Trading up in the Draft for a QB

[GimmedaBall]

Comments and evaluations from around the league in regards to trading up in the draft to obtain a quarterback. Quick summary: Does not look promising.

http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2018/01/does_trading_up_for_a_quarterback_in_the_nfl_draft.html

Great breakdown of some recent deals and how the QBOTF turned out:
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...und-quarterback-is-generally-a-terrible-idea/

Result summary from 2005 to 2017:
http://www.footballperspective.com/teams-traded-up-for-a-1st-round-qb-16-times-from-2005-to-2017/

Buffalo Bill fan column on moving up in the draft:
https://www.buffalorumblings.com/20...-nfl-history-trading-up-franchise-quarterback

Article from 2016 that is critical of the Eagles and Rams moving up for Wentz and Goff. Author is now probably sorry that stuff posted on the Net doesn’t just disappear:
https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2016/4/21/11446886/rams-nfl-draft-rumors-carson-wentz-jared-goff

Summary chart from http://www.phillyvoice.com/review-10-teams-who-traded-quarterbacks-last-10-years/

Additional source courtesy DevonCardsfan on 2/15:
http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.co...re-miserable-at-executing-the-draft-pick-swap

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[GimmedaBall]

Sorry for the multiple posting of the chart. Durn new fangled computer things.

 

[Solar7]

This is a great thread. It summarizes a lot of the data I've been pulling in to make my argument against "the big move" for a QB. We have so many teams ahead of us that aren't just going to let franchise quarterbacks get away for anything but a bounty, and it's been shown that it doesn't work at all.

There's only 32 NFL franchises, they're all professionals at the top of their game. To think we can just outsmart them all is an interesting viewpoint.

 

[unseenaz]

i'd trade up for mayfield, no one else. rosen is a nut, i could see darnold working out, but he needs a few years of developing it looks like

 

[AsUpRoDiGy]

Trading up to 9 or 10th from 15 really wouldn't be a major risk to get your QB. I'm against trading into the top 5, but anything after that is fair game, imo.

 

[football karma]

Trading up to 9 or 10th from 15 really wouldn't be a major risk to get your QB. I'm against trading into the top 5, but anything after that is fair game, imo.

this is my POV

some things have to break the Cards way, AND, they will have to pay a price

the things:

1. Browns go Darnold
2. Giants go Rosen, or better, Saquon Barkley
3. Jets or Broncos sign Cousins
4. of the team that misses out on Cousins, they fall in love with Josh Allen,or, if Giants go Barkley, they take Rosen

1 -4 happnening gets Mayfield to #7, with four teams on the clock that dont need a QB.

Going from #15 to #7 is a do-able trade ( im guessing, 2nd in 2018+, or, a 2019 1st). Of the teams in between the Cards and #7 -- Dolphins and Bengals might take a QB, but im not sure they want one so bad as to give up lots to get to #7 ( noted: KC last year fit that description, and we know what happened).

 

[AZCrazy]

We'll see what they can pull off in free agency. Otherwise we have no choice but to trade up. Our QB's are gone.

 

[GimmedaBall]

We'll see what they can pull off in free agency. Otherwise we have no choice but to trade up. Our QB's are gone.

Would really like to get a peek at SK's draft board and to hear the discussions going on around the QBs in this draft.

I can see the Cards sitting at #15 if they have 6 or 7 QBs bunched together in terms of value with the idea that at least one will drop to us. On the other hand, if the guy the Cards really want is within moving up a few picks I can see them making the trade up (before someone like Elway did with Lynch, the Texans with Watson, Reid with Mahomes leapfrogs us for the QB.)

In the past, SK sticks to his board. If we don't get that vet FA to fill the roster spot it is going to be real interesting to see how SK responds---it is not longer just BPA but a whole lot position of need.

 

[Cardiac]

Interesting info in the OP but my question is what is the failure percentage vs trading up or simply having a high draft slot. I already know that if you don't draft a QB in the top 5 slots in rd 1 then your odds of winning a SB are significantly lower. If you don't pick a QB in rd 1 then your odds go way down.

There is a very high failure rate for drafting QB's and I don't know that it changes much if you trade up to get one.

 

[Jetstream Green]

This is a great thread. It summarizes a lot of the data I've been pulling in to make my argument against "the big move" for a QB. We have so many teams ahead of us that aren't just going to let franchise quarterbacks get away for anything but a bounty, and it's been shown that it doesn't work at all.

There's only 32 NFL franchises, they're all professionals at the top of their game. To think we can just outsmart them all is an interesting viewpoint.

