OT : Miami 2020 picks

[farn]

I’m not advocating, I’m genuinely curious.

With everyone always saying QB is the most important position and that hitting on the right one is crucial, why wouldn’t a team in Miami’s position (three 1st, two 2nd) go for more than one QB ?

For instance : in a scenario they could grab Hebert at 5, Love in the middle of the first round and Hurts at either the end of the 2nd or the top of the 3rd... they would STILL have a late first rounder and at least one second rounder to get more talent.

Is the male athlete ego so vast that they’d be unable to coexist for the 1-1.5 seasons it’d take to see “who’s the one” ?

Of course, all three could fail. Or they could even draft Tua if things break their way and still get another QB.

 

[luuked]

There is only very limited time and reps to make rookie QBs NFL ready. Even top picks need that time.

Instead they should just trade one of the early picks into next year to have another shot at a QB after a full season of evaluating whoever they pick this time around.

 

[borg]

I thought because Brady once owned a condo in a Stephen Ross building Tomiami was a lock

 

[farn]

There is only very limited time and reps to make rookie QBs NFL ready. Even top picks need that time.

Instead they should just trade one of the early picks into next year to have another shot at a QB after a full season of evaluating whoever they pick this time around.

Arguably the two best QBs of this generation - TB & AR - started their careers behind another established QB. Yet they got reps enough to prove they were ready.

 

[Steve102]

I’m not advocating, I’m genuinely curious.

With everyone always saying QB is the most important position and that hitting on the right one is crucial, why wouldn’t a team in Miami’s position (three 1st, two 2nd) go for more than one QB ?

For instance : in a scenario they could grab Hebert at 5, Love in the middle of the first round and Hurts at either the end of the 2nd or the top of the 3rd... they would STILL have a late first rounder and at least one second rounder to get more talent.

Is the male athlete ego so vast that they’d be unable to coexist for the 1-1.5 seasons it’d take to see “who’s the one” ?

Of course, all three could fail. Or they could even draft Tua if things break their way and still get another QB.

Throw enough chit at the wall, sooner or later it will stick?

There's only so many reps for QB's. If you take two and split the reps, then the starter isn't getting enough reps. If you take two and then pick #1 gets 80% of the reps, then pick #2 never gets to develop. Plus there's the divided locker room thing.

Take your guy, be confident in him, coach him up to the best of your ability. See that he succeeds.

 

[farn]

Throw enough chit at the wall, sooner or later it will stick?

There's only so many reps for QB's. If you take two and split the reps, then the starter isn't getting enough reps. If you take two and then pick #1 gets 80% of the reps, then pick #2 never gets to develop. Plus there's the divided locker room thing.

Take your guy, be confident in him, coach him up to the best of your ability. See that he succeeds.

I hear the words you are saying : but isn’t this exactly the strategy that has been awful for most teams in the League over years ? They keep trying a new QB every second year and that player fails.

 

[luuked]

Arguably the two best QBs of this generation - TB & AR - started their careers behind another established QB. Yet they got reps enough to prove they were ready.

But they were behind established starters. That to me is a totally different situation. Especially because neither GB nor NE invested multiple high picks to get there.

You are asking Miami to invest costly resources into multiple rookie QBs and then try to figure out within one COVID affected preseason who the correct starter would be.

 

[Steve102]

I hear the words you are saying : but isn’t this exactly the strategy that has been awful for most teams in the League over years ? They keep trying a new QB every second year and that player fails.

That to me means there's a problem in said organization. Impatient owners, wrong guy picked, bad coaching.

Define most. Not every guy picked is a franchise cornerstone. Fewer still are pro-bowl caliber. You can count the elites on one hand, HoF'ers even less. Sure, you want to pick a guy who is going to be the foundation. Sometimes, the guy you get isn't Mr. Right, he's just Mr. Right Now.

If you're picking Mr. Right at 5, you'd best be right. 100% sure. If not, then you take Mr. Right Now in the third round and to take that shut down corner, that stud LT or edge rusher who can't miss at 5.

 

[farn]

But they were behind established starters. That to me is a totally different situation. Especially because neither GB nor NE invested multiple high picks to get there.

You are asking Miami to invest costly resources into multiple rookie QBs and then try to figure out within one COVID affected preseason who the correct starter would be.

Almost true.

I am asking if they are better off getting three QBs and finding out which one they like. It absolutely doesn’t need to be during the preseason. It can be year 2-3...

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

Back in the day, that's somewhat like the Cowboys did in drafting Steve Walsh, doubling down on two (not 3) QBs.

The Dallas Cowboys surprised observers by selecting Walsh with the second overall pick in the NFL Supplemental Draft, even though they had already selected Troy Aikman number one overall in the 1989 NFL Draft. They then had to surrender by rule an equivalent pick in the 1990 NFL Draft, which would turn out to be the number one overall selection.

While Walsh was never able to move out of Aikman's shadow, he was traded to the New Orleans Saints for a good haul: a first, second and a third round draft pick. With the third draft choice the Cowboys selected (#70-Erik Williams), the other two picks (#14-Leonard Russell and #52-Patrick Rowe) were traded to the Patriots as a package to move up to the number one overall draft choice to select Russell Maryland.

So I guess you'd have to say it worked out for them, since Williams and Maryland were key pieces on three champions.

 

[primetime]

That to me means there's a problem in said organization. Impatient owners, wrong guy picked, bad coaching.

Define most. Not every guy picked is a franchise cornerstone. Fewer still are pro-bowl caliber. You can count the elites on one hand, HoF'ers even less. Sure, you want to pick a guy who is going to be the foundation. Sometimes, the guy you get isn't Mr. Right, he's just Mr. Right Now.

If you're picking Mr. Right at 5, you'd best be right. 100% sure. If not, then you take Mr. Right Now in the third round and to take that shut down corner, that stud LT or edge rusher who can't miss at 5.

Why, though? There's really no such thing as a draft pick that "can't miss."

The Redskins actually did exactly this with the RG3 pick and, well, it worked out pretty well (the other QB they selected was Kirk Cousins in the 4th round).

 

[farn]

That to me means there's a problem in said organization. Impatient owners, wrong guy picked, bad coaching.

Define most. Not every guy picked is a franchise cornerstone. Fewer still are pro-bowl caliber. You can count the elites on one hand, HoF'ers even less. Sure, you want to pick a guy who is going to be the foundation. Sometimes, the guy you get isn't Mr. Right, he's just Mr. Right Now.

If you're picking Mr. Right at 5, you'd best be right. 100% sure. If not, then you take Mr. Right Now in the third round and to take that shut down corner, that stud LT or edge rusher who can't miss at 5.

I’m wondering out loud, to entertain myself during Covid, not advocating.

I guess I can think of quite a few teams who waste time and ressources getting the ONE qb... Miami, Jets, Cincy, Cleveland, Jax, Denver, Vikings, Chicago, Tampa... all trying over several (many) years. All failing. While other QBs they passed on succeed elsewhere.

 

[Steve102]

Why, though? There's really no such thing as a draft pick that "can't miss."

The Redskins actually did exactly this with the RG3 pick and, well, it worked out pretty well (the other QB they selected was Kirk Cousins in the 4th round).

It's what I'd do if I were GM.

 

[Kontradiction]

Let's say they draft Tua with their first pick. I don't see why they couldn't go with Hurts later on. Worst case scenario, Tua pans out and they have to figure out another position for Hurts and try to get him to make the transition.

 

[primetime]

Back in the day, that's somewhat like the Cowboys did in drafting Steve Walsh, doubling down on two (not 3) QBs.

The Dallas Cowboys surprised observers by selecting Walsh with the second overall pick in the NFL Supplemental Draft, even though they had already selected Troy Aikman number one overall in the 1989 NFL Draft. They then had to surrender by rule an equivalent pick in the 1990 NFL Draft, which would turn out to be the number one overall selection.

While Walsh was never able to move out of Aikman's shadow, he was traded to the New Orleans Saints for a good haul: a first, second and a third round draft pick. With the third draft choice the Cowboys selected (#70-Erik Williams), the other two picks (#14-Leonard Russell and #52-Patrick Rowe) were traded to the Patriots as a package to move up to the number one overall draft choice to select Russell Maryland.

