The 2021 NFL Draft Thread.

[Shanemansj13]

I’m not sure Bill is going to settle for JimmyG when he can possibly trade up to #4 and get a QB on a rookie contract. They have plenty of money, assets and tradable contracts to acquire more assets to then build around him on his rookie deal but JimmyG could definitely be a backup option

 

[Groo]

Well then it could be Mac to SF. Hard to believe they traded up for Mac but a lot of QB’s could thrive in SF when they are healthy it’s just about getting the guy that is right for the system and a high ceiling

I read that the Niners worked a few other teams for a trade before ending up trading with Miami for the #3. If they were looking at #'s 4 and 5 or later then I'd have to assume they weren't targeting a Fields or Lance. The Niners have shown a propensity to fall in love with a player and move up to take them. So far that hasn't worked out. I think they just didn't think he'd drop to 12

 

[Shanemansj13]

I’m no homer lol. Just some interesting stuff

 

[Shanemansj13]

 

[cdumler7]

Atlanta trading down would be somewhat unusual at this point. Imo, it would require a scenario with exactly 4 top tier QB prospects and then a massive dropoff. But if that was the case then it would require something to the same tune as what the Niners gave up to get in the game and I don't think Denver or New England fit the profile of teams who normally do that kind of thing.

I would say at this point we don't know if the Broncos fit that profile or not. Paton has never been a GM. He did however see how the Vikings tried to solve the QB position over all the years. Mostly throwing late 1st round picks at the position with Bradford and Bridgewater or throwing funny money with that of Cousins.

I can tell you I know for a fact the Broncos have been in big time talks with both the Falcons and Bengals about a trade up possibility. It would not shock me one bit if they were the team that traded up to get their guy.

 

[Clayton]

I would say at this point we don't know if the Broncos fit that profile or not. Paton has never been a GM. He did however see how the Vikings tried to solve the QB position over all the years. Mostly throwing late 1st round picks at the position with Bradford and Bridgewater or throwing funny money with that of Cousins.

I can tell you I know for a fact the Broncos have been in big time talks with both the Falcons and Bengals about a trade up possibility. It would not shock me one bit if they were the team that traded up to get their guy.

If we have 4 or 5 QBs go in a row then the NFL probably needs to rework rookie QB contracts because teams aren't doing this because top 5 QBs have been turning into franchise qbs on a regular basis.

 

[cdumler7]

If we have 4 or 5 QBs go in a row then the NFL probably needs to rework rookie QB contracts because teams aren't doing this because top 5 QBs have been turning into franchise qbs on a regular basis.

I would say teams are looking at QB early now more than ever because the statistics say that outside the top-12 good luck actually finding a star.

In the last 15 drafts 32 QB's have been taken picks 1-12. 3 have been elite, 8 have been good, 3 have been solid, 6 have been fringe starters, 9 have been backups, 1 is Sam Bradford with injuries, and then you have the Burrow/Tua that we don't know what they are yet.

So you have a 10% chance you find a star, 33% chance you find at least a good starter, about a 45% chance you find at least a starter quality player.

Picks 13-32 in the last 15 drafts you have...
12 QB's taken
1 borderline elite in Jackson
1 solid starter in Flacco
1 fringe starter in Bridgewater
8 career backups/busts (Tebow is in this group and did have the 1 magical season)

Still don't know on Jordan Love

So drops from 45% chance to 16.7% chance of finding at least a solid starter.

Day 2 picks
36 QB's taken
1 Elite in Wilson
4 solid starters in Dalton, Carr, Jimmy G, and Kaepernick
2 fringe starters in Foles and Birssett

Jury still out on Hurts/Lock

So 14.3% chance of finding at least a solid starter.

Teams look at these numbers and realize you cannot just nickel and dime the QB position. Every once in a while you get lucky and find a Wilson, but to depend on that working out in your favor is asking for a miracle.

 

[Clayton]

I would say teams are looking at QB early now more than ever because the statistics say that outside the top-12 good luck actually finding a star.

In the last 15 drafts 32 QB's have been taken picks 1-12. 3 have been elite, 8 have been good, 3 have been solid, 6 have been fringe starters, 9 have been backups, 1 is Sam Bradford with injuries, and then you have the Burrow/Tua that we don't know what they are yet.

So you have a 10% chance you find a star, 33% chance you find at least a good starter, about a 45% chance you find at least a starter quality player.

