PDA

View Full Version : Does anyone really believe Quinn will really be available with the 9th pick ?



Captain Lou
02-22-2007, 12:53 PM
Teams drafting in front of us



1: Raiders: NEED A QB
2: Lions: NEED A QB
3: Buccaneers: Simms isn't the answer, NEED A QB
4: Browns: are the browns sold on incumbant Charlie Frye, thin ice
5: Cardinals: Matt Lienart, not drafting qb
6: Redskins: Jason Campbell not drafting qb
7: Vikings: NEED A QB
8: Texans: Looks like Carr may be gone, NEED A QB
9: Dolphins: ?


So inconclusion 6 of the 8 (Frye situation could go either way)teams picking before us need a qb more than we do. If Quinn is as good as some of you believe do you really believe he'll still there when we pick ?

ckparrothead
02-22-2007, 12:56 PM
The Vikings drafted a QB in the 2nd round last year. You may say they need a QB, but for all intents and purposes that is not true. I would be comfortable saying that IF a team has ever drafted a first round QB the year after drafting a second round QB, then it only happened maybe once in the history of the league.

Crypt Keeper
02-22-2007, 01:01 PM
I highly doubt he will fall to #9. If Miami gets him, it will be because they traded up.

DolfanTom
02-22-2007, 01:06 PM
I'd give it a 40% chance now. It's possible, but a lot would have to happen to make it possible, i.e. trades, signings that make QB less of a priority for the eight teams in front of us.

I'm all about trading up if that's what it takes! I know that's not popular (and I usually would agree) but that's my take on Quinn's potential.

fishyanks
02-22-2007, 01:06 PM
Teams drafting in front of us



1: Raiders: NEED A QB
2: Lions: NEED A QB
3: Buccaneers: Simms isn't the answer, NEED A QB
4: Browns: are the browns sold on incumbant Charlie Frye, thin ice
5: Cardinals: Matt Lienart, not drafting qb
6: Redskins: Jason Campbell not drafting qb
7: Vikings: NEED A QB
8: Texans: Looks like Carr may be gone, NEED A QB
9: Dolphins: ?


So inconclusion 6 of the 8 (Frye situation could go either way)teams picking before us need a qb more than we do. If Quinn is as good as some of you believe do you really believe he'll still there when we pick ?

Lions (Matt Millen) cannot afford another QB bust pic that high. The fans already organized a rally to fire him. So they will go safe in the draft and you know QB's are usually hit or miss. Browns need a RB more than a QB at this time (Drougns is not getting it done) and AP is too good to pass up. They would go o-line before QB if Thomas is there-that line is in shambles.
The bucs have draft pics and money tied up in Simms and Grad and CJ will be staring them in the face. They also are desparate on the DL. My mother ran for 120 and 2 TDS against the skins D-line so they will not take QB. Arizona obviously doesn't need a qb. Minny just drafted a QB and are the most likely to trade up with Cleveland for CJ. Lastly, the wildcard is Jake Plummer and David Carr. They are really the only threat I see right now. Also, every year some combine freak jumps into the top ten and screws every scenario up-so take my post with a grain of salt.

aerokev
02-22-2007, 01:07 PM
Teams drafting in front of us



1: Raiders: NEED A QB
2: Lions: NEED A QB
3: Buccaneers: Simms isn't the answer, NEED A QB
4: Browns: are the browns sold on incumbant Charlie Frye, thin ice
5: Cardinals: Matt Lienart, not drafting qb
6: Redskins: Jason Campbell not drafting qb
7: Vikings: NEED A QB
8: Texans: Looks like Carr may be gone, NEED A QB
9: Dolphins: ?


So inconclusion 6 of the 8 (Frye situation could go either way)teams picking before us need a qb more than we do. If Quinn is as good as some of you believe do you really believe he'll still there when we pick ?

i don't believe he will be there, but some of the teams you mentioned are apparently gun shy about picking a QB that early like detroit.

also throw in the fact that some of the top players are also in the mix that teams don't want to pass on either like c. johnson (every team mentioned can use except the cards), adams, and j. thomas who look like safer picks. also what team couldn't use peterson except for the bucs if they are sold on caddie?

Finsfan1984
02-22-2007, 01:09 PM
The Vikings drafted a QB in the 2nd round last year. You may say they need a QB, but for all intents and purposes that is not true. I would be comfortable saying that IF a team has ever drafted a first round QB the year after drafting a second round QB, then it only happened maybe once in the history of the league.

And the Texans are likely to get Plummer. The Browns, Lions, and Bucs are likely to get any combo of Thomas, Peterson, and Johnson, so that hopefully knocks them out of the loop.

Elliott 1
02-22-2007, 01:09 PM
Don't the Vikings have one of the best offensive lines in the NFL?

If that's true it doesn't leave much room for execuses by their QB's does it.

If they don't make a move in free agency, they will be looking real hard at Quinn.

Psychosikes
02-22-2007, 01:10 PM
Hey CK, i can't ever recall a team taking a qb in the first/second rounds of successive years... but we did just invest (not draft) a second on DC last year, and I am one of many dolfans who would love to use our first on brady this year. Just thought that was kind of funny.

