List of every 1st round trade for Quarterbacks over the last 10 years

[Pbomb]

8 minutes ago, NewDayBills said:

When is the last time we've had this many picks? We can literally load up and build a powerhouse. Trading that away for nothing, why do it? I could see moving up 8-10 spots because that would not put a dent in our capital, but moving in the top 10 like some want is irresponsible.

Or maybe continuing to not address the qb situation properly is irresponsible

[SoCal Deek]

Thanks for putting the summary together. What it really shows is that the jury is out on this small sample size since the ONLY ones that ‘appear’ may work out haven’t been in the league for more than a couple of years and even some of those already suffered season ending injuries!

 

Of course the more important list would be the success rate of the past decade’s first round QBs regardless of whether a trade-up was involved.

[GreggTX]

12 minutes ago, NewDayBills said:

Well, take Goff, Wentz and Watson off the list then, which makes my reasoning behind this thread even more meaningful. Fans want to trade the farm for a QB when the odds of landing a franchise guy is 33% at best.

And there are 31 other teams trying to win the SB which makes the odds 3.125%. Should we just stop trying? At some point you have to take a chance. I doubt our next franchise QB is going to be handed over.

[Pbomb]

Just now, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Or those 5 picks could turn out to be non-impact players.  

 those picks are guaranteed to be good only qb picks are risky

[GreggTX]

3 minutes ago, NewDayBills said:

I doubt Chicago would trade up for Trubisky again, which is all you need to know.

I don't need to know if he'll turn out OK?

[Foxx]

1 minute ago, Pbomb said:

 those picks are guaranteed to be good only qb picks are risky

probowlers even.

[ghostwriter]

5 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Or those 5 picks could turn out to be non-impact players.  

Let's take the 33% odds for example and let's say you're playing scratch off tickets. Would you rather have 1 ticket at a 33% chance or 5 tickets with a 33% chance?

 

(Although the odds of finding a franchise QB is far slimmer than drafting other positions and our chances of finding starters would be greater than 33% along with 5x more chances to find good players.)

Edited March 11, 2018 by NewDayBills

[BuffAlone]

4 minutes ago, NewDayBills said:

I doubt Chicago would trade up for Trubisky again, which is all you need to know.

All we really know is Mitchy didnt win a Superbowl in year one and that you dont like him as a QB

[Foxx]

2 minutes ago, NewDayBills said:

Let's take the 33% odds for example and let's say you're playing scratch off tickets. Would you rather have 1 ticket at a 33% chance or 5 tickets with a 33% chance?

 

(Although the odds of finding a franchise QB is far slimmer than other drafting other positions and our chances of finding starters would be greater than 33% along with 5x more chances to find good players.)

some attempts at logic scare the !@#$ outta me.

[26CornerBlitz]

Just now, NewDayBills said:

Let's take the 33% odds for example and let's say you're playing scratch off tickets. Would you rather have 1 ticket at a 33% chance or 5 tickets with a 33% chance?

 

(Although the odds of finding a franchise QB is far slimmer than other drafting other positions and our chances of finding starters would be greater than 33% along with 5x more chances to find good players.)

 

Terrible analogy. This isn't a scratch off lottery.  Either you trust a GM and the scouting staff's ability to judge QBs or you don't.  If they cannot identify a franchise QB, then what makes you think they'll have success with five of the top 65 picks? 

[SoCal Deek]

2 minutes ago, NewDayBills said:

Let's take the 33% odds for example and let's say you're playing scratch off tickets. Would you rather have 1 ticket at a 33% chance or 5 tickets with a 33% chance?

One can compare the drafting a QB to playing the lottery but it’s a lot different if the wife finds out you used the entire months grocery money to play it! Following the Tyrod trade the Bills have literally NOTHING in the cupboard m.

[Zerovoltz]

4 minutes ago, NewDayBills said:

Let's take the 33% odds for example and let's say you're playing scratch off tickets. Would you rather have 1 ticket at a 33% chance or 5 tickets with a 33% chance?

 

(Although the odds of finding a franchise QB is far slimmer than drafting other positions and our chances of finding starters would be greater than 33% along with 5x more chances to find good players.)

Your analogy assumes a pro bowl linebacker is equal to a pro bowl QB.  that simply isn’t the case.  

[GunnerBill]

3 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Terrible analogy. This isn't a scratch off lottery.  Either you trust a GM and the scouting staff's ability to judge QBs or you don't.  If they cannot identify a franchise QB, then what makes you think they'll have success with five of the top 65 picks? 

 

100% 26. I hate the "it's a lottery" argument. It really isn't. That is why you employ personnel staff. If it was just a lottery why would you bother? 

