Yep, missed Brees. 2nd round is kind of a weird spot to take a QB.
Well, first pick of the second round, right? Technically you’re right, but he’s not exactly the prime example of a late round pick.
Yeah, the Bears have made a habit of it too, for better or worse. In 2004 they had all of 15 starts (6 if you leave out 4th stringer Hutchinson’s starts back in 2002) between Rex Grossman, Jonathan Quinn, Craig Krenzel and Chad Hutchinson.
In 2005 they went back to the well with Grossman and Orton’s 6 starts combined and added a crappy Jeff Blake late in the process to be their 3rd stringer.
Go back to 1999 and they had all of 1 start on the roster between Shane Matthews, Jim Miller and Cade McNown and zero starts since 1996.
In 1989 they had 20 between Tomczak and Harbaugh and only had 2 QBs on the roster.
I don’t know, I’m not sure Jones, Washington and Greene are any better than LDT. The Jets have an amazing line, I could probably get 800 yards behind it. It’s entirely possible that Jones will look like a bum behind the Chiefs line and Washington and Greene might be no better that Matt Forte and Garrett Wolfe playing behind on the Bears. Would it really be a shock if LDT had a 1500 yard season behind that line?
Completely disagree, but as a secondary jets fan I wouldn’t complain. I just don’t see it. For my money, Tomlinson is exactly like Emmit Smith or Edgerrin James in their last season in Arizona: a worthless shadow of their former selves. For comparison, I’d say Tomlinson is to (uninjured) Washington as Edelman is to Welker.
Before his injury Leon Washington was the man. I would describe him as “Reggie Bush is a poor man’s Leon Washington.”
Keep in mind that Leon has a career average of 4.8 yards per rush and has returned 4 kickoffs for touchdowns. Also, don’t think his (or Thomas Jones’) numbers were inflated by the OL, which really only got put in place last year. Before 2009 the consensus opinion was that D’Brickashaw Ferguson was a bust and the OL generally sucked.
IIRC doesnt Greene have injury issues too?
Hmm. Seems like it’s more common than I would have thought. In the Giants case, at least Eli was a high first round draft pick, and Hasselback had been around awhile. Even without a lot of starts they had a better pedigree than Moore/Cantwell. But I see the Bears’ examples too.
I think Moore has a chance to be pretty good, we’ll just have to wait and see.
Holy crap, 49ers GM Scott McCloughan is considering stepping down as top personnel man only weeks before the draft. I wonder what’s going on, he’s grown into being a quality GM over the last few years.
Anybody see the trade between the Seahawks and Chargers? Seems…quite a bit one-sided…
Link: http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d816fffa8&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true
Well, if you add up the point values for the picks, and assume a similar draft position for the Seahawks next year, it adds up to essentially a mid-2nd round pick for a well-regarded young backup QB.
I think your math is off a little bit. There’s a 200 point difference between the 60th pick and the 40th pick and a 2011 3rd rounder is equivalent to a 2010 4th rounder using conventional wisdom which comes in at a value of 86. Adding those up equals essentially a pick at the top of the 3rd round.
Since Whitehurst was tendered at a 3rd round pick that makes perfect sense. This trade is just another example of what young QBs with potential are worth. I’m a little curious why Whitehurst is so highly regarded though.
I’d like to point out, as I always do, that the draft chart is more or less worthless, except that GMs are afraid to get “ripped off” according to the draft value because fans think it’s official or something. So it only means something because lots of people think it means something, and it sometimes keeps teams from doing stuff that’s in their own best interest. I hate that stupid chart.
It’s not official or even conventional wisdom, it was one GM’s personal rough guide 2 decades ago when the draft and pick values were significantly different.
This is all understood but you’re being too cynical I think. While I’m sure there’s a tiny bit of concern over what the fans think I would bet that your average GM couldn’t give two shits what the fans thought as it applies to trading draft picks. If the picks pan out fans forget trades.
Also, while one GM came up with it years ago there’s very little way to establish equity when trading draft picks. That system is the only one they have and since Seattle didn’t have a 3rd rounder they had to find a way to agree on something. You’re kidding yourself if you think GMs today don’t have their own draft charts that build on the original one that’s publicly available. Seattle and San Diego have built their own just like this chart and while they probably tweak the values to adjust for salary inflation and any inherent disagreements with the original, they definitely have one. They certainly aren’t flipping a coin or throwing darts to estimate value of a 3rd round pick afterall.
I decided not to discount the 2011 pick for my post, but I had done it both ways prior.
I never said they were. They have their own charts, and we don’t know what they look like. And their own charts probably have nothing to do with one particular GM who happened to release his personal chart back almost 3 decades ago, except as it plays into fan expectation.
The GMs are indeed afraid to make trades, especially high up, because their fans grill them for not “getting proper value”. Quite frankly, the top 5 picks are undesirable to have almost always because of the salary ramifications - if I were the GM of a team, unless there was the best prospect ever, I would trade out of the #1 slot for almost nothing - throw in a third rounder and your #9 overall pick and we’ll get a deal done. But this deal would never actually happen because the fans would be outraged because the GM didn’t get proper value according to the chart even if it’s in the best interest of his team.
It isn’t just the picks, its the money the Seahawks are paying to a backup QB that hasn’t proven anything. $10 million is way too much for Whitehurst at this point if you ask me.
The first quoted fragment is a truism in life. The same could be said for currency, but that doesn’t mean money is valueless.
The second fragment seems to imply that the chart is an arbitrary fabrication out of whole cloth. It is not. The chart was codified based on actual trades. The chart itself is simply a quantification of actual trades that really happened before the chart existed. As such, it has quite a bit more credibility than you give it. It wasn’t created based on what one guy thought picks should be worth. It was created as a reflection of what picks actually were worth based on past transactions.
It’s obviously not the be-all end-all, and it’s certainly been customized by individual GMs, but it’s not accurate to paint it as worthless.
This is overstated. There is certainly a fear of second-guessing that permeates the NFL decision makers, but nowhere near the extent you claim. As a New York fan I’ve seen both my teams trade up in the top 5 to acquire their current franchise QBs. Not having the data in front of me, I’d wager that most years involve a high-pick trade.
Those GMs who are too afraid of chart-based fan backlash can always find ways around it to make the trades they feel they need to make. For example, the Jets traded players instead of picks to get that #5 overall spot to get Sanchez. Thus I don’t see any chilling effect the chart has on trades at the top.
The salary structure of top 5 picks, though, I’m with you. It’s getting to a point of ridiculousness. Until that comes down, top picks are somewhat devalued.
NFL news has been pretty quiet of late, but this whole Pacman Jones situation has me interested. The release of Nathan Vasher leaves an even bigger hole at the CB position for the Bears and with Safety an issue as well, the Bears still probably need to add a veteran or two before the draft. I have no idea if Jones has anything to give a team and if the headaches are worth it, but with so many teams apparently looking to give him a workout at least someone thinks he might be of value. If he’s lost a step and might not be a man-to-man lockdown CB anymore (if he ever was) that could make him a good fit for the Bears Tampa 2 scheme. He wouldn’t be required to turn and run with stud WRs that often and his toughness and athleticism could work in short areas with help over the top.
I’m sure they won’t work the guy out and his character issues probably rule him out, but if I were the Bears I’d be giving him a look. He’ll be cheap and could provide depth with upside if his skills haven’t eroded.
I realize this is the “Combine and Free Agency” thread, but I thought that news that owners are considering changing overtime rules for the playoffs might be interesting:
It seems a little convoluted to me, but I kinda like it nonetheless.
Win by 6 on first possession?
Sounds good to me.
Word.