Mark Long Beach Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 The following thread is scattered throughout the posts, but I really enjoyed it, so I thought I'd pass it along to the rest of you (so you don't have to work hard at finding/following it) This conversation wounds a little deeper since we just failed with a high OT in MikeWilliams and are still in need of an OT and debatably a QB (although we shouldn't draft one high this year). My opionion on this topic has changed after reading it. Good stuff, albeit hard to pull out of their forum. link: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2006/03/0...our-downs/3727/ 2 ...On a more serious note, we�ll have to agree to disagree on Ferguson�there is scant evidence to show that there is a correlation between elite left tackle play and overall offensive performance, while there is a ton of evidence showing the correlation between quarterback play and overall offensive performance. The team would be better served using free agency to patch up the line with a few decent players (Schaffer is an obvious target, as are Ashworth and Neal) and securing an elite prospect at quarterback. And the Jets salary cap woes seem a bit overstated to me (a lot overstated, actually). Once the Jets trade John Abraham, which should happen in the next week or so, the team is actually somewhere between 25 and 30 million under the cap this year (they are supposedly down to around $90 million now, and that�s with Abraham�s $8 million counting against the cap), and they�ll have two first rounders to work with, to boot. :: Sean — 3/9/2006 @ 4:19 pm 13 “On a more serious note, we�ll have to agree to disagree on Ferguson�there is scant evidence to show that there is a correlation between elite left tackle play and overall offensive performance, while there is a ton of evidence showing the correlation between quarterback play and overall offensive performance.” Is there? Good quarterback play is defined as… what? Throwing for a lot of yards and TDs? Good offensive performance is defined as… what? Gaining a lot of yards and scoring a lot of TDs? Really, if you have evidence, I would like to see it. Would Peyton Manning be PEYTON MANNING if he was playing with the Texans or Niners offense? Would David Carr be DAVID CARR if he was playing with the Colts offense? :: Jeff — 3/9/2006 @ 5:36 pm 20 Jeff- Yes, there is. And in this case, good offensive performance is defined as a team having a high offensive DVOA rating. You can go and track the offensive DVOAs for the top performing quarterbacks over the years, and the numbers will overwhelmingly support the idea that if you are getting elite quarterback play, your offense is going to perform at a high level. Does that mean you can afford to field an incompetent line, as Houston has? No, it does not. But it also doesn�t mean that you need to spend the #4 pick in the draft on a tackle. There is a reason why certain positions get favored at the top of the draft (quarterback, running back, defensive end) and certain positions do not (guard, safety, tight end). It�s because the difference between having great players and good players at the former positions will do more for your football team as a whole than having great players instead of good players at the latter positions. That�s why the Patriots are paying Tom Brady $14.5 million this year and his entire offensive line is making $7 million combined. You allocate your resources to prioritize the most important positions and then you do everything you can to make sure the less important positions are giving you the best bang for your buck. :: Sean — 3/9/2006 @ 6:37 pm 22 Sean - I still think this is circular. If you get elite quarterback play, your offense is going to perform at a high level. But isn’t elite quarterback play defined by the offense performing well? Plummer was the #5 QB by DVOA last year. Is he really the 5th-best QB in the league, or did his offense boost his numbers? As for drafting high, and salary, Orlando Pace was a #1 pick. Gallery was top-5. It costs more to franchise an OL than RBs or WRs. (OL are 4th behind QB, DE and LB.) If you don’t think D’Brickshaw is in the class of Pace, Gallery, Ogden, etc. that is understandable. But it’s not unreasonable to want to draft a top OL over a top QB. :: Jeff — 3/9/2006 @ 7:02 pm 27 Jeff- The exception doesn�t prove the rule. In 2003, Steve McNair was the #3 DVOA quarterback in football, the same year his offensive line was 30th in adjusted line yards, 31st in power rankings and 32nd in stuffs. The Titans overall offensive ranking? Fifth best in the league. You can readily find instances where quarterback play clearly and directly lifted the offensive execution of the team as a whole. You absolutely cannot find the same information for any particular offensive lineman. Jonathan Ogden has been playing at a Pro Bowl level his