Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Drew Lock Thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by skeeter01 View Post

    I wouldn't mind Mariotta coming here.
    Remember Drew Lock is the 5th best QB in the Division behind

    Mahomes
    Herbert
    Carr
    Mariotta
    Lock

    Raiders have cap issues and no way they can afford a 10m a year back up

    Comment


    • Originally posted by arapaho View Post
      i sit here and still remained baffled at the drew lock hate...some saying he's proven to be a bust, he cant play, yada yada yada

      what i see is a young qb with all the physical tools you could want in a qb

      a qb who missed the majority of 2020 training camp after being injured, missed 2020 preseason, couldnt practice with the team at all season untill week 11, then finished the season 4-1 as a starter, who then

      had to learn his second offensive scheme,with no spring camps, no ota's, no player contact, and then starting on the leagues youngest offense...in a new scheme, and losing his #1 wr in week two, playing a 2020 back up wr as his #1 and two rookies as his #2 and #3,

      a offense that the oldest most experienced skill player was RB melvin gordon in his 6th year! and dotson on the line in his 12th...a oline that had only bolles and risner that played together, center, RG and Rt all new to the team

      patrick 3rd
      jeudy rook
      hamler rook
      hamilton 3rd
      cleveland rook
      fant 2nd
      fumigala 3rd
      bolles, 4th
      risner 2nd
      cush rook
      glascow 5th
      muti rook
      albert o ROOK
      dotson 12th
      lock 2nd

      and then you have what was obvious throughout the season a scheme that really wasnt the greatest in playcalling, in playing to locks strengths and creativity, 1st down run up the gut, secnd down run, 3rd down long pass...not until late in the season did he finnally start getting creative in the run game and short passing game to get the qb going....some call it dumbing down the offense...i call it putting a young offense in a position to move the ball

      and desite that...Lock who has only 18 games played in, 17 he finished...think about it he has for all intents and purposes finished his rookie campaign as a starting qb

      17 games, 3953 passing yards, 23 tds, 18 ints

      if we land watson great!! if we get a quality vet to push and help lock...great

      but can we just let the quy play at least 2 seasons of games before calling him a bust

      it just reminds me of elways first couple seasons...fans calling him a bust after being benched as a rookie...nobody willing to let the guy grow and learn

      Great post!! Finally someone puts all the facts out there. Give the man some time, we can all see signs of a good QB, only thing is inconsistency and that I believe, develops over time. Watson is a great player but we would be giving up multiple first and second round picks where we have major needs at CB, MLB, OT, all which are immediate needs and next year we're probably looking at HB and safety. In order for Watson to be successful here he will need to make the playoffs and if we have all these holes that need to be filled with talent from 3rd round on, we might be in deeper trouble than we are now. It would be a waste of a QB's prime years if we can't put talent around him.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by arapaho View Post
        i sit here and still remained baffled at the drew lock hate...some saying he's proven to be a bust, he cant play, yada yada yada

        what i see is a young qb with all the physical tools you could want in a qb

        a qb who missed the majority of 2020 training camp after being injured, missed 2020 preseason, couldnt practice with the team at all season untill week 11, then finished the season 4-1 as a starter, who then

        had to learn his second offensive scheme,with no spring camps, no ota's, no player contact, and then starting on the leagues youngest offense...in a new scheme, and losing his #1 wr in week two, playing a 2020 back up wr as his #1 and two rookies as his #2 and #3,

        a offense that the oldest most experienced skill player was RB melvin gordon in his 6th year! and dotson on the line in his 12th...a oline that had only bolles and risner that played together, center, RG and Rt all new to the team

        patrick 3rd
        jeudy rook
        hamler rook
        hamilton 3rd
        cleveland rook
        fant 2nd
        fumigala 3rd
        bolles, 4th
        risner 2nd
        cush rook
        glascow 5th
        muti rook
        albert o ROOK
        dotson 12th
        lock 2nd

        and then you have what was obvious throughout the season a scheme that really wasnt the greatest in playcalling, in playing to locks strengths and creativity, 1st down run up the gut, secnd down run, 3rd down long pass...not until late in the season did he finnally start getting creative in the run game and short passing game to get the qb going....some call it dumbing down the offense...i call it putting a young offense in a position to move the ball

        and desite that...Lock who has only 18 games played in, 17 he finished...think about it he has for all intents and purposes finished his rookie campaign as a starting qb

