4merper4mer Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 18 minutes ago, ndirish1978 said: SBnation is not the most reputable of sources OP. I see you're catching some flak for posting this (it does seem like you're just posting things that back up your already established opinion, but that's not really a unique thing here so I won't complain about that). It would probably be a better idea to back up your position with articles from actual professionals and not a website whose content is amateur at best. When you see Scouts Inc has the top 4 prospects at QB graded in the 90s, this article from Bill Connelly, who is not even a professional writer, doesn't really hold that much water. Dude. Todd McShay?
BuffaloHokie13 Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 2 minutes ago, HappyDays said: Read the whole article, not just the posted blurb. He specifically mentions rate statistics and says success rate is the one with the highest correlation from college to the pros. So success rate isn't a perfect tool but out of a sample size of 38 QBs it has found a ceiling you can expect for each QB, and that ceiling isn't very likely at all. 38 is a fairly small sample size, maybe there's a 1 in 40 chance that a QB will exceed his college success rate in the pros and the sample size wasn't large enough to find one. It paints a troubling picture though. The blurb was enough of a turn off that I'm not interested in the article, honestly. 1
HappyDays Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 2 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said: The blurb was enough of a turn off that I'm not interested in the article, honestly. The blurb itself says you have to look at "the right statistics." He's not a great writer but his points are very interesting.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 2 minutes ago, HappyDays said: The blurb itself says you have to look at "the right statistics." He's not a great writer but his points are very interesting. Quote For instance, we definitively know a prospect’s ceiling: His college stats. It's bad.
4merper4mer Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 28 minutes ago, SouthNYfan said: I read the long, dumba$$ article that says by the end started that Josh Rosen's ceiling is Brandon Weeden, Darnold's is Colt McCoy, Rudolp's is hard Goff, and Allen is Tebow/kizer. Kizer and McCoy barely have any NFL stats to go off of, yet this guy claims to be using the first 4 years of NFL player's stats as projections, when kizer only has one season under his belt. I honestly don't know which QB will be the best, nobody does, and every single scout uses different metrics and film study to project a draftee. Articles like this one which basically claim to have figured out some magical, convoluted system of advanced metrics to project don't mean crap. Moneyball failed in baseball because it relied solely on advanced metrics. So that's a "no I can't name one QB in the history of the NFL that succeeded despite having Josh Allen stats in college"? I agree magical convoluted stats are thrown around by all sides in many arguments. This is not contained to sports. The nobody ever argument isn't even the best. That doesn't make wishing a good strategy to pick a QB. People are constantly using selection round/place as an indicator for QB success. If that works, why not just trade up to 1 with 37 picks and select Leighton Vander Doodle to be our QB? 2 1
Madd Charlie Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 5 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said: There were PLENTY of questions on Manning, to the point that the Colts were debating between him and Leaf right up to the draft. Luck had the fewest questions, for sure, and he hasnt exactly been in the running to be the next GOAT either. So what is all that worth? This entire song & dance to try to accurately predict which QB will be successful is mostly BS. Especially from folks as far removed as us fans. You can try to look for trends and similarities, but the fact is, EVERY rookie situation will be different. Just because one player did something years ago doesnt mean that any player this year will be the same. Success or Failure doesnt happen in a vacuum. Just because a player does well on one team does NOT guarantee he'd be just as good everywhere else. Coaching, scheme, heck even personal stuff, all factor in. All we know for sure is the Bills need a QB. And there seem to be plenty of prospects in this draft. Quote from Manning's Draft profile: "Manning does everything well but he may be too serious," the personnel man said. "(Brett) Favre, Fran Tarkenton, Joe Namath ... guys like that don't give a (expletive)." Leaf: “I’d take Ryan Leaf,” Buffalo Bills general manager John Butler said. “I like the big, physical aspects about him. He’s got good mobility, and there’s something about him, kind of tough to say just what, just something that you like in a quarterback. They’re both talented players, but I give the edge to Leaf.” Wow that Leaf comparison sounds a lot like Allen to me. Leaf vs. Manning was the classic what do my eyes and data tell me VS. what do I FEEL this guy could be in the future. We all know how it worked out. Flame if you want but my choice #1 is Mayfield hes the most accurate and has the right attitude (when hes not drunk) and number 2 is Lamar Jackson best stats out of the group. Darnold is pure projection and speculation hes done nothing, Rosen too much going on not mobile injury prone and our oline is probably worse than last year at this point, Allen no, just no 1
4merper4mer Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 Just now, BuffaloHokie13 said: It's bad. Then show how. It should be easy to find one guy. Use any QB from NFL history that you choose.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 Just now, 4merper4mer said: Then show how. It should be easy to find one guy. Use any QB from NFL history that you choose. Brady is statistically better in practically every category in the NFL than he was in college. 1
Hapless Bills Fan Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 1 hour ago, Domdab99 said: ...And that Josh Allen is a monster bust. Boy, if I were Josh Allen, I would be building myself one helluva motivational scrap book 1
Chicken Boo Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 Hard as they may try, there is no science to this and there never will be. 2
SouthNYfan Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 6 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said: So that's a "no I can't name one QB in the history of the NFL that succeeded despite having Josh Allen stats in college"? I agree magical convoluted stats are thrown around by all sides in many arguments. This is not contained to sports. The nobody ever argument isn't even the best. That doesn't make wishing a good strategy to pick a QB. People are constantly using selection round/place as an indicator for QB success. If that works, why not just trade up to 1 with 37 picks and select Leighton Vander Doodle to be our QB? I don't disagree with you at all. My point was there are 2-3 threads for each on the top4 QBs that show why they ABSOLUTELY will/won't be a bust based on some convoluted "new" stat system and there are people who will argue that it's fact that a guy will/won't be a bust, including the op. That was what I was getting at.