We do not have to outsmart them all, just the ones up front who are there because their front office is not too bright... yes, I think we can easily move up a few and get our guy if he is there, geeez

 

[BillsCarnage]

This is a great thread. It summarizes a lot of the data I've been pulling in to make my argument against "the big move" for a QB. We have so many teams ahead of us that aren't just going to let franchise quarterbacks get away for anything but a bounty, and it's been shown that it doesn't work at all.

There's only 32 NFL franchises, they're all professionals at the top of their game. To think we can just outsmart them all is an interesting viewpoint.

Yeah, the more I look at it, I tend to agree. There's no clear #1 QB so the risk of spending current and future picks probably aren't worth it. But, who knows.

this is my POV

some things have to break the Cards way, AND, they will have to pay a price

the things:

1. Browns go Darnold
2. Giants go Rosen, or better, Saquon Barkley
3. Jets or Broncos sign Cousins
4. of the team that misses out on Cousins, they fall in love with Josh Allen,or, if Giants go Barkley, they take Rosen

1 -4 happnening gets Mayfield to #7, with four teams on the clock that dont need a QB.

Going from #15 to #7 is a do-able trade ( im guessing, 2nd in 2018+, or, a 2019 1st). Of the teams in between the Cards and #7 -- Dolphins and Bengals might take a QB, but im not sure they want one so bad as to give up lots to get to #7 ( noted: KC last year fit that description, and we know what happened).

Don't forget the Browns have the #4 pick too. The #3 (Indy) and #4 (Browns) could be serious trade bait for a team wanting to move up for a QB.

 

[GimmedaBall]

Interesting info in the OP but my question is what is the failure percentage vs trading up or simply having a high draft slot. I already know that if you don't draft a QB in the top 5 slots in rd 1 then your odds of winning a SB are significantly lower. If you don't pick a QB in rd 1 then your odds go way down.

There is a very high failure rate for drafting QB's and I don't know that it changes much if you trade up to get one.

Partial answer to your query here:

http://www.drafthistory.com/index.php/superbowl_quarterbacks/

Scroll down the page to the chart. It lists the winning and losing QB and when they were taken in the draft. To complete your answer, would have to go back and determine if their team traded up for them or took them in their 'earned' slot.

Winning Super Bowl quarterbacks have been drafted in the first round 55.3 percent of the time (29.8 percent with the first overall pick). Of the 45 quarterbacks taken in the traditional NFL draft, the average selection spot is 54.9.

http://www.nfl.com/superbowlchamps/quarterbacks

Our man KW and Steve Young were QBs not taken via the traditional draft.

Here's a review of QBs taken in either the 1st or 2nd round between 2004 and 2016. Some of the trade info you seek is embedded in the descriptions of the QB bio:

https://www.newsday.com/sports/football/nfl-draft-how-these-52-qbs-have-done-1.2829033

 

[bg7brd]

If we're not the "leapfroggers" we're going to be the "leapfrogees".

 

[GimmedaBall]

If we're not the "leapfroggers" we're going to be the "leapfrogees".

Did BA tell you to post that? LOL

 

[Cardiac]

Partial answer to your query here:

http://www.drafthistory.com/index.php/superbowl_quarterbacks/

Scroll down the page to the chart. It lists the winning and losing QB and when they were taken in the draft. To complete your answer, would have to go back and determine if their team traded up for them or took them in their 'earned' slot.

Winning Super Bowl quarterbacks have been drafted in the first round 55.3 percent of the time (29.8 percent with the first overall pick). Of the 45 quarterbacks taken in the traditional NFL draft, the average selection spot is 54.9.

http://www.nfl.com/superbowlchamps/quarterbacks

Our man KW and Steve Young were QBs not taken via the traditional draft.

Here's a review of QBs taken in either the 1st or 2nd round between 2004 and 2016. Some of the trade info you seek is embedded in the descriptions of the QB bio:

https://www.newsday.com/sports/football/nfl-draft-how-these-52-qbs-have-done-1.2829033

Thanks for the links, I'll get to them sooner than later. I'm not a mathematician but does each of Brady's and Montana's wins count or is that % based on just the QB's names. My point is that Brady and Montana would skew those %'s heavily. They would also impact the 54.9 draft slot number.

I did some research over ten years ago so the numbers have changed some but QB's playing in the SB were taken in the 1st rd and it was by a large margin. I forget who recently (past year) posted numbers showing that if you draft a QB outside of the top 5 in the draft then your chances of getting to the SB are very poor.

Bottom line for me is if SK & Company like a QB enough to trade up and get them then I'm all for it. I didn't want us to do that the last couple of years but I fell it's time to do so if the right guy is there.

