Rodgers wants out

[Yoop]

of course starter equals good

5 lines later

never said starter = good.

I mean....

whoops

[Yoop]

https://stathead.com/tiny/KBJKd

Let me enlighten here a bit on actually drafting a successful QB and just look at draft position. I am going to set good QB career at 40 Career Approximate Value. It's kind of arbitrary, but does seem to be a good line with the vast majority of good QBs above that line. That means there are 111 QBs drafted since 1970 we will look at:

54 of the 111 were 1st round picks.
44 of the 111 were taken before pick 15.
51 of the 111 were taken before pick 27.

Trying to say Jordan Love is already likely to fail simply by pigeon holing him due to his draft position is crazy. While most draft picks don't live up to expectations regardless of position or draft slot. Almost a majority of successful QBs comes from the 1st round.

I don't have to even look this stuff up to know that your scuing this up to make your point, since 1970, hell since 1980 we've produced 5 starters from later rounds, obviously the odds might be a little better with first rounders because they should be more ready to play, and need less coaching up, but over all the bust rate is nearly the same.

so add our 5 to your 95 gives us 100, so according to you there are only 11 others taken since 1970 that became GOOD, not even great, just good, no sale, heck two better then good ones are playing right now

You've misread it.

44 taken in picks 1-15
7 taken in picks 16-27
3 taken in the rest of the first round
57 taken in round 2 and later.

The 44 in picks 1-15 are also included in the 51 taken in picks 1-27 and the 54 taken ion the first round.

thanks, if he had explained it like that it would have been easier for me to understand, and it would have made more sense.

according to what your showing just as many 2nd or later rounders become good as first rounders, pretty even actually

getting back to my point, if I'am drafting a QB to groom, I stand just as good a chance taking one in the 2nd round or later as I do taking one in round 1

[Pckfn23]

whoops, seriously though QB's that start for 4 to 5 years are not busts,

NO ONE SAID THEY ARE!!!

as with Rodgers play in 017, 018 outside issues play a large part in there play.

And yet you want to pigeon hole Love as a likely bust simply because he was drafting at 26...

23 put in a lot of effort to somehow show that 2nd round and later QB's are the ones that bust, and not so much first rounders, and he succeeded,

No not at all, I never even used the word bust...

but there are a lot more then 11 later round QB picks that didn't bust,

Still not reading I see...

I stand just as good a chance taking one in the 2nd round or later as I do taking one in round 1

Nope, this is where you get out of your depth and don't understand the meaning of what you are looking at. There are 30-32 first round picks each year since 1970. There have been at least 7 times that amount of picks after the first round. SO no, you do not stand just as good a chance to get a good QB after the first round.

[Yoop]

whoops, seriously though QB's that start for 4 to 5 years are not busts,

NO ONE SAID THEY ARE!!!

as with Rodgers play in 017, 018 outside issues play a large part in there play.

And yet you want to pigeon hole Love as a likely bust simply because he was drafting at 26...

23 put in a lot of effort to somehow show that 2nd round and later QB's are the ones that bust, and not so much first rounders, and he succeeded,

No not at all, I never even used the word bust...

but there are a lot more then 11 later round QB picks that didn't bust,

Still not reading I see...

you confused me with the way you brought the post, DSR simplified and made it simpler to understand.

I simply said Love has just as big a chance to bust as any QB taken in any round, so when people want to get rid of Rodgers and just move on with Love might be in for a rude awakening, it's 50/50 he is not what we hope he is.

[BF004]

you confused me with the way you brought the post, DSR simplified and made it simpler to understand.

Then read it again and try to understand it, or ask for clarification before shouting random things back. Or simply don’t reply if you don’t know what is going on in the conversation.

[NCF]

I simply said Love has just as big a chance to bust as any QB taken in any round, so when people want to get rid of Rodgers and just move on with Love might be in for a rude awakening, it's 50/50 he is not what we hope he is.

We don't need stats to tell us that. It's a gamble and a risk. We get it.

[wallyuwl]

So since AR will be back for 2021, presumably with "concessions" from the Packers (Cobb, probably a say in where he is traded to next spring), will he go all 2018 or will he go 2020? Where you think his head is at?

