Tour2ma Posted April 3, 2017 Report Share Posted April 3, 2017 Collect them all...Here's one from Bleacher Report to kick things off. I've summarized their ranking. For the full article, including Positives and Negatives on each prospect, go to:http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2687975-nfl-draft-400-ranking-the-drafts-top-qbs NFL Draft 400: Ranking the Draft's Top QBMatt Miller - NFL Draft Lead WriterApril 3, 2017Grade / Label-- 9.00 -- : Elite—No. 1 pick8.00-8.99: All-Pro—Rare Talent7.50-7.99: Round 1—Pro Bowl Potential7.00-7.49: Round 1—Top-15 Player Potential6.50-6.99: Round 2—Rookie Impact/Future Starter6.00-6.49: Round 3—Rookie Impact/Future Starter5.80-5.99: Round 3-4—Future Starter5.70-5.79: Round 4—Backup Caliber5.60-5.69: Round 5—Backup Caliber5.30-5.59: Round 6—Backup Caliber5.10-5.25: Round 7—Backup Caliber5.00-5.10: Priority Free Agent4.50-4.99: Camp Player The Rankings: 1. Mitchell Trubisky, North Carolina - FINAL GRADE: 7.15/9.00 (Round 1—Future Starter)2. Deshaun Watson, Clemson -------- FINAL GRADE: 7.00/9.00 (Round 1—Future Starter)3. Patrick Mahomes II, Texas Tech -- FINAL GRADE: 6.75/9.00 (Round 2—Future Starter)4. DeShone Kizer, Notre Dame ------- FINAL GRADE: 6.75/9.00 (Round 2—Future Starter)5. Davis Webb, California -------------- FINAL GRADE: 6.25/9.00 (Round 3—Future Starter)6. Brad Kaaya, Miami (FL) ------------- FINAL GRADE: 6.25/9.00 (Round 3—Future Starter)7. Nathan Peterman, Pitt --------------- FINAL GRADE: 6.25/9.00 (Round 3—Future Starter)8. Joshua Dobbs, Tennessee --------- FINAL GRADE: 5.90/9.00 (Round 4—Backup Caliber)9. Chad Kelly, Ole Miss ----------------- FINAL GRADE: 5.70/9.00 (Round 4—Starter Traits)10. C.J. Beathard, Iowa ----------------- FINAL GRADE: 5.40/9.00 (Round 6—Backup Caliber)11. Jerod Evans, Virginia Tech -------- FINAL GRADE: 5.40/9.00 (Round 7—Backup Caliber)12. Cooper Rush, Central Michigan - FINAL GRADE: 5.40/9.00 (Round 7—Backup Caliber)13. Alek Torgersen, Penn --------------- FINAL GRADE: 5.00/9.00 (Round 7—Backup Caliber)14. Zach Terrell, Western Michigan -- FINAL GRADE: 4.99/9.00 (Undrafted Free Agent) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted April 3, 2017 Report Share Posted April 3, 2017 7 future starters?......HA! Unprecedented optimism that will never ever happen..... 7 starters from the same draft?>.........Ahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa...haha.....ha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unsympathetic Posted April 3, 2017 Report Share Posted April 3, 2017 Perhaps the tag should be "Future Akili Smith" rather than "future starter" ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBrown Posted April 3, 2017 Report Share Posted April 3, 2017 Clearly I'm no expert but how Mahomes and Trubisky can be graded higher than Kizer is baffling to me. They both have severe flaws I can't see being rectified Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrb12711 Posted April 3, 2017 Report Share Posted April 3, 2017 7 future starters?......HA! Unprecedented optimism that will never ever happen..... 7 starters from the same draft?>.........Ahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa...haha.....ha Yeah, although I wonder what they truly mean by "future starter". By technical definition if they mean will start a game one day, for example 8 QB's from the 2014 class were "future starters" http://insider.espn.com/nfl/draft/positions/_/id/8/year/2014/quarterback Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted April 3, 2017 Report Share Posted April 3, 2017 Yeah, although I wonder what they truly mean by "future starter". By technical definition if they mean will start a game one day, for example 8 QB's from the 2014 class were "future starters" http://insider.espn.com/nfl/draft/positions/_/id/8/year/2014/quarterback Well....that would not be my take......I suspect they mean actual starting QB.....not an emergency 1 game fill in guy.... and, by that standard, 2014 produced 3.....and 1 of them bites......so, make it 2....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted April 3, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 3, 2017 Yeah... seems like there should be a middle designation along the lines of "Potential Starter". A lot of kids have become starters that I can't imagine anyone predicted... e.g., Siemian, Yates, Hoyer...Got curious and googled BR's results for 2016: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2625323-nfl-draft-400-ranking-the-top-quarterbacks-for-2015Spoiler Alert: They also saw 7 "Future Starters" last year...Not going to capsulize this old edition, but here are a few highlights: 13. Kess - 5.70/9.00 (Round 5—Backup Caliber) 10. Kevin Hogan - 5.70/9.00 (Round 5—Backup Caliber) PRO COMPARISON: Brian Hoyer 9. Jacoby Brissett - 5.70/9.00 (Round 5—Backup Caliber) 5. Dak Prescott - 6.10/9.00 (Round 3—Future Starter) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted April 3, 2017 Report Share Posted April 3, 2017 Right.....you'd think "backup caliber" is the designation for the guy who has an occasional start.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted April 3, 2017 Report Share Posted April 3, 2017 7 future starters?......HA! Unprecedented optimism that will never ever happen..... 