 

[GimmedaBall]

Thanks for the links, I'll get to them sooner than later. I'm not a mathematician but does each of Brady's and Montana's wins count or is that % based on just the QB's names. My point is that Brady and Montana would skew those %'s heavily. They would also impact the 54.9 draft slot number.

I did some research over ten years ago so the numbers have changed some but QB's playing in the SB were taken in the 1st rd and it was by a large margin. I forget who recently (past year) posted numbers showing that if you draft a QB outside of the top 5 in the draft then your chances of getting to the SB are very poor.

Bottom line for me is if SK & Company like a QB enough to trade up and get them then I'm all for it. I didn't want us to do that the last couple of years but I fell it's time to do so if the right guy is there.

Yup. Read the links---the answers are there. The second link I cited counts each individual SB as a separate event even though it may same guy. Also, don't forget that the draft used to go up to 21 rounds!

Here's another interesting link that ranks the last 25 QB classes (pre-SB era I think it went up to 40 rounds):

https://www.foxsports.com/nfl/galle...asses-best-worst-past-25-years-ranking-060517

Wonder how this class is going to fall into that list?

 

[GatorAZ]

Manziel, Tebow, Sanchez and Brady Quinn were traded up for?

 

[SissyBoyFloyd]

The best answer to the Cards QB ? after the draft and we are left still holding our own balls will undoubtedly be DeShone Kizer. The Browns total lack of confidence in him after failing to surround him with skill players and throwing him, a rookie, to the wolves like they did will give a team who can read between the lines an opportunity to place him in a decent situation, and him a chance to show his real skills and to be successful. If he fails under a decent situation and with some decent talent around him, then it wouldnt have cost that much at all. At worst they will have a decent backup at a reasonable price.

 

[moklerman]

The best answer to the Cards QB ? after the draft and we are left still holding our own balls will undoubtedly be DeShone Kizer. The Browns total lack of confidence in him after failing to surround him with skill players and throwing him, a rookie, to the wolves like they did will give a team who can read between the lines an opportunity to place him in a decent situation, and him a chance to show his real skills and to be successful. If he fails under a decent situation and with some decent talent around him, then it wouldnt have cost that much at all. At worst they will have a decent backup at a reasonable price.

Funny how people have such different opinions of the same situations. While I agree that Kizer was thrown in too early, I thought the Browns stuck with him way too long and committed to him way too much. Kessler was the much better option for them last year. Not that he's "better" than Kizer but he was more ready to not cost them games. Obviously doesn't have the physical tools that Kizer has but he was a better overall QB that wouldn't have made so many mistakes.

Perhaps Kizer was just too raw and will develop with time but I didn't like what I saw from him last year. Never watched him in college so I didn't really have an opinion of him but the times I watched the Browns, I always came away wondering why Jackson kept sticking with him? He was always killing the Browns with poor accuracy and decision making.

 

[moklerman]

As far as the Cardinals being aggressive and bold, if they see a guy they think is worth it, is perfect for their system, is a future starter/franchise guy, then by all means, make the move. But to do it just because you "need" a QB is folly and where teams fail. I think with the position they're in, they'd be much better served to draft the BPA and add through FA if a QB doesn't fall to them in the draft.

Minnesota and Philly just proved that you can win and advance in the playoffs with solid QB play from a vet. Being "local" guys, I'm hoping for good things from Darnold and Rosen but I wouldn't say either one of them is worth mortgaging a draft for. It's hard to resist the temptation of a shiny, new QB but as deep as this class is, I don't write anything in stone draft wise. I take the BPA unless a small jump gets me the guy I really, really want. If so many QB's actually come off the board before 15, that means some real value is going to be sitting there that wouldn't normally be. Isn't that how the Rams got Donald and Gurley in recent years? Of course, they WAY overspent on Goff and Austin so it's not like I'm advocating "everything" they've done.

 

[SissyBoyFloyd]

Funny how people have such different opinions of the same situations. While I agree that Kizer was thrown in too early, I thought the Browns stuck with him way too long and committed to him way too much. Kessler was the much better option for them last year. Not that he's "better" than Kizer but he was more ready to not cost them games. Obviously doesn't have the physical tools that Kizer has but he was a better overall QB that wouldn't have made so many mistakes.

Perhaps Kizer was just too raw and will develop with time but I didn't like what I saw from him last year. Never watched him in college so I didn't really have an opinion of him but the times I watched the Browns, I always came away wondering why Jackson kept sticking with him? He was always killing the Browns with poor accuracy and decision making.