[Yoop]

Trying to say Jordan Love is already likely to fail simply by pigeon holing him due to his draft position is crazy. While most draft picks don't live up to expectations regardless of position or draft slot. Almost a majority of successful QBs comes from the 1st round.

this is wrong, and your stats prove it's wrong, and why I challenged your findings, 54 from 111 are not a majority.

as I said the way you explained this was confusing to a stupid old man like me.

[go pak go]

getting back to my point, if I'am drafting a QB to groom, I stand just as good a chance taking one in the 2nd round or later as I do taking one in round 1

I mean it's the same approach, which has been bashed on this forum soooo much right? (that Gute did with WR in 2018). He swung a lot and waited to see who stuck. There is validity in both approaches.

It's not as simple though as saying, "you have just as good a chance on taking on in the 2nd round or later as round 1"...that is isn't quite fair. (I mean you may have same hit count but your hit % is far, far lower)

I think of it like shooting hoops. At some point a goal of making ten 30 foot shots will happen. It just will.

But. If given the option between me shooting those shots to get to 10 makes or a division 1 college basketball player to get those 10 makes, I'd rather have the basketball player do it. Especially if we put a time limit on it.

Quarterback is a different breed than other positions and definitely a different breed than during the 90's and the Ron Wolf era. (I can't wait for this to get into another union vs owner rant ). But the facts are there. Practice reps are significantly less than it was in the Wolf era. Like more than half the reps now than in the Wolf era. There just aren't many reps to go around.

So doing the approach the of casting a wide net at a position where you keep 6 and play 4 consistently (like WR) is different than casting a wide net at QB where the starter gets 60% of the crucial TC practice reps (and more than 80% in season), the backup gets 30% of the TC reps and #3 and #4 split the remaining 10%. Quarterback is no longer a conducive environment to "cast a wide net" approach. And, unlike WR where you can just have another player play 25% of the positions' snaps, a mess up at QB has far more dire consequences than a mess up at WR.

So I can absolutely see the reason for wanting to make your count pick when you select a QB when your current starter is likely in the last 5 years or so if his career.

[YoHoChecko]

I missed the beginning of the Gutey Presser, but it doesn't sound like I'm hearing a lot that's new or interesting or insightful

[Yoop]

I simply said Love has just as big a chance to bust as any QB taken in any round, so when people want to get rid of Rodgers and just move on with Love might be in for a rude awakening, it's 50/50 he is not what we hope he is.

We don't need stats to tell us that. It's a gamble and a risk. We get it.

I brought a link a week or so back that shows that all QB picks are 50/50, the only slot that has had success above the rest is the very first pick, the rest bust at about 50% and thats from slot 2 till the end of the draft class, 23 attempted to prove that info wrong, and didn't, more then half of his 111 are 2nd round or later picks.

I new something didn't jive with his data, I was just to stupid to figure it out, thanks to DSR for simplifying it so a dummy like me could get it.

[NCF]

I missed the beginning of the Gutey Presser, but it doesn't sound like I'm hearing a lot that's new or interesting or insightful

Good balance between being respectful to Aaron but also not kissing his ass.

[YoHoChecko]

I missed the beginning of the Gutey Presser, but it doesn't sound like I'm hearing a lot that's new or interesting or insightful

Good balance between being respectful to Aaron but also not kissing his ass.

Yeah. The most interesting part for me was the question "if you had called Aaron Rodgers before drafting Love, do you think you'd be sitting here dealing with this right now?"

[NCF]

I missed the beginning of the Gutey Presser, but it doesn't sound like I'm hearing a lot that's new or interesting or insightful

Good balance between being respectful to Aaron but also not kissing his ass.

Yeah. The most interesting part for me was the question "if you had called Aaron Rodgers before drafting Love, do you think you'd be sitting here dealing with this right now?"

He's also been very clear that Aaron has a voice, but he will do what is in the best interest of the Packers next year. So, basically, still year-to-year with Aaron. Seems obvious he will be traded, but if he balls out and wins MVP again, maybe there just is no way the Packers can trade him. Maybe it gets ugly again next summer, but Gute seems like he will not back down from doing his job, whether that means keeping Aaron or trading him.

[YoHoChecko]

He's also been very clear that Aaron has a voice, but he will do what is in the best interest of the Packers next year. So, basically, still year-to-year with Aaron. Seems obvious he will be traded, but if he balls out and wins MVP again, maybe there just is no way the Packers can trade him. Maybe it gets ugly again next summer, but Gute seems like he will not back down from doing his job, whether that means keeping Aaron or trading him.

