Good post, ky.


A pass rusher can fail 90% of the naps and still make it to Canton.

I think it was Monroe that said pass rushers have the best job. They can make one great play a game and be All Pro.

---

I'd rather have Barr than Mack. 

---

So the argument is to go Mack because only one top five WR made the SB with the team that drafted him over the past 20 years. So how many top five LBs made it to the SB with the team that drafted him over the past 20 years? Let's see...


 

You can't say Von Miller because he was injured throughout the Broncos Super Bowl year. The Seahawks who just won the SB last year drafted LB Aaron Curry in 2009, however, but he's now a major bust having left for the Raiders in 2011 before being cut by the Giants in the offseason last year. AJ Hawk was the #5 pick by the Packers in 2006, and he helped them win the Super Bowl in February 2011, so that's one. Lavar Arrington was the #2 pick in 2000 and Kevin Hardy was the #2 pick in 1996, but neither player ever made it to the SB. Trev Alberts was the fifth overall pick by the Colts in '94, but he's known as one of the biggest busts in league history having played only two seasons before retiring due to injuries. Alberts carreer stats include 7


starts, 4 sacks, 3 forced fumbles and 1 INT.


 

So over the past 20 years only one LB (AJ Hawk) made it to the SB with the team that drafted him. So why should the Jaguars go Mack over Watkins?

 

You shouldn't just look at LBs when considering Mack.  You should also look at DE.

But, let's see... 

1) You forgot Willie McGinest, 1994, pick 4, played in 4 super bowls

2) You forgot Cedric Jones, 1996, though he did not have a big impact on that Super Bowl team.

3) You forgot Peter Boulware, 1997, pick 4.

4) Since we should include DE, add Julius Peppers to the list.

 

So three LB have made it to the Super Bowl with the team that drafted them top-5 in the past 20 years.  And at least two DE.  When you consider that a team drafting in the top 5 is exceedingly unlikely to make a Super Bowl in the subsequent 7-8 years, that's a decent record.  

 

 

In the last 20 years, 20 DE or LB have been drafted in the top 5, and 8 WR.  

so

((5) DE or LB who went to the SB at least once with the team that drafted him top five / 20 DE or LB selected top five) = 25% chance.

(1) WR who went to the super bowl at least once with the team that drafted him top five / 8 WR selected top five) = 13% chance.

 


I agree with you that playing in a Super Bowl may be too high of a bar.  But I don't have other easily-accessible information about if the team was successful after that player was drafted.  

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

What do you guys think if that if we stayed there and with Mack and Watkins on the Board we select Mike Evans? I am only saying this because its one name I have not seen mocked to the Jags unless we traded back. I am guessing this is possible, with the theory that most  mocks are wrong come draft day. So this would be a semi-surprise but still a good fit. what do you all think?

 

I would not like that much.

 

I question his route running, acceleration, and ability to get off the jam, though his size would make him a good pairing with Shorts.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

I'd rather have Barr than Mack. 

You might be alone on an island with that one....

---

I seriously don't understand this argument.  You're making it more complicated than it is. 

 

Wide receivers and LBs drafted in the top 5 since 2001

 

WRs:

Charles Rogers (Lions, No. 2, 2003)

Andre Johnson (Texans, No. 3, 2003)

Larry Fitzgerald (Cardinals, No. 3, 2004)

Braylon Edwards (Browns, No. 3, 2005)

Calvin Johnson (Lions, No. 2, 2007)

AJ Green (Bengals, No. 4, 2011)

Justin Blackmon (Jaguars, No 5, 2012)


LBs:

AJ Hawk (No. 5, 2006)

Aaron Curry (No 4. 2009)

Von Miller (No. 2, 2011)

---

I'd rather have Barr than Mack. 

 

You and Alfie. Congrats.