Captain Lou
02-22-2007, 01:11 PM
The Vikings drafted a QB in the 2nd round last year. You may say they need a QB, but for all intents and purposes that is not true. I would be comfortable saying that IF a team has ever drafted a first round QB the year after drafting a second round QB, then it only happened maybe once in the history of the league.


Granted. You counter argument makes sense. However, there is still 5 more teams likely to pick a qb. I don't want Quinn, but I could live with it. I think he's a better option than Russell. I'd like to draft someone at a position who helps us win now. I know many of you don't like CP at qb. However, he's our best chance. He came back too early last year, but can blame him he's a competitor. He wants to play, and this year he'll have something to prove.

Finsfan1984
02-22-2007, 01:16 PM
Granted. You counter argument makes sense. However, there is still 5 more teams likely to pick a qb. I don't want Quinn, but I could live with it. I think he's a better option than Russell. I'd like to draft someone at a position who helps us win now. I know many of you don't like CP at qb. However, he's our best chance. He came back too early last year, but can blame him he's a competitor. He wants to play, and this year he'll have something to prove.

I agree with you that Quinn is the better pro prospect than Russell. And I also think that CP will be our starting QB for at least this year if not another year. I just think that a young QB for the future in maybe a year or two would be great long term for the team. But CP definitly needs to get fully rehabbed and have a good year for us.

DolfanTom
02-22-2007, 01:19 PM
But CP definitly needs to get fully rehabbed and have a good year for us.This is the only way we make the playoffs in '07. But we definitely have to have an eye on the future too, rather than pass on Quinn and try to live off what could end up being short-term success under 'Pepper.

VT Dolphan
02-22-2007, 01:20 PM
I'd give it a 40% chance now. It's possible, but a lot would have to happen to make it possible, i.e. trades, signings that make QB less of a priority for the eight teams in front of us.

I'm all about trading up if that's what it takes! I know that's not popular (and I usually would agree) but that's my take on Quinn's potential.

I agree completely. I hate trading up, but giving up our first and third for a franchise QB doesn't sound to bad to me.

MassFinFan06
02-22-2007, 01:20 PM
I feel we will have to trade up to guarantee we grab him.......may fall to #9 or we get him after someone else picks him up.....like Manning a couple years ago!
It all depends on what Cam sees as a priority.....he seems to indicate QB is one of our top concerns and it IS!!!!:lifter:

Maybe Culpepper is our answer....yet to be proven....I would sleep better at night if we land Quinn!:D

Motion
02-22-2007, 01:24 PM
Don't the Vikings have one of the best offensive lines in the NFL?

If that's true it doesn't leave much room for execuses by their QB's does it.

If they don't make a move in free agency, they will be looking real hard at Quinn.

Minnesota needs a receiving threat more than anything.

DolfanTom
02-22-2007, 01:30 PM
I agree completely. I hate trading up, but giving up our first and third for a franchise QB doesn't sound to bad to me.Whatever it takes!

I feel a lot of teams will look back at last year's draft and wonder why the heck they passed on guys like Leinart and Cutler. I think Quinn is better than both ultimately.

The teams that pick before Quinn goes will - someday down the line - have to explain why they passed on him!! Like the 26 teams that picked before Marino!

darsey
02-22-2007, 01:31 PM
If we trade up to get him then I will be shocked.

WelcomeBack
02-22-2007, 01:32 PM
It's absolutely possible.

Not all those teams will go after a QB, especially with some hitting the market for them.

If I remember correctly, Texans want Plummer. How would Plummer feel to go back with his old coach Kubiak, and Kubiak screws him over (like Shanahan) by getting a first round QB that will probably beat him out by mid-season?

I've heard Lions organization wants to stick with Kitna, so that could mean Joe Thomas for them.

Browns have more pressing needs, and Adrian Peterson can go to them.

I still think Simms will be a Buc, and if not, Gradkowski looks pretty good.

Vikings got Tavaris Jackson last year.

If those teams go QB, I think it'll be later.

That leaves Oakland and Miami, JaMarcus Russell and Brady Quinn. I do believe we have a chance. :)

DolfanTom
02-22-2007, 01:34 PM
It's absolutely possible.

Not all those teams will go after a QB, especially with some hitting the market for them.

If I remember correctly, Texans want Plummer. How would Plummer feel to go back with his old coach Kubiak, and Kubiak screws him over (like Shanahan) by getting a first round QB that will probably beat him out by mid-season?

I've heard Lions organization wants to stick with Kitna, so that could mean Joe Thomas for them.

Browns have more pressing needs, and Adrian Peterson can go to them.

I still think Simms will be a Buc, and if not, Gradkowski looks solid.

Vikings got Tavaris Jackson last year.

That leaves Oakland and Miami, JaMarcus Russell and Brady Quinn. I do believe we have a chance. :)This would be one of the more likely scenarios for us getting Quinn if we don't trade up. None of the above is etched in stone, of course, but it's all possible.