He looked lost out there and was way over his head. On top of what i mentioned, Hue is a putrid play caller, and did nothing to help the kid by creating plays or any situation that he could have thrived in. He wont be calling plays again after last year. Why he still has a job is beyond me.

 

[oaken1]

As far as the Cardinals being aggressive and bold, if they see a guy they think is worth it, is perfect for their system, is a future starter/franchise guy, then by all means, make the move. But to do it just because you "need" a QB is folly and where teams fail. I think with the position they're in, they'd be much better served to draft the BPA and add through FA if a QB doesn't fall to them in the draft.

Minnesota and Philly just proved that you can win and advance in the playoffs with solid QB play from a vet. Being "local" guys, I'm hoping for good things from Darnold and Rosen but I wouldn't say either one of them is worth mortgaging a draft for. It's hard to resist the temptation of a shiny, new QB but as deep as this class is, I don't write anything in stone draft wise. I take the BPA unless a small jump gets me the guy I really, really want. If so many QB's actually come off the board before 15, that means some real value is going to be sitting there that wouldn't normally be. Isn't that how the Rams got Donald and Gurley in recent years? Of course, they WAY overspent on Goff and Austin so it's not like I'm advocating "everything" they've done.

I agree.
my biggest draft fear is watching keim trade back four spots because he thinks he can get Lamar Jackson at 19 still instead of just using 15 to draft him....and then seeing someone else trade up to 16 and picking him.....when you trade back you just make it cheaper for others to trade in front of you.

but yeah...if we sit pat at 1 and all the top five guys are gone....it would be a tough choice between Vita Vea and Quentin Nelson.... since we have a defensive HC I am sure he would covet Vea,...while Keim has a fancy for olinemen...
having Vea in the middle with diche while Jones and Golden come off the edge would really ramp up our pressure.....hell, we could have mikes aunt sally playing CB... the playmakers we have in our secondary would benefit since there will be lots of balls coming out hot... we havent seen a guy like Vea on our defensive front since the Eric Swann days... but vea is a bit bigger

on the other hand.... Nelson would help solidify our interior line.... Imagine Drafting nelson then signing Norwell...with Hump on the left and JV on the right our line would be pretty formidable.... which of course is paramount for a run first play action team....and for a rookie QB....then consider there will be a few viable options at center in the third round...we could totally rebuild our oline in a single off season ..would be a good move if we have to wait on a QB

 

[SissyBoyFloyd]

I would be hard pressed to ever use a high pick on a rookie qb. Just too much of a gamble. Give me more of a sure thing. If i got lucky with a late round qb becoming a Brady like find then fine. Otherwise I would settle for a late rounder being a backup. I just hate the idea of gambling away high picks, even late first or second rounders.

Now there are exceptions to everything. In a year with a very weak draft, maybe it would be worth a shot.

 

[SissyBoyFloyd]

I agree.
my biggest draft fear is watching keim trade back four spots because he thinks he can get Lamar Jackson at 19 still instead of just using 15 to draft him....and then seeing someone else trade up to 16 and picking him.....when you trade back you just make it cheaper for others to trade in front of you.

but yeah...if we sit pat at 1 and all the top five guys are gone....it would be a tough choice between Vita Vea and Quentin Nelson.... since we have a defensive HC I am sure he would covet Vea,...while Keim has a fancy for olinemen...
having Vea in the middle with diche while Jones and Golden come off the edge would really ramp up our pressure.....hell, we could have mikes aunt sally playing CB... the playmakers we have in our secondary would benefit since there will be lots of balls coming out hot... we havent seen a guy like Vea on our defensive front since the Eric Swann days... but vea is a bit bigger

on the other hand.... Nelson would help solidify our interior line.... Imagine Drafting nelson then signing Norwell...with Hump on the left and JV on the right our line would be pretty formidable.... which of course is paramount for a run first play action team....and for a rookie QB....then consider there will be a few viable options at center in the third round...we could totally rebuild our oline in a single off season ..would be a good move if we have to wait on a QB

My hard choice would be between Vea and Edmunds.

 

[oaken1]

He looked lost out there and was way over his head. On top of what i mentioned, Hue is a putrid play caller, and did nothing to help the kid by creating plays or any situation that he could have thrived in. He wont be calling plays again after last year. Why he still has a job is beyond me.

true... the entire knock on Kiser was youth and lack of experience...even his college coach said he wasnt ready to move to the next level.... a team that can sit him for another year or so may still salvage his career... the Browns may well have ruined him though... no way they should have left him in through some of that stuff