7 starters from the same draft?>.........Ahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa...haha.....ha It's not outside the realm of reason...we could have 5 of them start for us in any given year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted April 3, 2017 Report Share Posted April 3, 2017 Heck....ftm, Shashi might draft 5 of them in one year too...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrb12711 Posted April 3, 2017 Report Share Posted April 3, 2017 Well....that would not be my take......I suspect they mean actual starting QB.....not an emergency 1 game fill in guy.... and, by that standard, 2014 produced 3.....and 1 of them bites......so, make it 2....... Yeah I definitely agree, it was just something I was thinking about. These things sometimes sneak that type of crap into evaluations as a "hey, we weren't wrong!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted April 3, 2017 Report Share Posted April 3, 2017 Yeah I definitely agree, it was just something I was thinking about. These things sometimes sneak that type of crap into evaluations as a "hey, we weren't wrong!" Right.....and I honestly dont think they are saying that all will be starting QB's......more like they are saying all have some attributes and we just dont know which "1" will rise..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Make-Believe Posted April 4, 2017 Report Share Posted April 4, 2017 Clearly I'm no expert but how Mahomes and Trubisky can be graded higher than Kizer is baffling to me. They both have severe flaws I can't see being rectified And Kizer doesn't? I agree that Mahomes is a shitshow, but I like Trubisky WAY more than Kizer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted April 4, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 4, 2017 And Kizer doesn't? I agree that Mahomes is a shitshow, but I like Trubisky WAY more than Kizer. And just to make the discussion complete... Gun to my head at 12? I take Watson... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBrown Posted April 4, 2017 Report Share Posted April 4, 2017 49mph velocity on the gun not concern you Tour? I see little upgrade in Watson over Kessler. Kizer could be a star Watson doesn't have that ceiling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted April 4, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 4, 2017 49mph velocity on the gun not concern you Tour? No, because I don't see "49" on tape... if you look at Watson's arm whip when he cuts loose, there is a lot of snap there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted April 4, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 4, 2017 lol... From reddit's Browns sub... http://i.imgur.com/yjW3i6P.gifv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Make-Believe Posted April 4, 2017 Report Share Posted April 4, 2017 No, because I don't see "49" on tape... if you look at Watson's arm whip when he cuts loose, there is a lot of snap there. I agree with this to a point. It is that 49MPH however that keeps from putting him ahead of Trubisky, personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoorta Posted April 4, 2017 Report Share Posted April 4, 2017 Clearly I'm no expert but how Mahomes and Trubisky can be graded higher than Kizer is baffling to me. They both have severe flaws I can't see being rectified And Kizer doesn't? I agree that Mahomes is a shitshow, but I like Trubisky WAY more than Kizer. I agree, of the four, (Trubisky, Watson, Mahomes, Kizer) MHO is Kizer will be the last qb taken. Heck Webb might even go before Deshone. Accuracy and slow release are things near impossible to fix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted April 5, 2017 Report Share Posted April 5, 2017 That velocity reading is meh. It's not a science, nor is it official, nor does it really show anything. If it was indicative of actual arm strength, Colt McCoy would have a stronger arm than Flacco and Austin Davis would have a stronger arm than Cam Newton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted April 5, 2017 Report Share Posted April 5, 2017 That velocity reading is meh. It's not a science, nor is it official, nor does it really show anything. agree 100%....I think its just a BS stat.....people gotta talk about something...... Lets just thank god his hands aren't 1/4" shorter too.......or it'd be over..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted April 6, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 6, 2017 That velocity reading is meh. It's not a science, nor is it official, nor does it really show anything. Which is why I've argued that the NFL needs to take this "measurement" over... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 Which is why I've argued that the NFL needs to take this "measurement" over... That would be one step toward making it legitimate. Even still, there's going to be a decent margin for error unless they're using laser gate timing...and then it kind of defeats the purpose because every prospect is just going to try and muscle up a rocket and that's not really a good indicator of anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.