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. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,403
    8,688
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Right.. and we should have chosen Brees like practically all pundits (and fans, me one of them) had us picking. If hiring Shula was the best move the Dolphins organization ever made, not choosing Brees (multiple opportunities) was arguably the worst move(s).
     
    Puka-head, resnor and Fin D like this.
  2. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Rosen Staff Member Club Member

    26,137
    27,241
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    Well as you said, it also boils down to how you view the available quarterbacks. If you view a guy as a 75% chance, and I view him as a 50% or lower, we're going to take a different tactic. Nothing wrong with having a different feeling about a player. But my point is that I don't view any of the 2020 QBs as even the 75% guy. And so to me, it seems crazy to then gamble on the "coin flip" QB with the top pick instead of taking the more sure thing defender.

    We're soft of arguing over semantics. But I came into the season with question marks on all three of the main QB prospects, and those questions have not only gone unanswered, but they've at least doubled on each one. I see them all as raw and needing a lot of work. Just as likely to have Mitch Trubisky in three years as you are Carson Wentz.
     
    resnor likes this.
  3. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Rosen Staff Member Club Member

    26,137
    27,241
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    I don't think we're debating the same topic :chuckle:
     
  4. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,403
    8,688
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Maybe we should debate whether we're debating the same topic.. then we'll definitely be debating the same topic!
     
  5. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,252
    43,675
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Right my post that you originally responded too was making a point about the importance of a QB over a DE in general. My points have been simply this:

    - If a person's concern is over a specific player in the draft, then make the discussion about that player. Don't, for example, say you think DE is more or just as important as QB in general, because you specifically don't want to take Tua.

    - QB is more important then other position or position group.
     
    resnor likes this.
  6. Carmen Cygni

    Carmen Cygni Well-Known Member

    2,421
    5,731
    113
    Dec 30, 2017
    Build the defense first, then draft a QB on a rookie deal to ride the team's coattails. While a QB may be more valuable than any specific defensive position. The defense as a whole is more important. Simply view the philosophical differences between, say, Belichick and Andy Reid. Defense wins championships.
     
    The_Dark_Knight and resnor like this.
  7. Carmen Cygni

    Carmen Cygni Well-Known Member

    2,421
    5,731
    113
    Dec 30, 2017
    I do. I don't see much to separate themselves from the average to above average NFL pack. Also, as with any QB, it significantly depends on which coach or coordinator they are able to learn under (and what kind of line they have to play behind).
     
  8. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,403
    8,688
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Belichick has never won a SB without Brady, and he really lucked into Brady. I mean Belichick didn't even know Brady > Bledsoe until he was forced to start Brady after a Bledsoe injury. So how precisely do you suggest copying that "lucking into a QB like Brady" part?

    And yes, the defense overall is far more important than the QB, but look at how many draft picks you need to build a defense vs. one pick for QB. Clearly, the cost of failure to acquire that QB with the one pick (very likely) you spend on it far outweighs the cost of missing out on any one defensive player. That's why you prioritize picking QB at #1. And no, on average at least.. defense doesn't win championships.
     
    The Guy likes this.
  9. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    9,914
    9,300
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    Couldn't agree more, this is why I'm okay with taking Chase Young before a QB as long as the Dolphins have confidence in a guy with the next pick.
     
  10. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    9,914
    9,300
    113
    Sep 28, 2015

    I didn't say that....I simply pointed out that picking Young first wasn't going to somehow ruin our shot at a franchise QB. The past 10 years have show us that.
     
    danmarino likes this.
  11. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,252
    43,675
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    But it can.

    You are still asserting that QBs picked 1st suck because they were picked first.

    If they think Tua has the best chance of the QBs of becoming elite but pick Young because they feel like he has the best chance of becoming elite of all prospects regardless of position, then they lose out on Tua, who goes 2nd or 3rd and goes on to become great, then.....Tua would become an example you'd use later of saying, "see, Tua was great and he didn't go first pick either", and we'd still have missed out.
     
    resnor, texanphinatic and danmarino like this.
  12. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    9,914
    9,300
    113
    Sep 28, 2015

    Ummm, what?

    All I did was show you guy's that not taking a QB #1 overall doesn't mean you missed out on the best QB in the draft.

    I'm still very okay with drafting Tua at #1 if we get that pick, however if we went in another direction due to his our FO feels about the Qbs in this draft then all hope was surely not lost.

    You guy's gotta relax on the hyperbole a little.
     
  13. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,252
    43,675
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    You just don't understand. It's fine.
     