Picks 13-32 in the last 15 drafts you have...
12 QB's taken
1 borderline elite in Jackson
1 solid starter in Flacco
1 fringe starter in Bridgewater
8 career backups/busts (Tebow is in this group and did have the 1 magical season)

Still don't know on Jordan Love

So drops from 45% chance to 16.7% chance of finding at least a solid starter.

Day 2 picks
36 QB's taken
1 Elite in Wilson
4 solid starters in Dalton, Carr, Jimmy G, and Kaepernick
2 fringe starters in Foles and Birssett

Jury still out on Hurts/Lock

So 14.3% chance of finding at least a solid starter.

Teams look at these numbers and realize you cannot just nickel and dime the QB position. Every once in a while you get lucky and find a Wilson, but to depend on that working out in your favor is asking for a miracle.

Right but I think 4 of 5 QBs going in a row at the top says something else. That doesn't say 'QB needs to be taken high' but 'QB needs to be taken well above the rest even in a draft with some top tier prospects' which I do think is a paradigm shift.

 

[cdumler7]

Right but I think 4 of 5 QBs going in a row at the top says something else. That doesn't say 'QB needs to be taken high' but 'QB needs to be taken well above the rest even in a draft with some top tier prospects' which I do think is a paradigm shift.

Top-4 DVOA passing offenses in football were the final-4 teams in the playoffs. QB has never been more important and especially having that position on the rookie wage scale is like having the golden goose. Even if they are only an above average QB you all of a sudden have a huge shot.

The have and have nots of the NFL it boils down to who do they have at QB. You have those teams like the Bears or Jaguars that emerge here and there with a great defense, but we have seen that is impossible to sustain long-term. So if you are going to take a risk then take it at the QB position.

 

[Clayton]

Top-4 DVOA passing offenses in football were the final-4 teams in the playoffs. QB has never been more important and especially having that position on the rookie wage scale is like having the golden goose. Even if they are only an above average QB you all of a sudden have a huge shot.

The have and have nots of the NFL it boils down to who do they have at QB. You have those teams like the Bears or Jaguars that emerge here and there with a great defense, but we have seen that is impossible to sustain long-term. So if you are going to take a risk then take it at the QB position.

We also saw the Texans last year with a top QB, passing offense, and they traded for an elite OT....and they stunk out loud.

I get it. Chiefs went from being a consistent division winner with Alex Smith to a Super Bowl contender. QBs matter.

But we're normalizing RG3 trades. Some teams are going to set themselves back five years. And some will win big.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Right but I think 4 of 5 QBs going in a row at the top says something else. That doesn't say 'QB needs to be taken high' but 'QB needs to be taken well above the rest even in a draft with some top tier prospects' which I do think is a paradigm shift.

The pay of top QBs has a impact because if you can find a good QB in the draft to start for the team, you have a big advantage over teams that have to work around large contracts for their QB. Think maybe at some point the NFL and NFLPA should look at a position cap as the pay QBs receives has negatively impacts top players at other positions on the team.

 

[Clayton]

The pay of top QBs has a impact because if you can find a good QB in the draft to start for the team, you have a big advantage over teams that have to work around large contracts for their QB. Think maybe at some point the NFL and NFLPA should look at a position cap as the pay QBs receives has negatively impacts top players at other positions on the team.

Agreed, although it's kinda worth noting that none of those QBs in the final four last year were drafted in the top 5.

This feels like some teams are chasing trends. Trade up for the next Mahomes? Good job. Trade up for the next Trubisky? Uh oh

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Agreed, although it's kinda worth noting that none of those QBs in the final four last year were drafted in the top 5.

This feels like some teams are chasing trends. Trade up for the next Mahomes? Good job. Trade up for the next Trubisky? Uh oh

Pays to pick the right QB for sure. However dumping a Trubisky, Darold or Rosen isn’t as crippling as say dumping Goff after resigning him to a second contract. We saw the Cardinal replace Rosen with Murray, Jets will replace Darold with Zach Wilson. The beauty is if a rookie craps the bed you end up with another top 10 pick and can try again.

 

[Clayton]

Pays to pick the right QB for sure. However dumping a Trubisky, Darold or Rosen isn’t as crippling as say dumping Goff after resigning him to a second contract. We saw the Cardinal replace Rosen with Murray, Jets will replace Darold with Zach Wilson. The beauty is if a rookie craps the bed you end up with another top 10 pick and can try again.

It is crippling to trade 2 1sts to get these guys, though.

 

[cdumler7]

We also saw the Texans last year with a top QB, passing offense, and they traded for an elite OT....and they stunk out loud.

