Watson will almost certainly be on the board for our first rounder. He will possibly be on the board for our second pick.
I understand 100% of the critiques here. He's from a spread offense. He hasn't run a huddle. He hasn't worked under center. He has off games. He's undersized...
I get it. I get it all.
This guy plays like a goddamn champion. Put aside the fact that he actually is one -- he is a locker room leader with toughness beyond his years.
We need to take him. He needs to be the QB of the future in Kansas City. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
There are valid reasons to wait until next year for the QB, especially if you can engineer a winning trade-down that nets us as much as a 2nd or 3rd in the '18 draft that can be used to move up a bit if needed. I'm not convinced I'd do it, but if my options are Peterman or Webb in the 2nd this year or wait until 2018, I'd go with the 2018 option in a heartbeat.
I think that if Peterman and Webb can be had in the 3rd round or the bottom of the second, I'm good with the Chiefs taking either and sitting them for a year (or two). If Mahomes checks out, I have no problem with them taking him in the first.
Josh Allen is a 56% passer, which won't cut it in the WCO. Any coach, offensive or defensive, will tell you that accuracy isn't something that can be taught, so he scares me. As for the other two guys you mentioned, there's always the possibility of injury or just falling apart at the seams.
I'd just rather get a head start on a guy, if Reid believes there's a guy he can groom. Of course, it's all moot if these guys flame out at The Combine or Pro Days but as of today, I truly hope they get a guy on Day 1 and if not, on Day 2. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I'm not of the mind that Watson is a first round talent and frankly Mahomes has enough flaws that in many years (if not most) he's not a first rounder either. How is Trubisky's resume appreciably better than Lynch's and Trubisky's considered a surefire top 10 and potential #1 overall.
Trubisky played well in the very tough ACC, whereas Lynch played in the American Athletic conference.
I've seen nothing from Lynch that makes me believe he'll ever be a quality NFL starter, let alone, a Franchise QB. [Reply]
I was intrigued by Peterman but he is essentially Alex Smith with a weaker arm according to the evaluations I've read. So people want to move on from Alex Smith to Alex Smith 2.0. Great! [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Right, overdrafts will always happen at QB.
But that's when you start to talk about depth of classes to determine just how egregious that overdraft will be.
I'm not of the mind that Watson is a first round talent and frankly Mahomes has enough flaws that in many years (if not most) he's not a first rounder either. How is Trubisky's resume appreciably better than Lynch's and Trubisky's considered a surefire top 10 and potential #1 overall.
This is an objectively bad quarterback class and as such, the degree of the overdraft is going to be worse this year than many other years.
Next year's top QBs are going to be a couple of legit top-end QBs, IMO, with Rosen and Darnold. Now that doesn't mean that we'll get them, but it means the quality of guy you're looking at in the teens/20s is going to be more like, I dunno, Baker Mayfield or Mason Rudolph (and I'm still beyond pissed that Rudolph returned). And your wild card isn't a potential game manager like Peterman but rather a guy like Josh Allen.
It's a rising tide thing; when there are legit franchise alterers at the top of the QB class, that trickles down to the wild-cards and their availability at the back of the first or early 2nd.
There are valid reasons to wait until next year for the QB, especially if you can engineer a winning trade-down that nets us as much as a 2nd or 3rd in the '18 draft that can be used to move up a bit if needed. I'm not convinced I'd do it, but if my options are Peterman or Webb in the 2nd this year or wait until 2018, I'd go with the 2018 option in a heartbeat.
I think it really depends on what the interviews yield, but I think either way if you aren't picking in the top 15 then you're getting a project.
But obviously there's an exception to the rule. Derek Carr, Russell Wilson, Andy Dalton, Dak Prescott. Is there one of those guys?
Don't sleep on Nate Peterman. It's early but I really like his game [Reply]
If they decide they don't like any of the QB's that have already been mentioned, I would like them to take a shot at Dobbs on day 3. His athleticism, intelligence, and arm strength make him an intriguing project to match up with Reid. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
I think it really depends on what the interviews yield, but I think either way if you aren't picking in the top 15 then you're getting a project.
But obviously there's an exception to the rule. Derek Carr, Russell Wilson, Andy Dalton, Dak Prescott. Is there one of those guys?
Don't sleep on Nate Peterman. It's early but I really like his game
Peterman is the most realistic possibility for the Chiefs under the current regime. He's the closest QB to Alex Smith you're going to get. That isn't a stab at Alex this time, he just is. He's smart. He's pro ready. He's going to play within the offense. He doesn't have a big-tiem arm, but he can make the throws. I think with Peterman, you'd have a guy that at least will take a shot more often. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
Peterman is the most realistic possibility for the Chiefs under the current regime. He's the closest QB to Alex Smith you're going to get. That isn't a stab at Alex this time, he just is. He's smart. He's pro ready. He's going to play within the offense. He doesn't have a big-tiem arm, but he can make the throws. I think with Peterman, you'd have a guy that at least will take a shot more often.
Not that I disagree but since they have a year, I'd rather see Mahomes as the pick.
I like the Peterman comparisons to Cousins, because I think Cousins would have won the Super Bowl if he was a Chief this year.
But regardless, get one high and get him going. [Reply]
Originally Posted by MahiMike:
Kid's a winner. That's all that counts. Bucky Brooks has him going to us in 1st round.
Winning in college means nothing if the QB wasn't playing under center, didn't read defenses, isn't tall enough, doesn't have an NFL frame and isn't smart enough to handle complicated offenses.
Very few "winners" from the college game have success in the NFL, which is why so many teams have a need at QB each and every year. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
Winning in college means nothing if the QB wasn't playing under center, didn't read defenses, isn't tall enough, doesn't have an NFL frame and isn't smart enough to handle complicated offenses.
Very few "winners" from the college game have success in the NFL, which is why so many teams have a need at QB each and every year.
Nate Peterman went into DeShaun Watson's house and beat him.
Also beat Penn State, Virginia Teach on the road, Georgia Tech on the road, Louisville, etc.
He can read defenses, he's mobile, he's confident. Goddamn does he remind me of Kirk Cousins but he seems more confident. [Reply]
Originally Posted by philfree:
I was intrigued by Peterman but he is essentially Alex Smith with a weaker arm according to the evaluations I've read. So people want to move on from Alex Smith to Alex Smith 2.0. Great!
The upshot to Peterman is the cost control.
IF he's Alex Smith, at least he's Alex Smith on the cheap. The problem is that he's only cheap for 4 years, one of which will be on the bench, the next will probably be a year of growing pains. So you get 2 years of cheap production before you find yourself right back in this hellish QB purgetory of paying the price of a #1 WR and a starting defensive back for a mediocre QB.
And then a whole lot of first round playoff flameouts. [Reply]