If the Jags Stay at 3: Watkins or Mack. I don't see Clowney getting to #3. If Houston does not want him, St Louis would either take him or trade the pick away.
If the Jags trade down: If Clowney, Watkins, and Mack are off the board then a QB would probably be the best option. It is said to be the deepest draft in recent memory so the more picks the better.
Quote:Psst... they won because they drafted him where he was supposed to be drafted. He's the same player no matter where you select him.
They were wise, and their patience served them well. There's simply no logic that supports taking him any earlier. It simply can't be spun. It's an insult to intelligence.
Because we have hindsight. I think it was dumb to risk losing out on your top qb prospect. Irvin wasn't the difference and they would have won a superbowl without him. Wilson gets scooped up a few picks before Seattle and they are still good but not good enough to win it all. That's a risk I wouldn't be willing to make.
Where did I say he's a different player?
Quote:Because we have hindsight. I think it was dumb to risk losing out on your top qb prospect. Irvin wasn't the difference and they would have won a superbowl without him. Wilson gets scooped up a few picks before Seattle and they are still good but not good enough to win it all. That's a risk I wouldn't be willing to make.
Where did I say he's a different player?
Sorry, but the truth is they got him and took him EXACTLY where they should have. You draft a player as low as you can, not as high as you can. Take that to heart.
Keep spinning like a top. I have a feeling you'll give us something spectacular a week from today, too.
Quote:Sorry, but the truth is they got him and took him EXACTLY where they should have. You draft a player as low as you can, not as high as you can. Take that to heart.
Keep spinning like a top. I have a feeling you'll give us something spectacular a week from today, too.
The concept of not having hindsight during the draft should not be a difficult subject to grasp. Why are you struggling with it so much?
Quote:The concept of not having hindsight during the draft should not be a difficult subject to grasp. Why are you struggling with it so much?
I'm not struggling at all. You make the wise choice.
What do you think all this scouting work is for prior to the draft?
To find out
where you're going to take your players. You take them when you've calculated them to be available. You draft them as low as you can, not as high as you can. You marry the pick with the value you've placed on the player. Otherwise, you're foolishly going to waste a first round pick on a guy you would have otherwise been able to get later... in some cases MUCH later.
This is like trying to discuss advanced calculus with those who can't pass algebra, though it's not nearly that difficult to grasp.
Quote:I'm not struggling at all. You make the wise choice.
What do you think all this scouting work is for prior to the draft?
To find out where you're going to take your players. You take them when you've calculated them to be available. You draft them as low as you can, not as high as you can. You marry the pick with the value you've placed on the player. Otherwise, you're foolishly going to waste a first round pick on a guy you would have otherwise been able to get later... in some cases MUCH later.
This is like trying to discuss advanced calculus with those who can't pass algebra, though it's not nearly that difficult to grasp.
You rank players based on the grade after watching film. You cant "calculate where they are available". That requires seeing other teams draft boards, which you cant. Teams do not skip over the highest player on their board just hoping he will fall another round.
Example, if Teddy is the #2 prospect on Caldwell's big board isnt taking him at 3 good value?
Quote:You rank players based on the grade after watching film. You cant "calculate where they are available". That requires seeing other teams draft boards, which you cant. Teams do not skip over the highest player on their board just hoping he will fall another round.
Example, if Teddy is the #2 prospect on Caldwell's big board isnt taking him at 3 good value?
Yes, it would. I've also stated that if my opinion is wrong and we select him, I'm behind that pick because I'm not Caldwell nor do I pretend to be.
However, I truly believe his honest value is in the 20s or 30s. Meaning, IMO he's not even in the right zip code at #3. If that's the case, then you certainly don't select him there just because you're afraid he wouldn't be there with your second pick.
Quote:Sorry, but the truth is they got him and took him EXACTLY where they should have. You draft a player as low as you can, not as high as you can. Take that to heart.
Keep spinning like a top. I have a feeling you'll give us something spectacular a week from today, too.
I'm not spinning anything. I understand you want to draft a player as low as possible. I'm saying it is foolish to risk when we are talking about a position that can make or break your franchise. Qbs are a completely different animal and you obviously don't feel this way so this discussion is pointless.
I'm obviously not the only one who feels that way either. Josh Norris, Matt Miller, and a few others have Teddy ranked first overall. One word....positional value. Don't get cute and try to get value on the most important player on the field, just get your guy.
Quote:I'm not spinning anything. I understand you want to draft a player as low as possible. I'm saying it is foolish to risk when we are talking about a position that can make or break your franchise. Qbs are a completely different animal and you obviously don't feel this way so this discussion is pointless.
I'm obviously not the only one who feels that way either. Josh Norris, Matt Miller, and a few others have Teddy ranked first overall. One word....positional value. Don't get cute and try to get value on the most important player on the field, just get your guy.