[26CornerBlitz]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

100% 26. I hate the "it's a lottery" argument. It really isn't. That is why you employ personnel staff. If it was just a lottery why would you bother? 

 

Exactly to the point. 

[xRUSHx]

8 minutes ago, NewDayBills said:

I've shown you statistics that provide examples as to what other teams have done. Why not learn from the mistakes of other people so you don't make the same mistakes yourself?

 

33% chance at best to find a franchise QB if we trade the farm for to get into the top 5.

 

Or we could take those 5 picks in the top 65 selections and build our own version of the Legion of Boom.

What makes you think this draft will make a legion of boom? The boom had a talent at QB, without the QB the boom is more of a snap crackle pop.

 

I would hate to see them continue to build the Whaley way that thinks building the team before finding a QB will create a powerhouse when all it does is create players leaving after the first contract and the forever talk of wishing we had a better QB while having the longest playoffless streak.

 

What happens if they pick another Maybin? How about listing all position busts from the 1st, no position is a lock from the 1st IMO 

[oldmanfan]

We can argue all we want but there are a couple things that remain set in stone.  One is that Beane has said they have to have a WB.  A second is that the front office has a lot more data on the guys in the draft than anyone on this board.  A third is we have no idea if they'll move up or down because we don't have the data they do.  And fourth is no matter who they take, there's a pretty good chance it won't be the right call.  Not because they are inept, but because that is the nature of trying to identify a great QB.

 

My guess is they sign McCarron and move up to get Rosen.  But if they stay put and take say Rudolph fine by me.  Ultimately none of us know if any of these guys will turn out any good.  

[BuffAlone]

Also OP, if they are in fact a "smart" organization now, I doubt they trade away a proven starter, and by far the best of only two QB's on the roster, just to take the 5th, 6th, or 7th best QB available in the draft and marry their (what will be very short) careers to. 

That wouldn't be very smart at all

[Cripple Creek]

1 hour ago, NewDayBills said:

Out of the teams that traded up for 1st round QBs in the past 10 years:

 

2017:

Chicago for Mitchell Trubisky

Kansas City for Patrick Mahomes

Houston for Deshaun Watson

 

2016:

Los Angeles for Jared Goff

Philadelphia for Carson Wentz

 

2015: no one.

 

 

2014:

Johnny Manziel

Teddy Bridgewater

 

2013: no one.

 

2012:

Washington gave up the farm for RG3.

 

2011: nobody.

 

2010: nobody.

 

2009:

Tampa Bay traded to #17 for Josh Freeman.

 

2008: Nobody

 

So out of the 9 QBs taken:

33% have been great.

(Wentz, Goff, Watson)

 

44% have been busts.

(Freeman, RG3, Trubisky, Manziel)

 

22% the jury is still out on.

(Bridgewater, Mahomes)

Interesting, you call Griffin a bust yet he had a fantastic rookie season but was never the same after suffering a knee injury.  You call Watson great after one partial season which was cut short after suffering a knee injury.  You say jury is out on Bridgewater who was playing very well before suffering a knee injury.

 

Notice any similarities here? You can't bust a player (Griffin) for getting hurt. You shouldn't project greatness on Watson just yet.  Bridgewater has a much larger body of work and if he regains NFL health he is definitely a known commodity. 

[ghostwriter]

1 minute ago, xRUSHx said:

What makes you think this draft will make a legion of boom? The boom had a talent at QB, without the QB the boom is more of a snap crackle pop.

 

I would hate to see them continue to build the Whaley way that thinks building the team before finding a QB will create a powerhouse when all it does is create players leaving after the first contract and the forever talk of wishing we had a better QB while having the longest playoffless streak.

 

What happens if they pick another Maybin? How about listing all position busts from the 1st, no position is a lock from the 1st IMO 

This draft is loaded at just about every weakness we have. We could probably walk away with 2 LBs, 2 DTs that start Day 1. 

 

I'm not against QB in RD1, I'm not against trading up for one either, I just wouldn't trade the farm for one.

 

It comes down to the risk/reward ratio. Giving up 21 and a 1st next year to move to 7-10 is a lot more acceptable than trading 3 1st and 2 2nds to move up to #2 in a draft class where I just don't see a Peyton Manning or an Andrew Luck, I just don't see a prospect like that. Sure there are good prospects, but no generational talents. I really like Josh Allen and there are talks about him going #1 and that guy's bust potential is through the roof. I don't think the risk to reward ratio is good for a massive trade up.

 

 

[mead107]

Comes Dow to you just never know.