Thread: Broncos predictions

Originally Posted by Von Kinger

I was responding to an argument made by Tned, Top.

And I take issue with people comparing TS' first year with rookie QB's because that's not apples to apples, either.

Look, I'm here to be optimistic and pull for my team. Most of the debate has subsided, but Tned and I were just talking, that's all. I'm off to get food and watch some boxing.

Maybe you were making a different point than what I inferred because I missed the
context of your discussion, but I just responded to what I saw.

Originally Posted by MOtorboat

But you don't set up your team building philosophy with, "Get quarterback in seventh round." That is not part of anyone's plan. When you budget for position you don't ever say, "we'll go cheap at quarterback." The two examples listed here, Seattle and New England had signed Matt Flynn and already had Drew Bledsoe, both on big contracts.

They didn't use the "get QB in 7th round" philosophy. They have used the "pay a free agent $100 million" philosophy. They have used the "draft a QB in the second round to learn behind Manning" philosophy. They have used the "draft a QB in the first round" philosophy.

It just happens that two of those three philosophies appear to have come up dry, and at the same time they lucked into the "holy shit, we found a gem in the 7th that's bailing out our bad high pick mistakes, and we wonder if that gem will become a diamond" philosophy.

Originally Posted by Von Kinger

Almost every big analyst had him as a first rounder. Mayock, the best analyst, had Lynch as a first rounder. Because of his talent. The only thing that would have kept him out was how raw he was, but his physical talents were so great that he was an easy first rounder. I saw a few people say second rounder, and I never saw anything lower than that.

I'm not going to argue with you about TS' first year and Carr's first year, but it's not 'established'. You have your opinion, and that's fine. If we were to compare the second seasons they had, however, I think you'll find yourself retracting your statement. http://www.nfl.com/player/derekcarr/2543499/careerstats

32 TDs, 13 picks, and a few yards away from 4k. TS is close to none of those things, sans INT ratio.


What I will say, however, is that Carr had a ton of obvious talent. There wasn't much to miss. A lot of scouts had him as the best QB in the draft and thought he'd be underdrafted because of his last name and school. I think you go overboard with your 'this is a crap shoot' and don't focus on the fact that just about every HoF QB is a first rounder, that most All-Pro QB's are first rounders, etc. Yeah, you can find a guy elsewhere, but it gets much less likely the further you go. It's not hindsight evaluations, either. It's ratios and percentages.

I don't have to retract anything. Remember, you established the meaning of "on par" when comparing QBs and using your use of the terms, then Carr's second season and Siemian's first, were much closer to being "on par" than Siemian in Lynch's play last year.

As to Lynch. I didn't say that people said he would go in the 4th, but that he was a 2nd to 4th round talent, but due to the fact that so many teams had holes at QB, that he was going to go in the first (some said he could fall to early 2nd, especially earlier in the pre-draft period) purely based on his physical tools, which is much different than football talent. Almost all of those same experts you refer to talked about him needing 2-3 years, because while he had very impressive physical tools, he was far from an NFL ready QB.

Originally Posted by MOtorboat

I don't care where he was drafted either. Someone tried to say he's the best quarterback in the division because he's cheap. When making a prediction about the season ahead, I don't care how much he costs or where he was drafted, he's the fourth-best quarterback in the division.

Value doesn't come into play when ranking players, unless that IS how you are ranking them, such as some might make a case for a Hyundai being better than a Mercedes, when you bring "value" into play.

On pure performance, you are sitting with:

Rivers
Carr
Smith
Siemian

An argument could be made, just not a good one, that Carr is better than Rivers (due to Rivers has a long body of work, but Carr could take the crown) and Siemian could push for third place, but would be a major upset to be considered the 2nd best or best QB when the season is over.

Originally Posted by Tned

They didn't use the "get QB in 7th round" philosophy. They have used the "pay a free agent $100 million" philosophy. They have used the "draft a QB in the second round to learn behind Manning" philosophy. They have used the "draft a QB in the first round" philosophy.

It just happens that two of those three philosophies appear to have come up dry, and at the same time they lucked into the "holy shit, we found a gem in the 7th that's bailing out our bad high pick mistakes, and we wonder if that gem will become a diamond" philosophy.

I didn't say Denver did.

Originally Posted by MOtorboat

I didn't say Denver did.

Ok, fair enough. I assumed too much based on the 7th round comment.

In other news I'm glad we had the cap to gamble on Jamaal because he's back.

Jamaalocaust is upon us!

Originally Posted by Magnificent Seven

Did anyone change her/his mind about Broncos vs. Patriots game? Edelman is out for a year. Broncos win this game?

How can anybody tell at this point? The Patriots are still absolutely loaded with talent. They are the NFL equivalent of the Golden State Warriors right now. They went out and signed a bunch of FAs too and crushed everybody in FA. Let's not forget that. Even if you discount all that, they're still the defending SB Champions who won 2 out of the last 3 and only lost to Denver because the game was played in Denver and because their kicker missed an extra point, so they needed a 2-pt. conversion and Chris Harris made a great play.

They are, with good reason, an overwhelming favourite to win it all again too. Will the loss of Edelman change anything? With a lot of teams it would absolutely matter. But the Patriots seem to pull effective players out of their butts all the time if they need to so they have plenty of guys to try and replace Edelman's production. They probably will manage. They won 3 of 4 without Brady last year.

The Broncos meanwhile have an absolute boatload of uncertainty starting with the QB position, and extending to the entire offense. And the defense too if they keep losing DL at this rate! Kerr was the only serious looking injury I saw.

Originally Posted by iLands

In other news I'm glad we had the cap to gamble on Jamaal because he's back.

I remember how tense I would get every time he touched the ball and especially if he caught it in open space. Now the other teams get to feel that fear instead of us.

Originally Posted by Magnificent Seven

Did anyone change her/his mind about Broncos vs. Patriots game? Edelman is out for a year. Broncos win this game?

No, I already have it down as a W for the Broncos, so Edelman being out doesn't change anything for me.

Originally Posted by Cugel

I remember how tense I would get every time he touched the ball and especially if he caught it in open space. Now the other teams get to feel that fear instead of us.

I'd like to see Henderson and Charles on the field at the same time. Send one in motion and watch the chaos ensue.

Originally Posted by Al Wilson 4 Mayor

I'd like to see Henderson and Charles on the field at the same time. Send one in motion and watch the chaos ensue.

We will just have to keep them both running on shorter routes.

Originally Posted by MOtorboat

That's a shitty way to build a franchise.

What valuable insight do you have to fixing the problem this season? Because last I checked there isn't anyone on our roster who outperformed Trevor, nor is there any proven QB's on the waiver wire that would be an improvement.


So basically, worry about building a franchise next year. This year, we've got what we've got.


I totally get not being satisfied with what we've got, but bitching about it incessantly, it's not going to change anything. When the off-season comes up, we'll see what Elway does there, for now, there isn't a dang thing any of us can do about TS. He's our starter until further notice.

Originally Posted by Freyaka

What valuable insight do you have to fixing the problem this season? Because last I checked there isn't anyone on our roster who outperformed Trevor, nor is there any proven QB's on the waiver wire that would be an improvement.


So basically, worry about building a franchise next year. This year, we've got what we've got.


I totally get not being satisfied with what we've got, but bitching about it incessantly, it's not going to change anything. When the off-season comes up, we'll see what Elway does there, for now, there isn't a dang thing any of us can do about TS. He's our starter until further notice.

It's not that hard to follow that conversation. I was not referring specifically to this year's Bronco team, only the idea that the cheapest quarterback in the division, whatever division it might be, is the best quarterback in said division.