shasta519

It’s pretty funny. Bragging about how you passed on Boller, only to have tunnel vision for Rex Grossman.

Destin, Shaad, Hicks, Arthur…all have been on the AR bandwagon since last season ended. They aren’t piecing it together…they are trying to confirm their own biases.

I don't think it clears up anything. It's not like they would be giving up the #2 pick. And there are already rumors that they might pass on a QB anyways. If they trade for Lance, they are going to trade out of #2 to a QB-needy team to recoup draft capital given up.

Not surprised. Lance is younger than Levis. He's only going to be 23. If teams want to gamble on the upside profile of an AR, why not a guy like Lance? He's been hurt, but he's had two years to watch and learn at the NFL level. He should be further ahead than any of these prospects from that standpoint. I just don't see SF trading him with Purdy being a major question mark. Not only that, they won't get anything back that is close to what they gave up. But if it only took #35, sign me up for that dice roll. Opens up all kinds of possibility for that #4 pick.

At first teams will have to respect his ability as as runner, But eventually, AR isn't going to run nearly as much, so he is going to have to overcome how defenses play the deep pass and how to excel in the short area. Allen did get a second college year, which means AR has to make all of his improvement in the NFL, with NFL DBs and DCs. Plus, AR's needed improvement is greater than that of Allen. So an unprecedented outlier becomes even more unprecedented. It's just a major red flag, given the data that we now have. And I can understand why some aren't willing to overlook it. Personally, I wouldn't take the risk at #4. But maybe Steichen and Ballard will.

It's wild. But I don't even think DeFo gets you from #4 to #2. He's a great player, but I don't see HOU taking highly-paid DT nearing 30, who also will need a new contract, over draft capital from a QB-needy team. And in this crazy scenario, they would get that AND the QB they wanted.

Steichen also said that "accuracy" was one of the top 3 traits. Here is AR's comp % and on-target %: LOS: 57.8/58.9 Short: 44.3/52.5 Medium: 54.7/56.6 Deep: 40.0/46.7 Pressured: 36.8/39.6 Unpressured: 61.8/67.7 AR struggled mightily in short to medium passing. Depending on the publication, I have seen him ranked in the 1st to 3rd percentile for short passing. AR was bad, Allen was below average. And Allen's issues were more near the LOS and deep throwing, which could much more theoretically be fixed with coaching and having NFL talent at WR. And Allen's unprecedented improvement was an outlier...AR would have to improve even more than that. One reason this is such a red flag is because short area passing has the strongest correlation from college to the NFL. And the other reason is that two-high coverages have grown from 24% in 2018 to 34%+ last season...while the aDOT has decreased from 8.2 in 2018 to 7.7 last season. We should expect this trend to continue, as defenses take away the deep passing game and put more focus on the short passing game, which is where AR struggled. While AR is a great athlete and has a solid floor with his legs, I think his weaknesses could be even more pronounced in the NFL. Steichen might like how AR fits the deep passing aspects and using his legs to extend plays, but it just seems like a big risk for a HC to want to build a system around a QB who can't function (let alone excel) in an area (short passing) that is going to feature heavily in any offense in today's NFL. At least it will be more fun to watch than the opposite, which was Matt Ryan, who could operate in the short area and a was a statue, but I think it will still limit the offense's ability to move downfield.

These scenarios are getting wilder and wilder. Just can't imagine HOU passing on QB. If they do, then that pick is incredibly valuable in trade...like future R1 pick valuable. The Colts will be picking from 1-2 QBs at #3 or #4.

I am pretty much against drafting players from UF (not named Pitts), regardless of position. And that is probably doubly true for QB.