  14. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    9,914
    9,300
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    I don't understand what I posted?

    Ok.
     
  15. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,252
    43,675
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    No you really don't. Nor do you understand why I was addressing it.
     
  16. Carmen Cygni

    Carmen Cygni Well-Known Member

    2,421
    5,731
    113
    Dec 30, 2017
    Though early in his career and now, Belichick has won Super Bowls with his QB playing average to above average. One thing Belichick has never done was won a Super Bowl without a top level defense. Because, defense wins championships. (Just ask offensive genius Andy Reid).
     
    The_Dark_Knight and resnor like this.
  17. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,403
    8,688
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Belichick has never won a SB with a QB playing average. It's either been above average or top level. Also, I wouldn't label a defense ranked 6-8 as "top level" personally, and 3 of NE's SB's had defenses ranked outside the top 5. So the question arises once again.. how do we luck into a QB that's consistently above average if you prioritize defense and say someday later on we'll worry about QB? What's the strategy?

    Also, despite your repeated demonstrations that you don't actually care about the evidence, post #71 conclusively shows that "defense wins championships" is a myth in the NFL, unless of course you disagree with using points allowed and points scored as the best measure. This isn't a question of differences of opinion Carmen, it's a testable statement and offense is on average more important in the NFL.
    https://www.thephins.com/threads/qb-or-chase-young.94713/page-2#post-3216872
     
    The Guy and Fin D like this.
  18. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    1,645
    841
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    The vast majority of Super Bowls in the past 25 years have been won by HoF-caliber quarterbacks. A small minority of them have one been won by average quarterbacks on rookie contracts.
     
  19. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    9,914
    9,300
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    #FinDprobs
     
  20. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Rosen Staff Member Club Member

    26,137
    27,241
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    But that also might have been a situation that will never repeat itself. The Patriots are dominant like no other team in the history of the league has been, and in addition to that you have one of the greatest players of all time in Peyton Manning going to Super Bowls on his own. Take those away, and you have the normal ebb and flow of a team being really good for three or four years at a time, for the most part, and a variety of players being part of a run in any given season.
     
    Carmen Cygni likes this.
  21. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,403
    8,688
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    There's no reason to only go back 25 years. From 1966-2000 (first 35 years), chosen because Brady in 2001 is the first QB that's not yet eligible to be in the HoF, 26 out of 35 SB's were won with a HoF QB:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_..._quarterbacks#Winning_and_losing_quarterbacks

    That's 74.3% of QB's for the winning SB team being in the HoF from 1966-2000. And if Eli happens to not get in (I really hope he doesn't because he would be a true statistical anomaly based on z-scores), that 75% probability is about the same pre-2000 vs. post-2000.
     
    The Guy likes this.
  22. Hooligan

    Hooligan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    162
    188
    43
    Dec 31, 2018
    Costa Rica
    We didn't make the play-offs every year but, under Wanny we DID make the play-offs, we won the division and, wasn't that the last time we won a play-off game? One could argue that the deficiency was more the coach than the QB.
     
  23. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    1,698
    1,475
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    I'm not sure you can blame us the first time. No-one knew he would be this good, every team passed on him once basically before the Chargers scooped him up.

    The second time though...shame on us.
     
  24. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    1,645
    841
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Passer rating differential is what wins in the league. You need either one of the best quarterbacks in the league accompanied by at least an average pass defense, or one of the best pass defenses in the league accompanied by at least an average quarterback.

    Now, when you have the first overall pick in the draft, the focus should be on obtaining potentially one of the best quarterbacks in the league, if that player indeed exists in the draft.

    That single player allows your pass defense to be merely average, whereas without that player, you need a whole host of very good players on the defensive side of the ball, in the effort to compile one of the best pass defenses in the league.

    Obviously that single draft pick of a defensive player at number one overall would carry with it no guarantee that you will compile the number of other very good defensive players necessary to achieve that kind of pass defense, and so the pick is much better spent on the elite quarterback, again if that player indeed exists.
     
  25. Vertical Limit

    Vertical Limit Senior Member

    10,606
    3,713
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    To add to that, the only possible quarterback we missed out on in the first round during Wannstedt tenure was Drew Brees.. same season the only other franchise quarterback was Michael Vick in the first pick...

    right after Wannstedt left, we had the opportunity to draft Aaron Rodgers and Saban wasnt interested, he was purely a SEC only guy. He wasnt interested in a PAC12 quarterback.. that was a major mistake.

    who else were we suppose to draft during Wannstedt? Kyle Boller? Patrick Ramsey? Marques Tuaisosopo?

    after Wannstedt, k we had the chance to draft Aaron Rodgers and Matt Ryan, im not sure Matt Ryan is a player to die for.. hes above average, but hes not a guy you are winning championships with.

    first round quarterbacks have been historically weak.

