Mahomes perspective - success not that easy to predict

[jkeerie]

On 10/31/2018 at 11:26 AM, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

 

Right now, still too early to tell. Wentz looked way better than Goff initially. Different story this year 

Which argues the point that you cannot neglect the surrounding cast.  Would Mahomes look as good on the Bears and Trubisky better on the Chiefs...given the receivers on each of these teams?

 

Folks like to argue that Brady has always played with a bunch of "no names" and he makes them look good.  Well...not discounting Brady's obvious talent...their offense was very ordinary this year until he got Edelmann back.  It seems the great QBs have always had their "go to" guys to make plays.  Kelly had Andre, Rothlesberger has Brown, Mahomes has Tyreek Hill and Kelce, etc.

 

Again...I'm not discounting the obvious talent of these QBs, but the talent surrounding them does matter.

 

 

[SoTier]

1 hour ago, dtgolder said:

Sure--hindsight is 20-20...and it's not just the "bad" teams that missed on Mahomes....think about it--

 

If say the Pats thought he was as good as he now seems to be before the draft, wouldn't they have traded up to secure Brady's replacement? There were 10 teams they could have traded with to secure that pick...same is true for any other NFL team you can name.

 

EVERYONE in the league (save the Chiefs) missed the mark on this kid (not just the 'bad' teams).

 

Bottom line: predicting QB success is elusive. And the jury is still out on all of the 2018 (and 2017 for that matter) QBs, including Allen. 

 

How do you know that the Pats -- or other teams -- didn't try to move up to draft Mahomes?  Moreover, some teams already have franchise QBs and are trying to build championship teams, so they have other needs.  Others had/have young QBs prospects that they drafted in the last 2-4 years.  Some other teams may have gambled that Mahomes would be there when it was their turn or that they simply liked Trubiskey or Watson better. 

 

1 hour ago, TonyBeets said:

People are so quick to annoint the next great QB.  Sustained success is a that matters, if he's this good 5 years from now then yes, good QB

 

Not true.  Historically, QBs who are going to be good QBs long term generally take a huge step forward sometime in their second season as starters.  This is true even for QBs who don't look very good as as first year starters.  When you look at the careers of most of the good current QBs in the league, most were significantly better in their second seasons than in their first, including Brady, Rodgers, Newton, Wilson, Cousins, Wentz, Goff, etc.  There have been some precocious QBs who looked good as rookies and continued that way: Ben Roethlisberger, Joe Flacco, Andy Dalton, and Derek Carr. 

 

QBs who look good in their first year as starters and then failed tend to be QBs like Colin Kaepernick who depend upon running rather than developing as passing QBs.  This looked like maybe DeShaun Watson would be that kind of QB, but he's developed his passing skills, and can't be considered a "run first" QB any longer.   IOW, Kaepernick was essentially a running back who could throw the ball, not an athletic QB who can run the ball like the young studs like Wentz, Watson, and Mahomes.  

 

The QBs who need 3-5 years as starters to show if they're any good are highly unlikely to become true franchise QBs.  At best, they seem to be not "good enough" to win consistently with but "too good" to relegate to backup status.  Jay Cutler is the poster boy for this type.  Ryan Tannehill, Blake Bortles, and Marcus Mariota seem to be this type -- and maybe Jameis Winston, although that's questionable at this point.

 

[Boatdrinks]

3 hours ago, dtgolder said:

Sure--hindsight is 20-20...and it's not just the "bad" teams that missed on Mahomes....think about it--

 

If say the Pats thought he was as good as he now seems to be before the draft, wouldn't they have traded up to secure Brady's replacement? There were 10 teams they could have traded with to secure that pick...same is true for any other NFL team you can name.

 

EVERYONE in the league (save the Chiefs) missed the mark on this kid (not just the 'bad' teams).

 

Bottom line: predicting QB success is elusive. And the jury is still out on all of the 2018 (and 2017 for that matter) QBs, including Allen. 

Ahhh, yet again the old chestnut about hindsight. I’ve said a million times, NFL executives / coaches et al are paid huge dollars to have foresight. Excusing away errors in the name of hindsight is fanboy stuff. As for your Pats analogy, the answer is a flat NO. The drunkard owner Kraft is married to Tommy boy until he decides to stop playing. No one knows when that will be. The Pats* already had the guy Belichick felt he could win a lot of games with going forward. He lost the power struggle and was forced to trade Garappolo to San Francisco. Belichick has always been unsentimental about players; he only cares about winning post Brady to further his legacy. While other teams passed on drafting Mahomes before the Bills did, some of those teams had QBs. Several had been to the playoffs and even a Super Bowl with their current QB situation. The Bills braintrust not taking a shot with a dire need at QB was foolish.  The draft is a crapshoot, but need at the most important position dictated taking their chance while the cost was known. At just a single first round pick, the cost wasn’t getting any lower. They decided to put it off until the next draft. The maxim that applies here is the one about a bird in hand being worth two in the bush, not the played out excuse regarding hindsight. 

Edited November 1, 2018 by Boatdrinks

[Samwell Tarly]

Mahomes has definitely been impressive.  Lets see how he does when the weather turns, also how he handles playoff games.  Can he sustain his current level of play?

[technobot]

On 10/31/2018 at 5:34 PM, Teddy KGB said:

 

So don’t draft good players ? 

 

That was not even implied in my post...

 

Did we miss out?  Sure looks like it.  My point was simply Mahomes wouldn't look so great here.  That's not a knock against him, he obviously has "it".  It's my opinion that the current coaching staff would have wasted him, especially with the roster as it is.  I can't prove it, obviously, but like everyone else I'm entitled to my opinion.

 

To me, we're dealing with alternate histories, like the one where the Bills drafted Tom Brady or even Rob Gronkowski; let's throw in Aaron Rodgers for giggles.  Could even Brady/Rodgers have elevated those Bills teams, without Belichick and his genius/system, or without a strong Packers roster used to winning?  Would Gronk "Gronk Out!" on the Buddy Nix/Gailey Bills, lead by the plucky Ryan Fitzpatrick?  I don't think so.

 

Seems like people are worked up about stuff that didn't happen.  Sometimes that's for the best.  And hindsight is 20/20.  I agree, it sucks we missed out on what was apparently a generational talent.  As a fan of the NFL, I'll be content to watch him from afar, watching him (likely) reach his full potential.  My point was simply that I don't think he would have reached his potential here, at this time, much like the Bills would have wasted Brady/Gronkowski/Rodgers.

[Soda Popinski]

On 10/31/2018 at 12:47 PM, HappyDays said:

I didn't want Mahomes anymore than I wanted Allen.

On that you and I can agree 100%

 

Wrong on the first one, hopefully wrong on the 2nd one.