Not years...one year. That's all I think it will take to find better prospects than AR or Levis. It's not really meant to be a theory. It's just that I view AR and Levis similar to how some teams viewed QBs last year, which is why they fell. Not as late Day 2 picks, but certainly not as top 5 picks. And I view Williams and Maye as prospects on another level...franchise-altering players. And even if they don't get one, I am confident others will emerge, just like AR did, who nobody even knew about this time last year. I am certainly not for kicking the can down the road for an indefinite period of time for the right guy. I wanted to draft one in 2020 and 2021 when this team was on the right trajectory and there were better prospects available. And I would be fine drafting Young and Stroud. I am fine taking one on Day 2 even as a lottery ticket (after trading back). I just don't like finally taking that swing with AR or Levis at #4. I think it's bad value. Drafting a QB at #4 (who is in the 3 percentile for short-area accuracy among college QBs) is such a huge risk. Short-area accuracy (0-9 yards) actually translates to the NFL and he is awful at it. Maybe he will get better, but he has a massive leap to make and will have to do it at the NFL level. And ultimately, I think this team is in need of a rebuild, not just a young QB. Which means they should be well-positioned to be in a similar position in a better class next year and have the ability to use this draft to maximize a top 4 pick, like they did in 2018, which build the foundation of this team. That said, I am almost certain they will draft one of those guys, so it's mostly a moot point. And if they do, it should at least be fun to watch him.

A 5th round pick is all it cost. If Okudah can start playing up to his talent level, ATL has put together quite the secondary this offseason.

I don't disagree about the lack of being relevant without a QB. I disagree that that this team would ever be relevant with Levis or AR, which makes it a poor use of a #4 pick IMO. The QB arms race in the AFC has created this situation where you should be more selective when you swing because you aren't going to contend without a stud QB. So given where the Colts are right now, it's not a 3-2 count in the bottom of the 9th with the bases loaded...it's actually the bottom of the 2nd and they're already down 6-0 and there's a better hitter on deck. If that pitch isn't there (which I don't believe it is), take the free run to close the gap that way and let the next guy swing away. And in this case, there's a chance that Mike Trout could be that guy on deck.

No. I would not have guessed that Richardson had a lower % of TO-worthy plays. But TBH, I don't want it to dismiss, but I have a hard buying it. Not just from the tape, but just the sheer math. PFF says he only had 13 TO-worthy plays on 378 dropbacks. But he had 9 INTs, many of which were bad throws. So unless PFF just doesn't count actual TOs as TO-worthy plays, that would mean that out of 369 more dropbacks, he only had 4 additional turnover-worthy plays. That just seems very unlikely, especially with that really low completion%. That's why I question it. I don't questions his deep passing. But, as you mentioned, his short passing game is a huge red flag. He doesn't possess any touch yet. Perhaps that will improve. But jumping up to average on those throws (in the NFL no less) seems like a big leap by itself. And that's assuming that his deep passing in the NFL stays the same. I wish I had some numbers to back it up, but it seems like deep passing is much different in college vs. the NFL with how guys get open. I just think there is a lot of projection involved. And with the hit rate of QBs, I am not trying to add more risk. But AR is a better prospect than Willis and Ridder, so it will be very interesting to see how much better he is perceived.

Yep. Staying at #4 is not an option, unless they take a QB. They either take the QB that is available or they sell that pick for more draft assets to position themselves for other QB options, whether that's a trade, a Day 2 pick or (preferably) another R1 lotto ticket in 2024. But these are just thought exercises because I think they are drafting a QB at #4 (or maybe even #3).

I mean...there are pages and pages of this thread debating drafting the QB3 and QB4 of this draft, not QB1 and QB2. And one of those guys, AR, entirely emerged this past season. Hard to imagine at least 1-2 other QBs won't emerge next year as well. Seems to happen every draft. In the event they don't get a top 2 pick next year, they should be bad enough to find themselves in a pretty similar position as this year...debating which non top-2 QB they want to draft. So I don't see much difference between drafting the QB3 or QB4 this year vs. next year. And I would argue that next year's class is not only better at the top, but also has stronger depth with potential emerging QBs. There really isn't much downside, unless you think this team is going to win a lot more games. But considering they haven't addressed much this offseason, have lost players, hired a first-time HC and a journeyman QB2 is the current starter, I don't think many teams are better positioned. And now it appears they are going to use their top pick (potentially along with other draft capital in a trade up) to draft a QB who won't even play next year. So they might find themselves in that position anyways. I just would prefer to not have drafted AR in that scenario.

Because if they did...they would probably find themselves on the bench. Joking aside, AR is a great athlete with a big arm. These are skills that can translate to the NFL. But there are plenty of effective mobile NFL QBs who don't even have elite athleticism, so I am not sure I place as much value on that. And there is also just so much that has to go right with AR to reach this ceiling. Completing a little over half your passes and getting picked nearly 3% of passes is not a good recipe. Everybody is entitled to their opinion of course. Mine is that I think this is a perfect storm that is overrating AR and I don't want to see the Colts get swept up in it because of where they are picking. Two years ago, I think AR is probably a late R1 pick at best. And in two years, my guess is he will be once again, as athletic QBs continue to become the norm. The difference is those QBs can consistently make throws.