    There was a season where Eli and Rivers came out, we didnt have the opportunity to draft either and i think we dodged a bullet there anyways.... Ben Roethlisberger who was picked at 11 turned out better than both of them. I guess we could have traded up for a MAC quarterback??

    Then theres amazing talents of Johnny Manziel, Jason Campbell, Josh Freeman..

    The quarterback we have missed on recently as did many was Lamar Jackson.

    but please, lets not pretend we failed to address quarterback in the draft, the scouts did just fine missing on many of those busts... brees aaron rodgers and lamar are three within our grasp we have missed out on the last 19 years.. and many teams passed on them..
     
  26. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,403
    8,688
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    You can definitely blame Wannstedt for not drafting Brees in 2001. Everyone knew we needed a QB and was projecting the Dolphins to take Brees with our first pick. The issue isn't whether one could project Brees to be an all-time great. The issue is that QB was a real need for us – the most important component missing on our team – and Wannstedt decided not to prioritize it. Full blame on Wannstedt for that.
     
    Tin Indian likes this.
  27. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    6,344
    8,311
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    But like you said, the move is to grab who you think is a generational QB. If you don't think Tua is that guy and you can't get Burrow (or you don't think Burrow is that guy either...), then it doesn't make any sense to take the best QB available just to take a QB. Rosen or Fitz are both "good enough" if you feel Lawrence in 2021 is the true prize.

    I get that you wanted a 1-year tank...I didn't want any tank at all. But if the ultimate goal is to take that generational QB then you have to draft him when he's actually available, regardless of how long it takes.
     
    resnor likes this.
  28. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,403
    8,688
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah obviously tanking for a QB is worth it only if you think there is a very good prospect at QB, and that seems to be the popular view right now. So the timing is right. And I think the Dolphins are tanking precisely because they think there is such a QB in the 2020 draft.
     
    KeyFin likes this.
  29. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    6,344
    8,311
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    But what if there's not? After all, what could Grier really do differently with his pitch? Keep Gase another year AND THEN tank? Or tank for two seasons to have the greatest possible odds of being able to pick the right guy? Remember, we're stockpiling picks for two seasons...not just one. So it's hard to say it's a multi-year rebuild yet only a one-year tank. We really don't know either way.

    As you said earlier, absolutely everything can fall perfectly into place (which it has so far), we have the ideal players on the board at the right time and still pick the wrong guy. The one constant that we have no idea about is Grier, and if he picks poorly then it's a two-season tank whether we want it to be or not. That's what still frustrates me about this.
     
  30. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    1,698
    1,475
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    I blame him for not prioritizing the position, I dont blame him for not taking Brees specifically. I blame him for taking noone.
     
  31. Carmen Cygni

    Carmen Cygni Well-Known Member

    2,421
    5,731
    113
    Dec 30, 2017
    I do disagree. Points allowed, timely turnovers, 3rd down percentages, turnover on downs, etc. all need to be taken into consideration.

    Most importantly, you also need to take into account how the games played out. Take for instance the genius of Belichick in messing with other coaches, scouting personnel, and statisticians, with tomfoolery at the end of games. There was a game in 2018 (where you claim their defense fell outside the top 5 due to PA) when the Patriots had the the game won, so BB called a few loopy defensive calls (on purpose) allowing the team (Saints?) to score a TD for the mere purpose of throwing off future opponents and scouting reports.

    Therefore using strictly points allowed is an inaccurate mark to rank defenses. You must know how the game played out and why. And to end that '18 season, their defense shut the door on one of the hottest offenses and held them to a paltry 3 points. I don't give a damn what your pretty lil' charts spit out, defense wins championships.
     
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2019
    Hooligan, resnor and Unlucky 13 like this.
  32. Carmen Cygni

    Carmen Cygni Well-Known Member

    2,421
    5,731
    113
    Dec 30, 2017
    A defense also does not need to be riddled with superstars are even great players to be elite, just well coached.

    For example view the differences in player snap counts bw the Patriots and the Bears.