---

90s era top 5 LBs and WRs (1990 to 2000, as you can see, NFL has changed).:

 

Taken from wikipedia,

 

* = 1x pro bowler at minimum

 

WR:

*Desmond Howard (Redskins, no 4, 1992)

Michael Westbrook (Redskins, No. 4, 1995)

*Keyshawn Johnson (Jets, No. 1, 1996)

Peter Warrick (Bengals, no. 4, 2000)

 

LB:

Keith McCants (Chargers, no 5, 1990)

* Junior Seau (Chargers, no 5, 1990)

Mike Croel (broncos, no 4, 1991)

Quentin Coryatt (Colts, no 2, 1992)

*Marvin Jones (Jets, no 4, 1993)

*Willie McGinest (Patriots, no 4, 1994)

Trev Alberts (Colts, no 5, 1994)

*Kevin Hardy (Jaguars, no. 2, 1996)

*Peter Boulware (Ravens, no 4, 1997)

*Lavar Aarington (Redskins, No 2, 2000)

---

I seriously don't understand this argument.  You're making it more complicated than it is. 

 

Wide receivers and LBs drafted in the top 5 since 2001

 

WRs:

Charles Rogers (Lions, No. 2, 2003)

Andre Johnson (Texans, No. 3, 2003)

Larry Fitzgerald (Cardinals, No. 3, 2004)

Braylon Edwards (Browns, No. 3, 2005)

Calvin Johnson (Lions, No. 2, 2007)

AJ Green (Bengals, No. 4, 2011)

Justin Blackmon (Jaguars, No 5, 2012)


LBs:

AJ Hawk (No. 5, 2006)

Aaron Curry (No 4. 2009)

Von Miller (No. 2, 2011)

 

OK, so you've shortened the window we're looking at to only the last 10 years, and you're not including DE, only LB.  Fine.  I see zero conference championship game appearances among the WR group and 3 appearances in the LB group- two for Hawk and one for Miller.  Drafting pass rush in the top 5 has a much stronger correlation with success than drafting WR.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

90s era top 5 LBs and WRs (1990 to 2000, as you can see, NFL has changed).:

 

Taken from wikipedia,

 

* = 1x pro bowler at minimum

 

WR:

*Desmond Howard (Redskins, no 4, 1992)

Michael Westbrook (Redskins, No. 4, 1995)

*Keyshawn Johnson (Jets, No. 1, 1996)

Peter Warrick (Bengals, no. 4, 2000)

 

LB:

Keith McCants (Chargers, no 5, 1990)

* Junior Seau (Chargers, no 5, 1990)

Mike Croel (broncos, no 4, 1991)

Quentin Coryatt (Colts, no 2, 1992)

*Marvin Jones (Jets, no 4, 1993)

*Willie McGinest (Patriots, no 4, 1994)

Trev Alberts (Colts, no 5, 1994)

*Kevin Hardy (Jaguars, no. 2, 1996)

*Peter Boulware (Ravens, no 4, 1997)

*Lavar Aarington (Redskins, No 2, 2000)

 

Whether or not the guy made the pro bowl is kind of besides the point.  Somebody from each position has to make the pro bowl.  But with some positions, having an elite player has a lower correlation to wins and playoff appearances.  I'm not saying that Watkins won't be a great player, I am saying that he is less likely, if drafted in the top 5, to taste playoff success in his career than Mack will be if drafted in the top 5.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

OK, so you've shortened the window we're looking at to only the last 10 years, and you're not including DE, only LB.  Fine.  I see zero conference championship game appearances among the WR group and 3 appearances in the LB group- two for Hawk and one for Miller.  Drafting pass rush in the top 5 has a much stronger correlation with success than drafting WR.

 

Why would I include DE?  A typical DE that would go in the top 5, a pure 4-3 pass rusher, is a rare size/speed combination.  A pass rushing LB simply is not.  That's the difference.   I'm not even going to argue about what position correlates to better success because that information isn't important to me.  There are millions of factors that lead to making the playoffs.   My position has 100% to do with getting the most value out of the draft, and efficiently building a team through the draft. 

 

Whether or not the guy made the pro bowl is kind of besides the point.  Somebody from each position has to make the pro bowl.  But with some positions, having an elite player has a lower correlation to wins and playoff appearances.  I'm not saying that Watkins won't be a great player, I am saying that he is less likely, if drafted in the top 5, to taste playoff success in his career than Mack will be if drafted in the top 5.

