast improvement of the team using your #2 and #32 picks on QBs..

 

I'm a sucker for arm talent and Cardale has it in spades. I'm also a big believer in continuity at the QB position. I think Cam Newton is the poster child for the benefits of alllowing an inexperienced QB to grow in a system. He went from Chud to Shula and nothing changed. His career path could have been remarkably different had he been forced to learn a new offense. Cardale, if given the same opportunity could become a pretty good QB in my opinion. But if he's forced into a situation like Tannehill has gone through or Alex Smith went through he'll fail miserably.

 

I fear that to be true of any young QB they may draft...

This organization has been through so many changes, it is no wonder there is no player development on either side of the ball.

 

The Browns haven't been very good drafting, but some of that has to be the chaos that exists within the walls of Berea. By constantly turning over the front office and coaches, the player turnover is inevitable as well. And in today's NFL, we're so quick to slap a "bust" label on a player (especially when playing for a bad team like Cleveland) that other teams steer clear of them because they're already "lost causes".

In spite of all the talk of parity in this League, it's the same franchises that are always in the playoff hunt in December and playing in those games in January.

The "parity" exists between six and 10 wins, but consecutive 10+ win teams are those that have been built and stay together in the same system and same approach.

The Browns hit the reset so fast and so many times that they've created this huge pit to dig out of and on top of that, they're not willing to stick it out through the long haul to try and improve. It will be interesting to see how quick Jimmy H. pulls the trigger this time around.

 

Sorry for that quick detour. Back to the topic at hand:

Why we need to draft Jared Goff.

• We can't wait several seasons for Cardale Jones to develop.[/*]

• The more I watch, the more I see of Teddy Bridgewater, who our 2014 analytics test says was the top pick.[/*]

• Speaking of analytics... Goff is the best QB in this class with the long ball and long ball accuracy -- good news, because Hue Jackson loves taking shots downfield.[/*]

• Best "translations traits": smart, accuracy, athletic, mature.[/*]

• Per Pro-Football-Focus.com: 5th best QB in 2014, best QB in 2015. Remember, 2014 included the No. 1 and No. 2 overall picks.[/*]

• The Browns really need a quarterback![/*]

 

Before taking Jack at #2 I?d like to know that he?s passed every medical exam? twice?

Given that there are only two QB?s in this class that pass most of the eye tests, and the value of the position and the Browns lack thereof, and once again they REBOOT. So I?m not going to be surprised if they Take one or the other at #2, just because. Both have their good and bad. I just know that Hue needs to get Brown to get Schwartz signed, talk Mack into staying. From there Hopefully Gordon is reinstated and they get the rabbit signed, and the Kid(Goff, or Wentz) may just have a chance to succeed.

As for this staff?s ability to coach the QB up, it?ll be interesting to see how that goes. At least Hue has put together a pretty good staff with experience on the offensive side of the ball. We?ll see.

 

Im going by what I hear....also nother name that keeps popping up is Lee