You get last word. You "win". LOL...
Just listen to yourself and understand how foolish that sounds. Do you really expect Ted to "make or break" our franchise? ...r
eally?!?!... Just like with Geno at #2 last year?!?!
Just wow... some of you really can't see the forest for the QBs you fall in love with. No one person is going to make or break the franchise, unless he's the GM making bad selections at all 22 positions.
You get the proper value for every position, including QB. Take your eye off the ball (such as panicking and overdrafting your so-called "savior") and that backwards thinking will cause you strike out across the board.
Quote:You get last word. You "win". LOL...
Just listen to yourself and understand how foolish that sounds. Do you really expect Ted to "make or break" our franchise? ...really?!?!... Just like with Geno at #2 last year?!?!
Just wow... some of you really can't see the forest for the QBs you fall in love with. No one person is going to make or break the franchise, unless he's the GM making bad selections at all 22 positions.
You get the proper value for every position, including QB. Take your eye off the ball (such as panicking and overdrafting your so-called "savior") and that backwards thinking will cause you strike out across the board.
OK
http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago-bears/po...at-no-2-qb
Little blip on drafting and developing a qb. For those who don't want to click the link.
"I just did a little study. It's very interesting," Emery said. "That developmental theory doesn't hold a whole lot of water. There's entire classes of quarterbacks, since '06, I went back and looked at from Jay's on -- when people say developmental quarterbacks, OK, so who has gotten developed? There isn't a single quarterback after the third round since 2006 that has been a long-term starter. So you're either developing thirds, and most of them have been wiped out of the league. So to get a quality quarterback, you've got to draft them high. That 2012 class is a blip on the radar that's unusual, highly unusual.
"Most of the starters in this league come from the first and second round. So that's where you need to take a quarterback. So when you talk about quarterback every year, they have to be somebody that you truly believe will beat out the second and third quarterback that you perceive on your roster. And if not, history shows that you shouldn't make that pick."
Quote:<a class="bbc_url" href='http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago-bears/post/_/id/4691890/palmer-early-favorite-at-no-2-qb'>http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago-bears/post/_/id/4691890/palmer-early-favorite-at-no-2-qb</a>
Little blip on drafting and developing a qb. For those who don't want to click the link.
"I just did a little study. It's very interesting," Emery said. "That developmental theory doesn't hold a whole lot of water. There's entire classes of quarterbacks, since '06, I went back and looked at from Jay's on -- when people say developmental quarterbacks, OK, so who has gotten developed? There isn't a single quarterback after the third round since 2006 that has been a long-term starter. So you're either developing thirds, and most of them have been wiped out of the league. So to get a quality quarterback, you've got to draft them high. That 2012 class is a blip on the radar that's unusual, highly unusual.
"Most of the starters in this league come from the first and second round. So that's where you need to take a quarterback. So when you talk about quarterback every year, they have to be somebody that you truly believe will beat out the second and third quarterback that you perceive on your roster. And if not, history shows that you shouldn't make that pick."
Says the guy who had a mid round pick start for him most of the year in Josh McCown. Also does he not realize that you need more than one quarterback on your roster? Mid round picks are how you keep from having to pay 4 million dollars a year to a backup quarterback.
What if Clowney and Mack are drafted 1 & 2? Which player do you think Dave will draft or will he trade down at that point?
What are the odds of the Jaguars drafting a QB at #3 in that scenario? I think he would trade down or draft Sammy Watkins or Jake Matthews at that point.
Bill Walsh claimed the way to do it is to get your quarterback first.
He drafted Joe Montana in round three.
Quote:Bill Walsh claimed the way to do it is to get your quarterback first.
He drafted Joe Montana in round three.
Keep in mind he had no first round pick in 1979 due to the OJ Simpson trade, and there were other QBs in that 1979 draft he liked better than Montana.
It's not as if he didn't value QBs. He didn't have the pick to reflect how much he valued QBs.
Quote:Keep in mind he had no first round pick in 1979 due to the OJ Simpson trade, and there were other QBs in that 1979 draft he liked better than Montana.
It's not as if he didn't value QBs. He didn't have the pick to reflect how much he valued QBs.
So, sometimes you have to sit on your hands to make the wise choice.
Quote:So, sometimes you have to sit on your hands to make the wise choice.
Yes.
In 1998, TC wanted to trade up in the first round for Curtis Enis. The trade fell through and he had to stay at 9. Wound up drafting Fred Taylor instead.
Conversely, Dallas had the 17th pick in the 1985 draft, and they were confident Jerry Rice would be on the board when they picked. San Francisco traded three picks to New England to move up to 16 and select the future HOF WR.
Seahawks showed you can get the QB in the 3rd round if he's the right guy. Patriots showed you can do it in the last round.
Looks like its get the QB with Bortles