 

I'm not putting any importance on the pro bowl or not.  This was just information that was in wikipedia.  A player could go to the pro bowl once and still be considered a bust.   To me it's more important that when you're in the top 5, you pick players that typically require a top 5 pick.  LB, even pass rushers, simply is not that.  BAP makes it more complicated.  But we should be able to draft a perfect fit at LEO and the LB positions late in the 1st round.   Whereas if we're caught with a late pick in the 1st having needs at a premium position, we're getting second rate/one dimensional players at that position. 

---

Gus said Mack would be a LEO for us. That makes him a DE, not a LB. 

---

Why would I include DE?  A typical DE that would go in the top 5, a pure 4-3 pass rusher, is a rare size/speed combination.  A pass rushing LB simply is not.  That's the difference.   I'm not even going to argue about what position correlates to better success because that information isn't important to me.  There are millions of factors that lead to making the playoffs.   My position has 100% to do with getting the most value out of the draft, and efficiently building a team through the draft. 

 

 

I'm not putting any importance on the pro bowl or not.  This was just information that was in wikipedia.  A player could go to the pro bowl once and still be considered a bust.   To me it's more important that when you're in the top 5, you pick players that typically require a top 5 pick.  LB, even pass rushers, simply is not that.  BAP makes it more complicated.  But we should be able to draft a perfect fit at LEO and the LB positions late in the 1st round.   Whereas if we're caught with a late pick in the 1st having needs at a premium position, we're getting second rate/one dimensional players at that position. 

 

So, then, we actually agree that there are "premium" positions where it pays to get those guys early, and "less premium" positions where it's easier to find talent.  You're saying that 4-3 end is a premium position, but LEO is not.  (1) They're basically the same position; the guy who's split wide still has a gap responsibility in the run game.  (2) Who would you draft at 3 then? Watkins?  You think WR is enough of a premium position?

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Gus said Mack would be a LEO for us. That makes him a DE, not a LB. 

 

So how many 250 lb DEs have gone in the top 5 of the draft the past 25 years? :whistling:

---

So how many 250 lb DEs have gone in the top 5 of the draft the past 25 years? :whistling:

 

None.  Guys who are Mack's combo of size and speed have usually played LB.  There is no reason Mack can't play LB.  But even then, drafting a pass-rushing LB in the top 5 is more strongly correlated with success than drafting a WR in the top 5.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

And it's not as simple as saying a LEO is a defensive end.

---

And it's not as simple as saying a LEO is a defensive end.

 

But I have shown that teams who draft traditional 4-3 DEs top 5 are more likely to be successful than those who draft WR, 

and teams who draft LB top 5 are more likely to be successful than those who draft WR (and that is even after counting Aaron Curry as a negative!)

 

So doesn't it stand to reason that drafting a guy who is a hybrid of both is just as likely to bring his team success?

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

You're saying that 4-3 end is a premium position, but LEO is not.  (1) They're basically the same position; the guy who's split wide still has a gap responsibility in the run game.

 

No, I don't see LEO as a premium position.  LEO is closer to a pass rush specialist.  The rest of the line is beefed up for run support allowing the LEO to be more one-dimensional.  

 

Who would you draft at 3 then?

 

Manziel. :yes:

 

Watkins?  You think WR is enough of a premium position?

 

Yes.  I think WR is a premium position and I'd pick Watkins/Evans over him.  

---

Gus said Mack would be a LEO for us. That makes him a DE, not a LB. 

 

 

Then again, a LEO is basically a 3-4 OLB. I always look at the Jaguars DL as containing...


 

3-4 OLB


4-3 3-tech DT


3-4 NT


3-4 DE

---

'02

What's the old saying, "correlation does not imply causation"?   Something like that.  You can cite all the stats you want about drafting WR vs LB or DE in the top 5, but unless you can tell me a REASON why one leads to the Super Bowl and the other does not, then it is just data mining.   It's like saying "if you buy stock on the first Tuesday of a month that begins with a J, you do better than if you buy stock on the last Friday of a month that begins with A.  Or drafting a QB whose name begins with a vowel is better than drafting a QB whose name begins with a consonant.  It's just a coincidence.  

 

Data, statistics, are worthless unless they reveal some kind of underlying truth.  

 

So to say, drafting a LB/DE is better than drafting a WR, to me, reveals no kind of truth that I would act on.  It's just a worthless stat. 

---