He said that in 2021 as well. And then traded for Wentz. But liking the depth doesn't necessarily mean liking the top 4 equally, let alone wanting to take one at #4. It could just mean he likes the depth and could take one on Day 2/3 as a project. It's just hard to square that the top 4 QBs are all the right QB for this team, which was a requisite for Ballard to take one.

There isn't anything wrong with it. But is there anything noteworthy about it? I think you could find tape of D2 QBs using their eyes to move defenders. I don't think I have ever seen a campaign like the one happening for AR. It's fascinating in a way. Every day, people are coming up with reasons why he's not really as raw as you would think. I have seen tweets with superlatives that "99% of QBs can't do this." I even saw one guy break down a handful of passes from the FSU game (I think) where he attempted to absolve AR of any blame for the incompletions. I am just very curious to see how NFL GMs value him vs. the media hype. And if you take him, you better have a 2-3 year plan in place. That's why a team like LV or SEA makes so much more sense than a team like IND. And if IND is going to put a 2-3 year plan in place like that, it might as well not involve taking AR this year. I just think that risk at #4 (with no real plan B) is wild, but that's JMO.

Yep. Even PHI and DAL came together on a R1 trade in 2021. PHI traded up to #10 (Devonta Smith) and gave up #12 (Micah Parsons) and #84.

Multiple times Ballard has said it's not about drafting a QB, it's about drafting the "right" QB. And you don't just draft one to draft one. He has also said he will do "whatever it takes" to get the "right" QB. And he had an excellent chance to trade up to #1 to ensure he got his choice of QBs. But he didn't trade up. So if we are to take Ballard at his word, then either that QB isn't in this draft or there are 4 of them (all similarly rated), which is highly improbable. It just doesn't seem like Ballard to just grab whichever of AR or Levis are available. I suppose one of those could be the "right" guy and he's just waiting to see how it falls (similar to what BUF did in 2018), but I think that opens up the possibility that they don't draft a QB.

Good. Call it a mistrial and try again next year.

I actually don't buy that ARI prefers to deal with IND. They have been shopping the pick for weeks now, which would lead to me believe they are looking for the best trade value. IND is the least trade value. Sure, they could get Anderson at #4, but they could move back and get Carter/Wilson and a lot of draft capital. But if Schefter is to be believed, then IND is going to have to pay to get that #3 pick. I don't see them doing it. And I am glad because trading UP to get AR just seems wild to me.

I have to disagree with this roster's ability to win 6-7 games with Gardner Minshew at QB. Without the defense last season, IND might have only won two games. The middle of the pack pass defense was somewhat propped up by the play of two veterans (Gilmore and McLeod), who are currently not on the roster. Those positions will be filled with young players, which often has growing pains. Gilmore, himself, secured both the LV and DEN wins. Oke had a nice year at WILL, but now he's gone. And Leonard is a question mark at this point. If he gets hurt again or doesn't play, then they are looking at Franklin and Speed as their LB duo, which will likely be a weakness (especially in pass defense). The DL should be solid again, but overall, I think we could see regression on defense. And the offense, which was #32 last season, has actually lost role players like PC and Hines, who have been replaced with depth players. The OL is still a wildcard, given how they played last season (only improving when Saturday took over). They did improve K I guess. Given this offseason to date, it's just hard to see this roster, with a first-time HC in Steichen and Gardner Minshew starting at QB, being appreciably better than last season. I think they are as well-positioned as any team to get one of those QBs next year.

Josh Allen had two seasons as a starter. This is JMO, but I think it's a bit disingenuous how people are comp'ing Allen and AR's solely because of the low comp%...while ignoring the difference in tape. AR has splash plays, but Allen's tape is just so much better (from a passing standpoint).

From a vertical passing standpoint, I think AR would be fine. He can bomb it downfield. But it's the rest of his game. He's just very raw and inexperienced. I do agree that he has the most upside of this QB class. but he's the furthest from it. Personally, I don't want him at #4. But if the Colts do, it will be fun to watch them try to develop him.