4merper4mer Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 8 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said: Brady is statistically better in practically every category in the NFL than he was in college. Then there you go. can you name any non-cheaters? Just kidding 1
HappyDays Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 14 minutes ago, Chicken Boo said: Hard as they may try, there is no science to this and there never will be. These analytics measurements don't seem to be too good at figuring out who will succeed. But they're good at figuring out the busts. No QBs with a negative QBASE have ever made it in the NFL, neither have any QBs with a low college success rate. Allen fails both tests. 1
Domdab99 Posted April 5, 2018 Author Posted April 5, 2018 1 hour ago, SouthNYfan said: No, but you linked it, and are acting like it's gospel. Moron. ?? Wtf is wrong with you? I’ve even said in this thread I have no idea what the right decision would be. I linked it because I though other Bills fans would find it interesting, not because I necessarily think it’s gospel. what an !@#$ you must be in real life. Go outsides and take a run or something, Gomer. You need to let off some steam. 1
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 6 minutes ago, HappyDays said: These analytics measurements don't seem to be too good at figuring out who will succeed. But they're good at figuring out the busts. No QBs with a negative QBASE have ever made it in the NFL, neither have any QBs with a low college success rate. Allen fails both tests. And Scout's Inc. is out today with Top 4 QB are the highest rated in many years (all over 90). Anybody who's a quality decision maker doesn't get bogged down with only one way of analyzing the question. They also realize the randomness of all these decisions. It is not just as simple as having a superior analytical tool. A great decision maker will methodically look at all the evidence available, ask questions and decide what is worth using and what isn't.
reddogblitz Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 Trading a bunch of picks (expecially including next years #1) for Josh Allen is my nightmare scenario. 1
DrDawkinstein Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 25 minutes ago, Madd Charlie said: Quote from Manning's Draft profile: "Manning does everything well but he may be too serious," the personnel man said. "(Brett) Favre, Fran Tarkenton, Joe Namath ... guys like that don't give a (expletive)." Leaf: “I’d take Ryan Leaf,” Buffalo Bills general manager John Butler said. “I like the big, physical aspects about him. He’s got good mobility, and there’s something about him, kind of tough to say just what, just something that you like in a quarterback. They’re both talented players, but I give the edge to Leaf.” Wow that Leaf comparison sounds a lot like Allen to me. Leaf vs. Manning was the classic what do my eyes and data tell me VS. what do I FEEL this guy could be in the future. We all know how it worked out. Flame if you want but my choice #1 is Mayfield hes the most accurate and has the right attitude (when hes not drunk) and number 2 is Lamar Jackson best stats out of the group. Darnold is pure projection and speculation hes done nothing, Rosen too much going on not mobile injury prone and our oline is probably worse than last year at this point, Allen no, just no Two different players in two different eras going to two different teams with different coaches and different schemes and different situations all around. NOTHING that Leaf did pertains to the future success or failure of Josh Allen. Josh Allen is not Ryan Leaf. None of the specific prospects are any of the former players you want to compare them to. They are their own person with their own career path. You can like Mayfield all you want. I'm not trying to stop people from picking favorites. I get that we need to talk about something during these down months. And the easiest way to do that is comparing the current prospects to past players. But it isnt an accurate means of assessment, at all. None of our guessing, or researching, or prognosticating matters.
Tyrod's friend Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 55 minutes ago, HappyDays said: If you read the article they're actually talking about college success rate which is a Football Outsiders metric. And yet I was just reading an article this morning - thankfully, I think you linked it or referred to it - where a FO metric of QBASE showed that Baker Mayfield is one of the top QBs to come out in the last 12 years. Something like that. So we have two metrics, apparently from the same source, 180 degrees from one another. Honestly, I'm just asking and not trying to be snarky. But on the surface that's the read I am getting.
reddogblitz Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 (edited) 58 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said: Why are you actively competing for the title of "Most **** Threads"? Why are you actively competing for the title of "Most **** Posts"? There's no reason to be an *** about it if you disagree. Edited April 5, 2018 by reddogblitz 1
DrDawkinstein Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 Just now, reddogblitz said: Why are you actively competing for the title of "Most **** Posts"? It's all Im getting to work with
Recommended Posts