entire career, and according to DVOA he�s never been on an offense that has even managed to be average. Orlando Pace has been playing at a Hall of Fame level his entire career. If you look at the Rams offensive DVOA as a whole, it�s very straightforward. Before Kurt Warner Warner showed up, they were terrible. For three years with Kurt Warner, they were the best offense in the league. Kurt Warner left, and they�ve been mediocre or worse ever since. Pace is playing at the same level the whole time and that�s not showing up as so much as a blip in the overall team performance. But when you look at the numbers, you really can�t miss when Kurt Warner showed up (or when he exited stage left). Do I think that Ferguson is as good a prospect as Pace or Gallery? Yes. But that�s not the point- he could be Pace, Gallery and Ogden all rolled up into one, and if the next Carson Palmer is available, taking Ferguson would be a crushingly stupid thing to do. Not only would you suffer the opportunity cost of taking a player who is going to do more to elevate the offensive production as a whole than anyone else on the team, but you would be investing the kind of money that a top pick demands into a position that doesn�t have enough demonstrable impact to warrant it. What confuses the issue is that left tackle is the easier position to project�top left tackle prospects have historically panned out with greater frequency than top quarterback prospects. But if you could guarantee the success of the top player at each position, so that Ferguson was a guarantee to be the next Orlando Pace and Matt Leinart was a guarantee to be the next Peyton Manning, 32 franchises would take Matt Leinart, and they would trip over themselves trying to get the card in to the podium. :: Sean — 3/9/2006 @ 8:43 pm 31 Sean - The Titans couldn’t run block to save their lives in 2003, but they were 7th in adjusted sack rate, so they could pass block fairly well. But trading specific instances back and forth isn’t going to settle anything. As for the projection issue, this more than just clouds the issue, this is the issue. A top QB is worth more than a top OL, I agree. But drafting a QB is like russian roullette. Starting in 2002, in the first two rounds of the draft, you get: David Carr, Joey Harrington, Patrick Ramsey. 2001: Vick, Brees, Quincy Carter, Tuiasosopo. 2000: just Pennington. 1999: Couch, McNabb, Smith, Culpepper, McCown, Shaun King. 1998: Manning, Leaf, Batch. If you include Pennington and Carr (both debatable), that’s 7 out of 17 that panned out. :: jeff — 3/9/2006 @ 10:20 pm 32 Jeff- I wouldn’t lump in guys who go in round two, or even in the back end of round one, with those who were taken at the top of the draft. Going back to 1998, quarterbacks taken in the top third of the round: Peyton Manning, Ryan Leaf, Tim Couch, Donovan McNabb, Akili Smith, Daunte Culpepper, Michael Vick, David Carr, Joey Harrington, Carson Palmer, Byron Leftwich, Eli Manning, Philip Rivers, Ben Roethlisberger, Alex Smith. Once you are looking at the guys who were genuinely elite prospects, the hit rate goes up quite a bit, well over the 50% mark. During that same time, the following tackles came off in the top third: Kyle Turley, Tra Thomas, Chris Samuels, Leonard Davis, Mike Williams, Bryant McKinnie, Levi Jones, Jordan Gross, Robert Gallery. There are some good players in that group, but I can’t say it’s jumping out at me as a compelling reason to forgo the option of drafting Peyton Manning, Carson Palmer, Ben Roethlisberger et al. :: Sean — 3/9/2006 @ 10:34 pm 36 ...I know. I picked 98 because it was the Manning draft. I could have moved it back to 1983 if I wanted to load up on quarterbacks. It’s all pretty irrelevant to my basic position, which is that even if you hit on a tackle prospect, you wasted the pick if there were prospects at more important positions who you could have taken. :: Sean — 3/10/2006 @ 12:07 am 37 In ‘96, Ogden was picked 4th, Will Anderson 10th. The best non-tackles in the top-10 that year were Keyshawn, Kevin Hardy, Simeon Rice. In ‘97, Pace was #1, Walter Jones #6. The best non-tackle in the top-10 was … Shawn Springs maybe? In ‘98, Kyle Turley was #7. Manning was #1, Woodson was #4 and Fred Taylor was #9. But you also had Leaf, Wadsworth and Curtis Enis. In ‘99, John Tait was the highest T at #14. The top-10 had McNabb, Edge, Rickey, Holt and Champ, but also Couch and Akili. In 2000, Chris Samuels was #3 with Arrington, Jamal Lewis and Urlacher the best of the rest. Are Leinart, Young and Jay Cutler more of a sure thing than Leaf or Akili Smith or Curtis Enis or Thomas Jones coming out of college? In contrast, top-10 offensive tackles almost never fail. :: jeff — 3/10/2006 @ 1:20 am 40 Top tackles do indeed fail. Leonard Davis has not been worth the pick. Mike Williams just finished getting cut. Robert Gallery hasn’t played especially