        17 games, 3953 passing yards, 23 tds, 18 ints

        if we land watson great!! if we get a quality vet to push and help lock...great

        but can we just let the quy play at least 2 seasons of games before calling him a bust

        it just reminds me of elways first couple seasons...fans calling him a bust after being benched as a rookie...nobody willing to let the guy grow and learn
        This is such a fantastic read, you laid it out great 🙌 I haven't been on here in a while and don't know if we can give out CPs anymore, but cheers to you 🤙🏽
        Last edited by Broncoboy6; 02-19-2021, 01:42 AM.
        HE>i

        Comment


        • I still believe if you're going to commit to developing a Young quarterback, you have to give that quarterback at least three years.
          (unless he completely stinks)
          You can't get all willy-nilly, hysterical, and over-emotional, while developing a Young quarterback.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Capt. Jack View Post
            I still believe if you're going to commit to developing a Young quarterback, you have to give that quarterback at least three years.
            (unless he completely stinks)
            You can't get all willy-nilly, hysterical, and over-emotional, while developing a Young quarterback.
            I appreciate the sensibility in your posts.
            Furthermore, I'd like to cite the NFL's draft and combine prospect profile on Drew Lock:
            will be a starter within his first two seasons.

            The Flacco and covid situations surely haven't helped.

            https://www.nfl.com/prospects/drew-l...c-a47f8df1d41b

            Comment


            • Originally posted by arapaho View Post
              i sit here and still remained baffled at the drew lock hate...some saying he's proven to be a bust, he cant play, yada yada yada

              what i see is a young qb with all the physical tools you could want in a qb

              a qb who missed the majority of 2020 training camp after being injured, missed 2020 preseason, couldnt practice with the team at all season untill week 11, then finished the season 4-1 as a starter, who then

              had to learn his second offensive scheme,with no spring camps, no ota's, no player contact, and then starting on the leagues youngest offense...in a new scheme, and losing his #1 wr in week two, playing a 2020 back up wr as his #1 and two rookies as his #2 and #3,

              a offense that the oldest most experienced skill player was RB melvin gordon in his 6th year! and dotson on the line in his 12th...a oline that had only bolles and risner that played together, center, RG and Rt all new to the team

              patrick 3rd
              jeudy rook
              hamler rook
              hamilton 3rd
              cleveland rook
              fant 2nd
              fumigala 3rd
              bolles, 4th
              risner 2nd
              cush rook
              glascow 5th
              muti rook
              albert o ROOK
              dotson 12th
              lock 2nd

              and then you have what was obvious throughout the season a scheme that really wasnt the greatest in playcalling, in playing to locks strengths and creativity, 1st down run up the gut, secnd down run, 3rd down long pass...not until late in the season did he finnally start getting creative in the run game and short passing game to get the qb going....some call it dumbing down the offense...i call it putting a young offense in a position to move the ball

              and desite that...Lock who has only 18 games played in, 17 he finished...think about it he has for all intents and purposes finished his rookie campaign as a starting qb

              17 games, 3953 passing yards, 23 tds, 18 ints

              if we land watson great!! if we get a quality vet to push and help lock...great

              but can we just let the quy play at least 2 seasons of games before calling him a bust

              it just reminds me of elways first couple seasons...fans calling him a bust after being benched as a rookie...nobody willing to let the guy grow and learn
              You make a good case. To be sure, I was feeling really good about Lock in his rookie year, going 4 and 1, and looking the part...even with a number of folks picking his technique apart, and for other things. This year I was expecting some progression. His QB Rate dropped by over 15 points to 75.4, and he had almost the same number of pics as TD passes (16 TDs/15 Pics). And it was a nit but some of his actions on the field were less to my liking..kind of immature, even unfocused it seems....but that's just me. It just didn't line up with who I thought he was. That does not mean he is near done, and has little or no bearing on his future success. He can grow.

              But I feel that we need to know soon if he is on the right track, rather than regression, because it comes back to the same old story here...we have not had a good O since the height of The Manning years, and without a great D, we not win the crown. And I just don't see us having a great D within a couple of seasons without some upgrades.

