Friday, 26 March 2010

Mel Kiper and Todd McShay talk draft

17 comments:

Micah said...

I like how McShay says this is a very poor QB class and because of that some QBs are going to get drafted higher than they really should. They even reference the Mike Holmgren comment about Clausen.

Rob Staton said...

I don't necessarily disagree with McShay. It is a poor QB class. If McCoy goes in the second round like a lot of people suggest, that'll be a major reach. Tebow will go early because of the intangibles, but any other guy would be a mid-late rounder. LeFevour - I said I wouldn't draft him after scouting the guy (that's archived on the blog). I've never been sold on Clausen/

Micah said...

Ya, I think you've been pretty consistent on your feelings about this year's QBs. Even though you have Clausen drafted high, and have brought up the possibility of the Hawks drafting him, you also always made sure to say "IF the Hawks (or any other team) thinks he is a franchiseQB". You never really said YOU think he is one.

Keep up the good work on the blog man.

c-hawker said...

I think Bradford is the only (potential) franchise QB in this class. I also think Tebow or McCoy have a chance to be as good as Clausen, from a developmental standpoint.
Kafka, Crompton, Nichols, Brown, LaFevour, and Skelton have the potential to be good back-ups. There could very well be sleeper in this group.
LaFevour is better than you give him credit for, Rob.
Keep up the good work guy's, love your site.

Rob Staton said...

I see LeFevour as a huge project and agree completely with what McShay says in the video. In all honesty, I wouldn't take him at all. I don't think there's enough to work with. If a team drafts him high hoping to start any time soon (eg 2 years down the line) - good luck with that.

Anonymous said...

Well lets put it this way, i think Clausen is going to be a better QB than Mark Sanchez.

Mr. Chriss said...

That's not really saying much. Mark Sanchez isn't a great QB.

akki said...

If Carroll/Schneider think the same way McShay does about qbs, then I guess acquiring Whitehurst is more defensible. Put it this way - should Hasselbeck get injured again next year, and the Seahawks determine that he's not dependable enough to resign, then Whitehurst is as ready as he'll ever be to take over, while Tebow, McCoy, and Lefevour almost certainly won't be ready.

Lefevour strikes me as Colt Brennan with a weaker level of competition, and Brennan went in the 6th round.

ChavaC said...

I don't think it's a weak qb class. You have two solid first round prospects and several latter rounders who potentially project as starters (McCoy, tebow, brown). Every year qb is nitpicked to death, especially by idiots like mcshay. He has had clausen as a2nd round prospect the entire year ( the reasons change week to week, and each makes less sense). I mean when was the last stellar qb class? 2004?

Rob Staton said...

Chavac - I have sympathy with McShay's opinion on Clausen though. I like to think I personally went into some detail as to why Clausen concerned me. I don't believe Colt McCoy will become a starting QB. It'll take a lot for Tebow to do it - it's only the character of the man that makes it even remotely likely. Brown is a big project. This year and last year, the QB class has been weak.

It gets said every year - but I genuinly believe that there will be much greater depth in the next draft. There's about five guys who could go in round one if they have a good year.

RJR said...

The thing is, this draft class is really deep.

Last year a lot of people thought Jevan Snead was a first round pick, now he is underrated.
I KNOW he had a bad year. I think he has the same amount of talent as Stafford.

I went to ball state and Nate Davis IMO is going to be a solid starter. This kid has it all.

I've said it before and I'll say it again... We're horrible at picking quarterbacks. Everybody is. It's a hard thing to pick

The draft "experts," remember, took Tom Brady in the sixth round, Joe Montana in the third, but Alex Smith AND Ryan leaf in the first round.

ChavaC said...

Rob, I know you're not a fan of Clausen and I respect going against the grain if you feel a certain way about a prospect. But you and McShay are down on Clausen for different reasons. McShay consistently sites "sources" about Clausen's horrible attitude despite good interviews at the combine and commendations from teammates. He argued for months Clausen wasn't physically an NFL starter (and stopped since the combine). He cites Clausen's minor foot injury (which he played through without a hit on performance), as "serious injury concerns", and I have seen him throw out some real dingers like knocking him for being too well coached or hitting his potential (because 28 touchdowns and 4 picks is such a low ceiling coming out of college). McShay is the epitome of the overzealous draftnik.

As for the 2nd rounders, sure none of them are great starter prospects. But when are second rounders ever expected to become starters? They are taken as either backups, or 2-3 year projects, and there are several year. And I'm not high on McCoy either, but you couldn't see him doing what Orton is doing in Denver? Or VY in Tennessee? I think he has a chance.

My point is that compare these guys to the second round prospects of the last five years, and compare Clausen/Bradford to the first round prospects of the five years. It's a wash. Everybody had questions marks. Flacco was a 1-AA wonder, Ryan was a senior with low upside that never learned to avoid picks, Rodgers fell all the way to the end of the first, Cutler was a wild card. So if you're going to call this a poor QB class, you had better be prepared to call the last 5 poor as well. And if that's the case its simply an average class. Every class gets compared to the next and it always looks inferior before the guys from the next year actually have to perform/declare. I mean you say next year could have 5 first round prospects, but this year was to supposed to have five too (Locker, Mallet, Clausen, Bradford, Snead).

Kip Earlywine said...

After watching that, I have to wonder if Rob is secretly Todd McShay. The opinions on QB's could hardly be more alike.

Ben said...

So the community mock draft is going on at Mocking the Draft and John Morgan just had the Seahawks pick Taylor Mays at #6 because Carroll values big safeties:
http://www.mockingthedraft.com/2010/3/25/1387179/2010-sb-nation-nfl-mock-draft#comments
Discussion ensues about whether or not the pick was made in good faith.

Kip Earlywine said...

Yeah, it was talked about in the comments of one of the POTD's. Mays is absolutely on Seattle's radar, but everyone knows he'll be there at #14.

Morgan tried to deny that he's insulting Mock drafts or taking a stab at Carroll, but he's made anti-mock draft comments in the past and his feelings about Carroll/Schneider are transparent and well documented, even though he strangely doesn't seem to think so.

My guess is, he did it "just for sh*ts" because he's become tired of mock drafts and/or wanted to see the reaction it would get, then he covered himself with an explanation to at least in theory, stave off accusations of trolling and disrespect for the process. His explanation is reasonable, although it does not explain why he took Mays at #6 instead of #14.

I think some of the comments over there have him to dead to rights, (like Ninjasocks), but like an accused criminal, Morgan is kind of in a position where he can't admit guilt on this one. Morgan has perhaps overstepped his bounds on this one by bringing controversy to another site.

Morgan is suddenly and suspiciously taking a more sympathetic approach to Mays, posting a blog update today. I can't help but think its to cover his own butt and his pride. Will Morgan still be so friendly about the prospect if, God forbid, Mays is actually taken at #6? I'm guessing there would be a meltdown over there. Not that I'd blame them. I'd have a meltdown too.

Mays is likely to be on Seattle's radar, for reasons John mentions and for reasons Kyle mentioned. Just not at #6... at least not if you think our FO has the competence to evaluate draft stock properly.

Kip Earlywine said...

That's not to say I think any of Morgan's statements on Mays are incorrect. In fact, I thought his post today on Mays was a pretty good one.

http://www.fieldgulls.com/2010/3/26/1391755/the-taylor-mays-problem#storyjump

Rob Staton said...

The Seahawks will not take Taylor Mays at #6. It's not even half likely.