    The Bears, along with many high profile names, have 5 players that have participated in at least 90% of the snaps, and 2 with at least 80%. That's more than half the defense.
    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/chi/2019-snap-counts.htm

    Now view the Patriots. Only 1 player with at least 90%, and 1 player with at least 80%. 19 other defenders have played to some significance within their defensive scheme. With just a couple of well-known players, the rest fill in, and as cliche as it is, they do their job, and simply have an excellent rotation of well coached defenders.
    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/nwe/2019-snap-counts.htm
     
    resnor likes this.
  33. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    1,645
    841
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    You mentioned wonky variation with regard to points allowed, thus decreasing its validity as a measure of defensive performance. What sort of wonky variation do you think exists with regard to points scored?
     
  34. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Rosen Staff Member Club Member

    26,137
    27,241
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    Points scored, and point differential, are both important. But we all know that not every touchdown is equal.

    A team that is up 42-7 entering the fourth quarter and allows two scores against the backups to bring the final to 42-21 isn't worse because they allowed over 20 points that day. And on the reverse, the losing team isn't better for scoring those garbage time points either. That's why you always need to use your human eye and intuition along with reading the cold statistics to get the whole picture.

    I would also personally argue that some scores are worth less than others, regardless of the final. Recovering a fumbled punt or kickoff and running it back for a TD yourself is wonderful, and no doubt helps you win, but it was more luck than skill, and probably won't be repeated. Therefore I would say that its much less important to look at than a TD that comes at the end of a 12 play, 80 yard drive on offense.
     
    resnor likes this.
  35. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,403
    8,688
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah it's easy to just say "take everything that could possibly matter into consideration", but it's an entirely different ballgame to actually demonstrate you know HOW to accurately take all those things into consideration.

    First, let's be clear about how good or bad using only points scored/points allowed is. The correlation between win% and point differential across NFL history is not a perfect 1 but is instead 0.9156, which means that 0.9156^2 = 83.8% of everything that matters for explaining win% is captured in just that final scoreline (actual points scored/allowed). In other words 16.2% is left to be explained by all those other factors AFTER you've already taken into account points scored/allowed (because a lot of the effect of all those other factors is already contained in points scored/allowed).

    So yes you're right that there must theoretically be a better measure. But what does that measure look like? This is where it's important for you to not just say "take everything that matters into account" but to actually show us HOW to accurately take them into account in an objective way. And if any proposed formula decreases that 16.2% to something smaller, then yes you have a better measure and we can see what the results are. However, what we CANNOT do if we want an objective solution to this problem is to revert to something you really really like to do around here, which is to say "Ask Carmen if you want to know the truth about football".

    So until I see something demonstrably more accurate (and this can be tested) then those graphs I provided are the best known objective solution to the problem of whether "defense wins championships" is accurate or not, and it's not.


    Aside from that issue, the other issue I have with your argument is cherry picking examples to fit your hypothesis. How about I ask you to explain how "defense wins championships" works with the 41-33 SB win by the Eagles over the Patriots?
     
    The Guy likes this.
  36. Sceeto

    Sceeto Well-Known Member

    12,458
    5,069
    113
    Oct 13, 2008
    New York
    :sidelol:
     
  37. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree Tank? Who is Tank? I am Guy Incognito. Club Member

    34,170
    24,457
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    Wansteadt didn't want to upset Fielder.
     
  38. Vertical Limit

    Vertical Limit Senior Member

    10,606
    3,713
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Yea if belichick stsrted his best cb that game they probably dont score 41
     
    Fin-O likes this.
  39. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    1,645
    841
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Once you get to the kind of sample sizes cbrad is talking about here, that kind of variation becomes equivalent enough across teams, you get a true picture of how the game functions, and there is no more need to put that kind of microscope on things.

    The kind of microscopic analysis you’re talking about is relevant to very small sample sizes only. In fact, if you made a conclusion about how the game functions on the basis of that kind of microscopic analysis, you could be entirely wrong, because the sample size used would be too small to permit a reliable conclusion.

    Think about it like this: if you’re trying to determine how good a quarterback Peyton Manning was, is it better to look at his career statistics, or is it better to pick one game at random and analyze his performance in it? If you do the latter, you could very well pick one of his worst games and inaccurately conclude that he was one of the worst quarterbacks of all time.
     
    cbrad likes this.
  40. ExplosionsInDaSky

    ExplosionsInDaSky Well-Known Member

    2,035
    1,159
    113
    Sep 13, 2011
    There was a poster on here that was screaming for us to draft Gardner Minshew last April and for basically months leading up to the draft. I'd like to know who that was, and who they think (QB wise) we should be looking at in this upcoming draft.
     

Share This Page