Yeah, he really shied away from the "and beyond" part of that "2021 and beyond" at this point.

[Labrev]

I simply said Love has just as big a chance to bust as any QB taken in any round, so when people want to get rid of Rodgers and just move on with Love might be in for a rude awakening, it's 50/50 he is not what we hope he is.

We don't need stats to tell us that. It's a gamble and a risk. We get it.

In the end, all a team can do for a given draft pick is to put them in a position to succeed. And we've given that to Love in spades:

- Head coach who excels in QB coaching
- Quality QB coach
- QB-friendly scheme
- Opportunity to learn behind one of the greatest to ever play
- Top-notch OL
- RB tandem with proven all-pro and an immensely talented #2 (Titans game last year just a taste of what they could be).
- Stacked at TE, which tends to be a security-blanket for new QBs (not to mention, the good ones really shine in our O scheme).

Fingers crossed that our WR corps will stay strong after free agency next year, but I'm sure he'll have rapport with at least a few of them when he gets the nod to start.

Yeah, Love's success isn't assured (quality analysis, Captain Obvious) but he has just about every imaginable factor working in his favor.

[go pak go]

I simply said Love has just as big a chance to bust as any QB taken in any round, so when people want to get rid of Rodgers and just move on with Love might be in for a rude awakening, it's 50/50 he is not what we hope he is.

We don't need stats to tell us that. It's a gamble and a risk. We get it.

I brought a link a week or so back that shows that all QB picks are 50/50, the only slot that has had success above the rest is the very first pick, the rest bust at about 50% and thats from slot 2 till the end of the draft class, 23 attempted to prove that info wrong, and didn't, more then half of his 111 are 2nd round or later picks.

I new something didn't jive with his data, I was just to stupid to figure it out, thanks to DSR for simplifying it so a dummy like me could get it.

Are you trying to say, or is your hypothesis that 50% of QBs taken after pick #1 all have the same rate of being unsuccessful?

That's not right yoop. A QB taken in Round 5 does not have the same success rate at being a quality player as one who is taken in the 1st round when you look at the selected player's probability of success.

[go pak go]

Good balance between being respectful to Aaron but also not kissing his ass.

Yeah. The most interesting part for me was the question "if you had called Aaron Rodgers before drafting Love, do you think you'd be sitting here dealing with this right now?"

He's also been very clear that Aaron has a voice, but he will do what is in the best interest of the Packers next year. So, basically, still year-to-year with Aaron. Seems obvious he will be traded, but if he balls out and wins MVP again, maybe there just is no way the Packers can trade him. Maybe it gets ugly again next summer, but Gute seems like he will not back down from doing his job, whether that means keeping Aaron or trading him.

It's better to sell Gamestop when it goes to $600 per share than "wait" and sell when it falls to $150 a share.

If Rodgers balls out again. I think that's exactly when it is time to sell high. The Patriots did that so well during their tenure.

[Pckfn23]

Trying to say Jordan Love is already likely to fail simply by pigeon holing him due to his draft position is crazy. While most draft picks don't live up to expectations regardless of position or draft slot. Almost a majority of successful QBs comes from the 1st round.

this is wrong, and your stats prove it's wrong, and why I challenged your findings, 54 from 111 are not a majority.

It isn't wrong... Look at the bold above, it says ALMOST a majority.

I brought a link a week or so back that shows that all QB picks are 50/50, the only slot that has had success above the rest is the very first pick, the rest bust at about 50% and thats from slot 2 till the end of the draft class, 23 attempted to prove that info wrong, and didn't, more then half of his 111 are 2nd round or later picks.

Again, you are not understanding what is going on. I never attempted to prove that info wrong, because that info was not wrong. I never even said it was wrong.

2nd round and beyond is also pulling from a much greater number of, hence the percentage of hitting is much lower.

Your link had some funky slotting that just didn't make a lot of sense and frankly it lacked any sort context. Of course many players fail. That is true regardless of position. It doesn't mean those positions should not be taken in round 1 or that there is just as good a chance to find one outside of round 1.

[NCF]

If Rodgers balls out again. I think that's exactly when it is time to sell high.

Maybe. My point was it's not up to Rodgers if he leaves next offseason. It's up to the Packers.