I get it. Chiefs went from being a consistent division winner with Alex Smith to a Super Bowl contender. QBs matter.

But we're normalizing RG3 trades. Some teams are going to set themselves back five years. And some will win big.

Honestly I would rather see my team keep swinging for the fences than stick with the Alex Smith's of the NFL. I like Alex Smith and honestly if the Broncos trade up, get their guy, and trade Lock I wouldn't mind signing Smith as that veteran presence to work with the young guy. You are right there will be times that sets an organization back maybe 5-years. I could say the same though of sticking with an above average QB. Bengals with Dalton. They were good when he was on his rookie contract, but the odds of them winning a Super Bowl were slim to none. That idea of having my team be 7-9 to 10-6 every year and make the wild card every couple of years to lose in the 1st round just sounds terrible. That set the Bengals back 9-years. I would rather swing for the home run twice during that stretch and struggle the other years if I miss than remain mediocre.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

It is crippling to trade 2 1sts to get these guys, though.

Sure trading up makes the risk higher. What the Bears did is what a team wants to avoid.

 

[cdumler7]

It is crippling to trade 2 1sts to get these guys, though.

Did it hurt the Chiefs? They traded 2 1st round picks to get Mahomes. Heck then the next year they traded a 1st to get Frankl Clark if I remember right. If you love a guy at the QB position then swing away.

Eagles trading up for Wentz led to a Super Bowl victory. Yes he didn't start the Super Bowl but his MVP season before the injury sure didn't hurt them that season. Bills sent a 1st round pick and 2 2nd round picks to get up and get Josh Allen. I think they are doing fine. Watson trading up for him was a very smart idea (before all this legal crap) and giving up multiple 1st round picks. Now yes the franchise got stupid after that, but Watson made them a contender. And all of those are in the last 5 years right?

So you could argue that 3 of the top-5 QB's in the NFL right now are because of a trade up using multiple picks to get them.

 

[Clayton]

Did it hurt the Chiefs? They traded 2 1st round picks to get Mahomes. Heck then the next year they traded a 1st to get Frankl Clark if I remember right. If you love a guy at the QB position then swing away.

Eagles trading up for Wentz led to a Super Bowl victory. Yes he didn't start the Super Bowl but his MVP season before the injury sure didn't hurt them that season. Bills sent a 1st round pick and 2 2nd round picks to get up and get Josh Allen. I think they are doing fine. Watson trading up for him was a very smart idea (before all this legal crap) and giving up multiple 1st round picks. Now yes the franchise got stupid after that, but Watson made them a contender. And all of those are in the last 5 years right?

So you could argue that 3 of the top-5 QB's in the NFL right now are because of a trade up using multiple picks to get them.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that iirc both the Broncos and Chiefs were signalling that they wanted Paxton Lynch. In today's nfl, you might have to trade 2 firsts for him.

But yeah, rookie QB contracts are pretty broken right now.

 

[cdumler7]

I guess what I'm trying to say is that iirc both the Broncos and Chiefs were signalling that they wanted Paxton Lynch. In today's nfl, you might have to trade 2 firsts for him.

But yeah, rookie QB contracts are pretty broken right now.

Still ticked that you guys didn't win that bidding war then had to "settle" for Chris Jones that draft. My how our two franchises could have gone in different directions if the Chiefs had wasted 3-years hoping Lynch would develop and missed out on Mahomes. Sometimes just better to be lucky than good.

 

[Jikkle]

The rookie QB contracts are a really nice perk but I don't think teams are picking these guys just because they are on the cheap. If any of the top guys in the league right now hit the market these teams picking these QBs in the draft would be falling over themselves to sign those guys rather than draft a rookie QB.

It just boils down to if you want long term success you need a top guy and the rewards for hitting that lotto ticket in the draft make teams keep playing. The odds are terrible which is why teams clamor to get ahead of everyone else to increase the odds that they do hit on a QB because the more talented the guy is the more likely you are to get a top guy.

Because if you do land your guy and he turns out to be elite you have him for cheap initially but beyond that you're a perennial playoff team and you're set at the position for the next 15ish years. Patrick Mahomes will turn 26 later this year so the Chiefs probably won't start to worry about their QB position until the year 2033 and in the meantime they'll likely win the division or be at least a wildcard team for that timespan. Brady, Peyton Manning, Brees, Big Ben, Wilson, and Rodgers have had their teams in the playoffs for most of the seasons they've been at the helm.

Teams and GMs know the odds are bad but you've gotta keep those slots spinning until they land on 777.