              So for us to move forward, it's time to seriously "lock" in a good QB. I strongly believe that teams searching for QBs year after year are losing so much strategic opportunity as well as draft capital and potential loss of star non QBs. Take a look at all the great players drafted after our QB selections over the last decade and imagine how much better we'd be if we could have had them...and not "potential" starting QBs. I know, it's not a perfect science, but we did go thru a lot of QBs, young and vet. And here we are, some distance from our last playoff year.

              Anyway, I do like your stats/info. It is definitely a young team in so many ways. And take heart folks, if you can keep the nucleus of that young base together, imagine how powerful they might be in the not too distant future, with all that time to grow together and develop harmony.

              Comment


              • I heard on the radio something to the effect that 22 of the 1st round Qbs drafted in the last 8 - 10 yrs aren't on the same team or not even in the league anymore .

                Comment


                • Originally posted by orange crush75 View Post
                  I heard on the radio something to the effect that 22 of the 1st round Qbs drafted in the last 8 - 10 yrs aren't on the same team or not even in the league anymore .
                  2011: Cam Newton #1; Jake Locker #8; Blaine Gabbert #10; Christian Ponder #12.

                  2012: Andrew Luck #1; RGIII #2; Ryan Tannehill #8; Brandon Weeden #22.

                  2013: E.J. Manuel #16

                  2014: Blake Bortles #3; Johnny Manziel #22; Teddy Bridgewater #32.

                  2015: Jameis Winston #1; Marcus Mariota #2.

                  2016: Jared Goff #1; Carson Wentz #2; Paxton Lynch #26.

                  2017: Mitch Trubisky #2; Patrick Mahomes #10; DeShaun Watson #12.

                  2018: Baker Mayfield #1; Sam Darnold #3; Josh Allen #7; Josh Rosen #10; Lamar Jackson #32.

                  2019: Kyler Murray #1; Daniel Jones #6; Dwayne Haskins #15.

                  2020: Joe Burrow #1; Tua Tagovailoa #5; Justin Herbert #6; Jordan Love #26.

                  Looks like the number is 19?
                  Last edited by samparnell; 02-19-2021, 09:33 AM.
                  "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by samparnell View Post

                    2011: Cam Newton #1; Jake Locker #8; Blaine Gabbert #10; Christian Ponder #12.

                    2012: Andrew Luck #1; RGIII #2; Ryan Tannehill #8; Brandon Weeden #22.

                    2013: E.J. Manuel #16

                    2014: Blake Bortles #3; Johnny Manziel #22; Teddy Bridgewater #32.

                    2015: Jameis Winston #1; Marcus Mariota #2.

                    2016: Jared Goff #1; Carson Wentz #2; Paxton Lynch #26.

                    2017: Mitch Trubisky #2; Patrick Mahomes #10; DeShaun Watson #12.

                    2018: Baker Mayfield #1; Sam Darnold #3; Josh Allen #7; Josh Rosen #10; Lamar Jackson #32.

                    2019: Kyler Murray #1; Daniel Jones #6; Dwayne Haskins #15.

                    2020: Joe Burrow #1; Tua Tagovailoa #5; Justin Herbert #6; Jordan Love #26.

                    Looks like the number is 19?
                    This is what I posted...from Judy Battista, NFL Network

                    With the trade of Wentz, NOT A SINGLE QUARTERBACK drafted in the first round from 2009 to 2016 is still with his original team. That's zero for 22, a batting average that would get someone fired if everyone weren't in the same boat.

                    I assume she has detailed analysis.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by CanDB View Post

                      This is what I posted...from Judy Battista, NFL Network

                      With the trade of Wentz, NOT A SINGLE QUARTERBACK drafted in the first round from 2009 to 2016 is still with his original team. That's zero for 22, a batting average that would get someone fired if everyone weren't in the same boat.

                      I assume she has detailed analysis.
                      Adding ...

                      2009: Matthew Stafford #1; Mark Sanchez #5; Josh Freeman #17.

                      2010: Sam Bradford #1; Tim Tebow #25.

                      Right. Twenty-two QBs drafted in the first round from 2009 through 2016. None are with the team that drafted them. Looks like eleven of the twenty-two are out of football? Of those QBs drafted in the first round since 2016, Trubisky, Watson and Darnold could conceivably end up on another team this year. Rosen and Haskins already have. Rosen is with his fourth team.
                      Last edited by samparnell; 02-19-2021, 09:55 AM. Reason: add
                      "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by jazzbodog View Post

                        And, one of my favorite sayings are from Mark Twain: "There are lies, damn lies, and then there's statistics."
                        Fancy quotes aside though, I get what you're saying. People use inconclusive statistics to support their argument. At the same time though, it's important to be objective with our responses.
                        Last edited by Spice 1; 02-19-2021, 10:58 AM.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Spice 1 View Post

                          Fancy quotes aside though, I get what you're saying. People use inconclusive statistics to support their argument. At the same time though, it's important to be objective with our responses.
                          Stats are funny. They do provide facts to a debate, but you can fix stats to fit any argument. Positive or bad, cherry picking can be done to suit whichever side. Everyone that uses stats in any degree, has done this, even if it is unknowingly cherry picking. Sports media does it. Before Colin Cowherd makes some outlandish hot take, he cherry picks a stat to make what he says believable. The casual viewer will take what he says as fact, but he provided a stat. While sports junkies will pull up google to look at those stats and notice he cherry picked, he created a window that suits the argument and went with it.
                          sigpic
                          Adopted Broncos:
                          EmmanuelSanders

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by InsaneBlaze23 View Post

                            Stats are funny. They do provide facts to a debate, but you can fix stats to fit any argument. Positive or bad, cherry picking can be done to suit whichever side. Everyone that uses stats in any degree, has done this, even if it is unknowingly cherry picking. Sports media does it. Before Colin Cowherd makes some outlandish hot take, he cherry picks a stat to make what he says believable. The casual viewer will take what he says as fact, but he provided a stat. While sports junkies will pull up google to look at those stats and notice he cherry picked, he created a window that suits the argument and went with it.
                            I love stats, but at the same time I hate them, because of how they've essentially become the be all and end all of so many debates. For instance in hockey there are all sorts of new age metrics, and the people who believe in them really believe in them. To the point where they'll take some nameless 4th line player and insist that it's a crime that player isn't getting more time because their expected goals per 60 minutes is so high.

                            What they leave out is that that player can't be played anymore than that because their level of play drops off drastically. And the player just scored two goals in the last 5 games while not having more playing time so their expected goals per 60 minutes has become way out of whack.

                            Just one example, but people have started trusting numbers over what they actually see and what's actually happened and why it actually happened.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by orange crush75 View Post
                              I heard on the radio something to the effect that 22 of the 1st round Qbs drafted in the last 8 - 10 yrs aren't on the same team or not even in the league anymore .
                              Wow that makes you want to run out an draft a 1st round QB, sheesh

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Butler By'Note View Post

                                I love stats, but at the same time I hate them, because of how they've essentially become the be all and end all of so many debates. For instance in hockey there are all sorts of new age metrics, and the people who believe in them really believe in them. To the point where they'll take some nameless 4th line player and insist that it's a crime that player isn't getting more time because their expected goals per 60 minutes is so high.

                                What they leave out is that that player can't be played anymore than that because their level of play drops off drastically. And the player just scored two goals in the last 5 games while not having more playing time so their expected goals per 60 minutes has become way out of whack.

                                Just one example, but people have started trusting numbers over what they actually see and what's actually happened and why it actually happened.
                                I agree, it's definitely an easy out when it comes to stats. I get into debates often bc I call players great that don't have the numbers people tend to put stock in. Like calling Larry Fitzgerald one of the 5 best wide outs ever. But he doesn't have the glam Moss, Rice, Owens, etc have. His best QB was an aged Kurt Warner. I've also said things like Pavel Datsyuk is one of the most skilled hockey players, but he doesn't have Crosby numbers, so people go with that. You gotta have Crosby, or Ovie numbers to be called one of anything.

                                The eye test has kinda died because we've become obsessed with numbers. Baseball and analytics are a couple. People are getting jobs in the MLB not for anything other than predicting, projecting numbers.
                                sigpic
                                Adopted Broncos:
                                EmmanuelSanders

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X