well in his two seasons (which isn’t to say he won’t be a good player, but he isn’t making Oakland’s decision to pass over Roethlisberger look particularly good). Chris Samuels has been good but not great. Bryant McKinnie has been erratic. But again, the question is, even if the pick succeeds, how much does it improve the offense? Does it improve the offense enough to justify passing over a quarterback, even if it’s a safer pick? Maybe, but I don’t think it’s a given. (And I don’t want it to sound like I am advocating passing over the best player on the board if that player happens to be a tackle, because I’m not. But when you have prospects with similar grades at the top of the draft and one of them is a tackle and one of them is a quarterback or even a defensive end, I’m not convinced that the high floor for the tackle is enough to outweigh the heigher ceilings that you get for the other positions. I’m honestly not sure. :: Sean — 3/10/2006 @ 3:16 am 43 ...I would suspect, even with busts like Akili Smith and Tim Couch, the Top 5 QB teams would also outperform the Top 5 OT teams in terms of performance, just going off some names that come to mind like Elway, Aikman, Manning, McNabb, and Bledsoe and knowing those guys got to multiple playoffs or superbowls in the first 5 years. In light of comments above, I would add: –Yes, there are in fact OL Busts, just like other positions, I’ll throw some more names you may not remember, Mark Addickes and Dean Steinkuhler. –QB appears to be boom or bust, but the upside is much better –the question here should be, not whether QB and offensive performance are correlated, but whether the top offenses have a) high drafted OT, or b) high drafted QB (or © neither, see New England or Denver). Mixed results there. Seattle vs Indy. Cincy with both, but Palmer being highest drafted. –I would draft the player, not the position. If I had player A ranked higher, I would not reach for player B because he played a perceived safer position. :: Falco — 3/10/2006 @ 8:47 am 48 ..."QB appears to be boom or bust, but the upside is much better" It’s tough to say. Controlling for the team’s effect on the player’s ability is tough. Just as an example, we all would agree that Manning is definitely a top-shelf QB, but he’s also never played on a team that had a high sack rate. Part of that is him, but if you plugged Manning into, say, Houston, I think he’d look like a slightly-above average quarterback. Which immediately raises the question of “is David Carr a bust or a boom?” which we’ve been asking for a while. �I would draft the player, not the position. And that’s the best statement I’ve heard for a while. There’s absolutely no way San Francisco should’ve drafted Alex Smith last year, for instance, which also makes me wonder whether or not a lot of the QB busts are because they “floated” upwards in poor QB draft years. The Jets definitely need offensive line help, but they should draft the best player available. If they don’t want Cutler, and they think Ferguson is a reach at 4, trade down. :: Pat — 3/10/2006 @ 11:52 am 51 I think another factor worth bearing in mind in the QB-OL discussion is the comparative difficulties of upgrading each position. It is virtually impossible to acquire an elite quarterback other than through the draft, and difficult to acquire even a good one. Offensive line play, however, can be upgraded substantially in any number of ways, and in particular by upgrading the coaching, for which there is no cap or opportunity cost whatever. For a couldn’t-be-clearer case in point, just look at Houck’s impact on the ‘Fins last year. On another note, to further complicate Tim’s point, I think there are clearly some players (within a position) whose abilities are limited by offensive line play more than others. For example, I would submit that indifferent protection will affect a Kurt Warner or a Drew Bledsoe - older players who were never that mobile in the first place - more than a young or young-ish quarterback with running ability - say McNabb. I firmly believe that if you put Warner behind the Seahawks’ line he would perform at a pro-bowl level, while if he signed in Houston it would be better to start Carr. McNabb, on the other hand, would probably be a pro-bowler on either team. :: Mr Shush — 3/10/2006 @ 3:34 pm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Long Beach Posted March 10, 2006 Author Share Posted March 10, 2006 Rats, I don't know how to get nice little quote boxes to make it easier to read. Sorry guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gobillsinytown Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 I don't know if this quote is in your post, but I especially like their asessment of Bennie Anderson: "The pulling guard is supposed to hit the hole BEFORE the running back, Bennie" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts