1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

QB or Chase Young?

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Galant, Oct 28, 2019.

  1. VManis

    VManis Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    5,753
    9,844
    113
    Nov 10, 2010
    But if you feel that Tua is only going to be a "consistently above average QB" than don't you have to consider how much difference there is between him and the other QBs in this class. We have multiple 1st round picks and could take a Young with 1a and another QB at 1b if we are only shooting for "consistently above average".
     
    Hooligan likes this.
  2. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    I think that's worth considering if we had both the #1 pick and another pick in the top 5. But that's too unlikely to consider IMO. Pittsburgh is already picking outside the top 10 and given their defense, Mason Rudolph being back, and remaining opponents Cinci, Jets and Cleveland (twice) I don't see them finishing any worse than 6-10. So our other 1st rounders are likely to be mid-1st round or worse.

    And in that scenario you're not going to have another QB most GM's would project as having a high floor with a good probability he'll end up "consistently above average". You'll have QB's that might have a projected high ceiling and low floor, but not a QB where most GM's project a high floor. And we need a relatively "safe" pick with the #1 pick regardless of position.
     
    danmarino and The Guy like this.
  3. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Remember those times we ended up with Chad Henne and John Beck because we thought it would be smarter to grab another position first and then pick a QB from the second tier of whoever was left? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

    If you have a strong conviction on a specific QB grab him first. Everything else is less relevant.

    Will Chase Young be significantly better than JT or Wake? Did they get us deep into playoffs?
     
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2019
  4. Vertical Limit

    Vertical Limit Senior Member

    12,162
    5,057
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Lots of disappointed fans in Miami when Chase Young, the best player in the nation and best prospect, becomes the pick. Cant wait to buy that jersey.

    ill tune into Tua when hes trying to throw in tight windows four times a year against Pittsburgh and Baltimore.
     
  5. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    I'm not necessarily a fan of Tua and I like Chase, but I dont think you can afford to go 0-16 potentially for a DE no matter how good.
     
    Phins_to_Win likes this.
  6. Carmen Cygni

    Carmen Cygni Well-Known Member

    2,422
    5,732
    113
    Dec 30, 2017
    I'll take an elite defender, especially on the line, over an OK QB any day of the week, and twice on Sundays.
     
    Puka-head, Hooligan and Sceeto like this.
  7. Tin Indian

    Tin Indian Rockin' The Bottom End Club Member

    7,929
    4,404
    113
    Feb 10, 2010
    Palm Bay Florida
    You need to watch some of his games this year if you haven't already. He is throwing the ball much better and can still run the ball when needed. I need to see more but I've been really impressed this year.
    If this is his floor, what is his ceiling? Or is it just Lincoln Riley doing his thing again?
     
  8. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Raheem Club Member

    51,930
    63,008
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    If this was a year where there was a true franchise QB there to be had at number one, I'd say just do it, no matter who else is available. However, I just don't feel that way about any of the QBs in this year's class. But I do feel that Young is a very special, rare talent, that I would love to see the team build around. He does everything that I would want, and he'll only be 21 next season as a rookie. Draft him, and then see how the chips fall after that with who's available.
     
    Hooligan and Tin Indian like this.
  9. Dorfdad

    Dorfdad Well-Known Member

    4,052
    2,347
    113
    Dec 9, 2007
    Why not #1 and 2 we have enough ammo to get that done easily! two immediate playmakers on both sides of the ball.
     
  10. danmarino

    danmarino Tua is H1M! Club Member

    15,360
    20,983
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    I agree....Do you think Tua or Fromm or Burrows are just OK?
     
  11. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    This really all boils down to...

    What grade do they have on the Qb's coming out. Not just Tua, if they have nearly the same grade on a player they are confident they can get with Pitt's #1, then why the hell wouldn't you take the best DE prospect I have seen in a long time?

    IMO the best QB's in each draft class the past 7 years not including this years class.

    2018- Lamar Jackson 32 overall...5 Qb's taken in front of him.
    2017 - Pat Mahomes 10 overall (D.Watson selected a few picks later) Tribusky was the "prize" QB at #3 overall.
    2016 - Wentz/Dak 2 overall/4th round (this is a subjective one but Dak has better numbers) Goff #1. System QB to a tee.
    2015 - This is the worst QB class I've ever seen. Winston #1 Overall is the only starter and his days are numbered.
    2014 - Another BAD class with Jimmy Garoppolo being the best at 62nd overall.
    2013 - 11 Qb's in this draft.....I doubt they had 30 wins collectively.
    2012 - While Andrew Luck was well on his way to a solid career? It was the 75th overall pick R. Wilson who is by far the best in the class.

    Will Tua break this laughable trend of overrated top 10 Qb's selected? I dunno, but these past years have shown us you are more likely to get a top flight QB outside of the first 10 picks in the draft.

    Sign me up for Young/Fromm and I will live with the results.
     
    KeyFin and Hooligan like this.
  12. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Raheem Club Member

    51,930
    63,008
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    Hell no. This team needs a massive infusion of talent at a number of positions. We need to be making as many picks as possible, at least in the first four or five rounds. Trading up like that is for a team that's already on the brink and needs something to push them over the edge. Thats the opposite of the Fins.
     
    Hooligan and Tin Indian like this.
  13. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    That last sentence is mathematically the wrong way to look at this.

    Asking whether it's more likely to find a QB of a sufficiently high quality in picks 1-10 vs. ALL OTHER picks combined will obviously yield the result that you'll more likely find a QB from picks 11 onwards. In fact you can go further and ask whether the entire 1st round compares to rounds 2 onwards (including undrafted) and obviously you'll more likely find that franchise QB in rounds 2+ because there are far more picks in rounds 2+ meaning that you have far more chances to succeed, and you're only looking at successes without caring about failures.

    No.. you have to equate "sample sizes" so to say. Ask whether it's more likely to find a "franchise" QB in round 1 or round 2, and the answer is round 1. Ask whether it's more likely to find a franchise QB in picks 1-10 or picks 11-20 and picks 1-10 win out. Ask whether it's more likely to find a franchise QB with the first overall pick versus any other SINGLE pick and by FAR the 1st overall pick wins out.

    That's why it's so important not only to get that 1st overall pick but to not use stats that show it's unlikely to land the QB you want with the 1st overall pick to argue it's fine picking later. The later you pick the better your QB eval has to be AND the more luck you need that teams picking before you don't pick the QB you want. The best chance of landing a franchise QB is by FAR with the #1 pick, and given the outsized importance of the QB position in the modern game, you pick one if there is a good chance he'll end up being an above average QB or better.
     
    Phin McCool, The Guy and Surfs Up 99 like this.
  14. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015

    I appreciate the effort to dress it up, however the point still remains. In the years aforementioned, not taking a QB #1 overall has been the correct move by a wide margin.

    But ultimately I agree that IF we think Tua or whomever is the exception and not the rule? I'm certainly on board with taking him as I'm certainly more than happy to draft Tua #1. I sure won't be upset to have a prospect like that as our QB.

    So again, kind of boils down to our scouts and FO and how they grade Tua compared to the next few guy's.
     
  15. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    That's not "dressing it up". That's looking at the problem correctly. If we use your logic then the correct move for almost every SB winner in history is to NOT take a DE like Chase Young with pick #1. Look where that "logic" gets you.

    No, the point is this: the probability of getting a franchise QB is by FAR the highest at pick #1, but it's still fairly low even with pick #1.

    That's what you have to keep in mind when drafting a QB. If you decide not to use the #1 pick on a QB, then the odds go drastically down with subsequent picks. There's a massive cost to NOT taking a QB with pick #1. You're only looking at successes without caring about failures and no cost/benefit analysis should ever do that.
     
    djphinfan and Fin D like this.
  16. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    I think you're math is on but your perception is off.

    How else do you dispute the examples I gave? Where are the examples of the first QB taken being the best one on the draft? I mean, obviously you would blindly take a #1 overall QB over a #3 overall QB, but that hasn't been working out well for teams.
     
  17. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Well.. if you go back a few more years you do find more examples of the 1st QB taken being the best in the draft (arguably). In 2011 you'd agree Cam Newton was right? In 2010 (really bad draft class) I'd say Sam Bradford was. In 2009 I'd argue Matthew Stafford was. And in 2008 I'd say Matt Ryan was. The first 3 of those were actually taken with the #1 pick. So it's more frequent than your list indicates.

    Regardless, the question shouldn't be "best in the draft" but "one of the best QB's of that era" or something similar because "best in the draft" gives you guys like Sam Bradford. And the last QB that was truly elite taken with the 1st pick was Peyton Manning. That's over 20 years ago!

    What all this is really saying is that good drafting is more due to luck than scouting proficiency. I mean.. you get the 1st overall pick and you still get the wrong guy that many times?? And that's my biggest worry with this tanking. It requires good drafting. When I point to examples like the Astros tanking for multiple years and now being a powerhouse, it's important to remember that their tanking was coupled with a novel use of analytics in drafting that led to the Astros not having anywhere near as many scouts as most other teams.

    There may be nothing like that in the NFL (Cleveland is trying but that experiment isn't yielding the expected dividends yet) and if that's the case it won't matter who you project at #1. But for now I'd rather go with the odds. At least many observers agree this isn't a bad QB class.
     
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2019
  18. Galant

    Galant Love - Unity - Sacrifice - Eternity

    19,127
    11,058
    113
    Apr 22, 2014
    For what it's worth, a recent PFF mock draft saw us picking second overall (based on current positioning) and taking Chase Young after the Bengals took Joe Burrow. Tua doesn't leave the board until pick 10. The argument is, if you don't love the QB available to you at the top of the draft then go with a prospect like Young who is as elite at his position as you're going to find.

     
    Tin Indian likes this.
  19. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    They have the Dolphins picking NO QB's with their first 3 picks??

    That alone should disqualify that mock for the Dolphins from serious discussion.

    Also, that was from October 21st. Today the Pittsburgh pick is at #12 which makes getting the QB we want with the 2nd pick much harder. Let's not forget that it's almost an annual rite for mock drafts this early to vastly underestimate the degree to which there will be a run on QB's in the draft. In just recent years, 3 QB's were taken top 15 in 2019, 4 QB's were taken top 10 in 2018, and 3 QB's were taken top 15 in 2017. So for everyone arguing we can pick our QB with our 2nd pick (which IMO will be worse than #15 when all is said and done), think about who your 3rd choice for QB would be and pencil us in for that guy.

    In other words, choice is: 1) 1st choice at QB and possibly 2nd or 3rd choice at another position, or 2) Chase Young and your 3rd choice at QB. That's a more realistic comparison and I'm going for option #1.
     
  20. Galant

    Galant Love - Unity - Sacrifice - Eternity

    19,127
    11,058
    113
    Apr 22, 2014
    The lead guy was making the case that the Dolphins are realistically looking at a two year rebuild and seemed to therefore be going BPA, which, at those positions, didn't lead to a QB. Instead, they'd be looking for one in 2021.

    He didn't specify it, but perhaps the case is that Rosen, with an improved roster, can start through the 2020 season before they need to upgrade at QB...?
     
    Hooligan likes this.
  21. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    No way to know what Ross is thinking, but I find it HIGHLY unlikely we are in for a 2-year tank job. First of all, IF that were the case you do not need the #1 pick in 2020 yet our FO moves suggest we're after the #1 pick in 2020. Secondly, the more components of the rebuilt team you have the less likely it is you can lose enough to get that #1 pick. The FO looks like it's tanking but Flores almost certainly isn't (though if we see many more questionable calls I might change my opinion on that), so how could the FO make sure we get the #1 pick in 2021? We don't really have many more core players to get rid of.

    So just logistically speaking I think this is a 1-year tank job. It's only a 2-year tank job if the coach is in on it, and I don't see the evidence for that yet. Besides, that's a dangerous move for any coach. I mean.. what's to stop the owner from changing his mind after tons of losing?
     
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2019
  22. Galant

    Galant Love - Unity - Sacrifice - Eternity

    19,127
    11,058
    113
    Apr 22, 2014
    I agree.

    I was just speculating as to why PFF might not have pursued a QB for Miami, and seeing Rosen as that QB next year might allow for that.
     
  23. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    That's because those teams' evaluations were wrong, not because of where they picked them. Where a player is picked has little bearing on if the player pans out or not.

    For what you're saying to be accurate, then if we swapped when Aaron Rodgers and Alex Smith were picked, would we swap their career results as well? Of course not.

    All getting the first pick does is ensure you get the guy your FO had the most conviction in....that's it. If your FO evaluated poorly and picked QB X w/1st pick, then QB X will likely fail. If your FO evaluated correctly and that eval showed QB Y was going to be meh and they took him w/1st pick because they felt desperate for a QB, then that was a mistake too. But none of that means the mistake was taking someone at 1, rather the mistake was taking the wrong player @1.

    The argument you're making is a classic correlation equals causation, which is incorrect.
     
    texanphinatic likes this.
  24. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Who wouldn't, but that's not this case.

    This case is you don't if the guy will be an elite defender nor do you know if the QB will be just OK or not.

    If your FO evaluates a rookie QB and a rookie edge rusher, and they determine that the QB has a 75% chance of becoming elite and the DE/OLB has a 95% chance of becoming elite, then you should actually take the QB, because QB's have a bigger impact on games.

    (None of this is specific to any QB or DE/OLB in this draft, just talking generalities and hypotheticals)
     
    texanphinatic likes this.
  25. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Another thing to consider here is that pass rushers are most effective when their own team is up big on the scoreboard and the opponent is forced to pass the ball.

    Obviously that has implications for the priority with which you want to approach drafting pass rushers versus players who are in a position to score points.

    Chase Young is doing what he’s doing at the present time in large part because Ohio State is outscoring opponents by a tremendous margin.
     
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2019
    jegol71 likes this.
  26. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    The interesting thing with that list Pauly added is that up to and including Peyton Manning, every single one of them was a very good passer in the NFL. More than 30 years of drafting, and not a single total bust. Nine quarterbacks out of 32 draft classes, 28%.

    From that point on, there's a change in methodology, and now we have 14 quarterbacks in 21 draft classes, and not surprisingly, a lot of them didn't pan out. The QB just isn't going to be the best player available 68% of the time, its not realistic. The were a lot of cases in the last 20 years where non-QBs were the obvious choice at the time, and ended up being excellent players, while someone wasted the pick on a QB instead, trying to force it.

    I don't want the Dolphins do to the same thing. Some years, its just a bad draft class and there aren't any real elite players there regardless. But this one looks really, really solid.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 30, 2019
  27. Hooligan

    Hooligan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    624
    790
    93
    Dec 31, 2018
    Costa Rica
    You don't have to look any further back than the past SB to see where a stout defense played a big part in the win. Holding the high powered offense of the Rams to one FG allowed one TD to win the game. We've seen an over the hill Peyton Manning ride a dominant defense to a title.
    Who was it that said " Great offense fills stadiums but, great defense wins championships."
    It always seemed to make sense that it would be a two year rebuild but, not necessarily a two year tank.
    This is the first defense oriented HC that we've had in a long time. Let him build the D and the lines and we may find that Rosen is that consistently above average QB.
     
  28. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Remember when we had the best CB tandem in league, the best pass rusher in the league, one of the best MLBs in the league and the best RB in the league......and didn't even make the playoffs because we had no QB?
     
    texanphinatic likes this.
  29. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Raheem Club Member

    51,930
    63,008
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    But if we HAD then gotten a QB after building that team up, we very likely would have been one of the best teams in the league. And we had about four offseasons to make that happen, and couldn't do it. That's a failure, but not because they didn't go QB first.
     
  30. Dorfdad

    Dorfdad Well-Known Member

    4,052
    2,347
    113
    Dec 9, 2007
    mom saying if we identify a sure fire talent that will fix a gaping whole we should do it. The draft is a crapshoot outside of top 10 usually.

    we already have 2 maybe 3 day one picks so we have ammo to move up and do that if we wanted
     
  31. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    "Defense wins championships" as a general rule is a myth, though there are obviously individual SB's where the defense was more important. Statistically you can prove that on average you need BOTH an above average offense and an above average defense to win in the playoffs and win the SB. However.. the offense is more important in both cases. I posted these graphs over a year ago but it's worth re-posting them so that this "defense wins championships" myth doesn't start up again.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    You can see that the average z-score for offense is bigger for both playoffs and the SB (especially the SB). And the QB has a MUCH bigger influence on the offense than a DE does on the defense, so if your argument is that we should focus on the part of the team more important for winning in the modern game, then you go offense not defense.
     
    The Guy likes this.
  32. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Uhh no it actually is precisely because we didn't go QB first. Almost everyone had us pegged to take Drew Brees in 2001 only for Dave Wannstedt to take Jamar Fletcher instead.
     
    Fin D likes this.
  33. tirty8

    tirty8 Well-Known Member

    1,325
    1,381
    113
    Jan 2, 2016
    I've been thinking more and more about this. I am supremely confident that Young will pan out, and with his athleticism, I think he will have the versatility that Flores wanted in Clowney. Just look at how Nick Bosa has transformed the 49ers. I also think that pass rusher is a primo position. So making this move would check a lot of boxes.
     
  34. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    People's objections right now are about their personal eval of Tua.

    If Andrew Luck or Peyton Manning were in this draft, no one but no one would want Chase Young over one of those. There'd be no discussion whatsoever.

    Again, it is perfectly fine to not like Tua as a prospect. But that's what the discussion should be then. Wrapping the dislike of Tua into some other nonsense argument that people don't actually think, makes no sense.

    Also, the order isn't important either. All that is important is that you pick correctly on the guy you choose. End of the day, on a scale of importance is QB > another position. And not only that, but they are harder to come by and usually need more attempts to get right.
     
    djphinfan likes this.
  35. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Raheem Club Member

    51,930
    63,008
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    That defense was built by 2000.

    Tim Bowens 1994
    Zach Thomas 1996
    Daryl Gardener 1996
    Jason Taylor 1997
    Sam Madison 1997
    Derrick Rodgers 1997
    Pat Surtain 1998
    Kenny Mixon 1998
    Lorenzo Bromell 1998
    Robert Jones UFA 1998
    Brock Marion UFA 1999

    Everything the team did from that point was in addition to the defensive base that they had built, and most of those players were around through the Wanny era. The failure came in not adding a QB - be it through the draft, trade or free agency, from 2000-2003. Not in building up the team around that QB beforehand.
     
    Tin Indian likes this.
  36. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Raheem Club Member

    51,930
    63,008
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    Well, I plainly stated that as my position. There does appear to be a highly elite defender. There does not appear (to me) to be am elite, sure thing QB. Therefore, take the defender.
     
    Fin-O likes this.
  37. danmarino

    danmarino Tua is H1M! Club Member

    15,360
    20,983
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    Again though, it's not about WHERE they were picked, it's about making sure the QB picked is the better one. Saying a team has a better chance at getting an elite QB outside the top 10 is just not true. The team with the first choice at picking a QB as the best chance. They still have to choose wisely, however.

    I still think that the reason why we are seeing these "better" QB's being picked later on is due to two things.

    1. The teams obviously did a better job at evaluating the player. Which is really no surprise. Better teams and FO's usually pick later in the draft.

    2. These QB's are drafted into a good atmosphere.
     
  38. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Right but as i said before, if a given FO evals the QB to have a 75% chance of becoming elite versus a defender having a 95% chance of becoming elite, you should still take the QB because they are harder to come by and require more effort to get and have more impact on the team.

    Your way has literally lead to John Beck and Chad Henne.
     
  39. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Umm.. when you say our failure to get our QB after building the defense was not because "we didn't go QB first", that implies you're talking about draft order because you're already assuming the defense is built. My response was that we didn't get our QB because we didn't pick a QB first in the 2001 draft. I'm obviously not disagreeing with the assumption in your post that the defense was already built by that time.

    Regardless.. to the point you apparently are trying to make, namely that it's fine to build the surroundings first then go after QB, that doesn't necessarily apply to a situation where you have a QB rich draft and you have the #1 pick. Dave Wannstedt is actually a cautionary tale about someone who does NOT value the QB position highly enough, drafting only Josh Heupel with a 6th round pick during his tenure.
     
  40. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Raheem Club Member

    51,930
    63,008
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    I'm not advocating for anything that Wanny did, whatsoever. Just the failure of the team to build on the foundations that Jimmy had left them.
     

Share This Page