So I guess you'd have to say it worked out for them, since Williams and Maryland were key pieces on three champions.

The picks they traded to the Patriots became Pat Harlow and Jerome Henderson (Russell and Rowe were selected with the Patriots pick). Of course, the Cowboys were still playing with borrowed money from the Herschel Walker deal.

The irony of all this is that the best player of any of those picks was Erik Williams, the third rounder. Just goes to show you the outcome of a draft class is impossible to predict.

 

[luuked]

I am asking if they are better off getting three QBs and finding out which one they like. It absolutely doesn’t need to be during the preseason. It can be year 2-3...

But you are still putting multiple high value picks into that at the same time. And while you might increase your chances to pick the better of the 2-3 QBs you also decrease the amount of information you will be able to gain about all of them because you only have so many resources under the CBA to evaluate and develop them at the same time. Someone who starts out slower might be the better player given enough experience a year later. And vice versa.

And lets not even get started on missing out on not getting potential starters at other positions because you focus on QB. It is just not an efficient way of doing things given the constraints of building a NFL roster (CBA, salary cap, roster sizes...).

 

[Steve102]

I’m wondering out loud, to entertain myself during Covid, not advocating.

I guess I can think of quite a few teams who waste time and ressources getting the ONE qb... Miami, Jets, Cincy, Cleveland, Jax, Denver, Vikings, Chicago, Tampa... all trying over several (many) years. All failing. While other QBs they passed on succeed elsewhere.

I think that can be said about any position. @primetime is correct, there's no can't miss, usually. But picking at 5, from my GM's chair, I best be getting an impact player, day 1 starter and possible future Pro-Bowler. I need to be as confident as I can be that the guy at 5 is as close to those things I mentioned. If I look at my draft board and my highly rated QB is a maybe, and there's a stud LB that has all the intangibles, then I am taking the stud LB and I'll take the next graded guy at QB and take him next. I just hope the guy I have rated at #2 is almost as good as the guy I have rated at #1.

Or, I trade out of 5 and get him at 8 or 9. *shrug*

 

[primetime]

Let's say they draft Tua with their first pick. I don't see why they couldn't go with Hurts later on. Worst case scenario, Tua pans out and they have to figure out another position for Hurts and try to get him to make the transition.

Yeah, the Dolphins have 6 picks in the first 70. The Patriots, by comparison, have on pick in the first 70. The Dolphins can take Tua at 5 and Hurts/Eason/Fromm at 70 and still have picks at 18, 29, 36, and 56.

 

[primetime]

I think that can be said about any position. @primetime is correct, there's no can't miss, usually. But picking at 5, from my GM's chair, I best be getting an impact player, day 1 starter and possible future Pro-Bowler. I need to be as confident as I can be that the guy at 5 is as close to those things I mentioned. If I look at my draft board and my highly rated QB is a maybe, and there's a stud LB that has all the intangibles, then I am taking the stud LB and I'll take the next graded guy at QB and take him next. I just hope the guy I have rated at #2 is almost as good as the guy I have rated at #1.

Or, I trade out of 5 and get him at 8 or 9. *shrug*

The problem is that the quarterbacks are essentially:

Tier 1: Burrows
Tier 1.5: Tua
Tier 2: Herbert, Love
---- big gap here
Tier 3: Hurts
Tier 4: Fromm, Eason
Tier 5: Throw a dart

At other positions there isn't that much of a difference. Tackle is four or five deep, and there are arguments for any of the top four being the best, but there's a second tier of 4 or 5 guys who aren't that far off the first group. Burrows and Chase Young are the only guys I'd say are in a tier of their own at their position. Maybe Simmons, but there's four or five linebackers you could make an argument for as 1sts after Simmons (Queen, Murray, Baun, Brooks).

 

[Steve102]

I guess I am looking at the total health of my franchise is this scenario. Is Burrows a face of the franchise guy for the next 10 years? Is he Patrick Mahomes or is he Mark Sanchez? Can I take my stud LB at 5 and then get Hurts or Fromm in the next round, and they can be Mr Right Now for the next 2-4 years.