WelcomeBack
02-22-2007, 01:37 PM
This would be one of the more likely scenarios for us getting Quinn if we don't trade up. None of the above is etched in stone, of course, but it's all possible.

Of course things change. It's just all a possibility. Not saying it will happen, but Quinn could be a Fin next year.

It's not a huge deal to me really. If we don't get Quinn in round 1, I wouldn't mind Drew Stanton or Trent Edwards later on.

Elliott 1
02-22-2007, 01:37 PM
What if Cleveland signs Jamal Lewis?
What if Detroit acquires Max Starks?
What if the Vikings sign Ashley Lelie or Stallworth?

A lot things could change one way or the other.

Motion
02-22-2007, 01:39 PM
What if Cleveland signs Jamal Lewis?
What if Detroit acquires Max Starks?
What if the Vikings sign Ashley Lelie or Stallworth?

A lot things could change one way or the other.

Obviously, thats why Mocks before FA are pure guesses.

WelcomeBack
02-22-2007, 01:40 PM
What if Cleveland signs Jamal Lewis?
What if Detroit acquires Max Starks?
What if the Vikings sign Ashley Lelie or Stallworth?

A lot things could change one way or the other.

Not saying it's going to happen. I said it's possible :).

DolfanTom
02-22-2007, 01:42 PM
Of course things change. It's just all a possibility. Not saying it will happen, but Quinn could be a Fin next year.

It's not a huge deal to me really. If we don't get Quinn in round 1, I wouldn't mind Drew Stanton or Trent Edwards later on.I wouldn't mind Stanton either. He could certainly be an upgrade over what we've had .... for far too long.

To me, though, it'd be somewhat of a disappointment, but a disappointment I'm sure I can live with. I don't care what it takes to get our QB situation rectified. Sign a guy off the street if we have to - I don't care!!!! :lol:

WelcomeBack
02-22-2007, 01:45 PM
I wouldn't mind Stanton either. He could certainly be an upgrade over what we've had .... for far too long.

To me, though, it'd be somewhat of a disappointment, but a disappointment I'm sure I can live with. I don't care what it takes to get our QB situation rectified. Sign a guy off the street if we have to - I don't care!!!! :lol:

:lol: I still believe Daunte will come back, but he's getting up there in age as well. He's 30 now, and an injury THAT bad on the knee is not easy to come back from.

rafael
02-22-2007, 01:45 PM
Hey CK, i can't ever recall a team taking a qb in the first/second rounds of successive years... but we did just invest (not draft) a second on DC last year, and I am one of many dolfans who would love to use our first on brady this year. Just thought that was kind of funny.

That's why I don't think Quinn makes much sense for Miami. I just assume that the people advocating Quinn have a lower opinion of DC and a higher opinion of Quinn than I do.

Regan21286
02-22-2007, 01:50 PM
Teams drafting in front of us



1: Raiders: NEED A QB
2: Lions: NEED A QB
3: Buccaneers: Simms isn't the answer, NEED A QB
4: Browns: are the browns sold on incumbant Charlie Frye, thin ice
5: Cardinals: Matt Lienart, not drafting qb
6: Redskins: Jason Campbell not drafting qb
7: Vikings: NEED A QB
8: Texans: Looks like Carr may be gone, NEED A QB
9: Dolphins: ?


So inconclusion 6 of the 8 (Frye situation could go either way)teams picking before us need a qb more than we do. If Quinn is as good as some of you believe do you really believe he'll still there when we pick ?

Raiders need a QB and perhaps the Lions if they've given up on McCown. Bucs don't need a QB, if they did, they wouldn't have given Simms that fat contract. Browns also have Derek Anderson who played well. Vikings need a QB but a veteran QB. They spend a pretty high pick on Jackson so I'd think they'd give him another go. Texans need a QB but they're likely going either with Carr or Plummer.

Todd347347
02-22-2007, 01:53 PM
I really really doubt he falls to 9, and I think its even less likely we trade up to get him. I think it is much more probable that someone will trade up in front us to get him, everyone knows we will take him if he is there so 8 or above is what it will take to get him.

nick1
02-22-2007, 01:59 PM
just go down the list

Oakland - Al Davis wants JaMarcus Russel
Detriot - Jon Kitna minimizes an immediate need at QB, they love Joe Thomas and will pick him
Cleveland - will give Fyre another year, Adrian Peterson fits their need at RB
TB - need a WR and Gradkowski shows promise, they also have Simms
Arizona - don't need a QB
Washington - don't need a QB
Minnesota - just drafted a 2nd round QB last year, they won't go QB
Houston - will have their choice of Garcia, Plummer, or maybe even Schuab. have been rumored to want to trade down with Denver, and Denver doesn't want QB

MrTree
02-22-2007, 02:01 PM
I think the chances of Quinn slipping all the way to 9 are low. I would say like 25% at best. Detroit could end up taking him...Cleveland very well may take him, hell I even think Tampa might if CJ came off the board before they picked. I am almost positive Houston will if no one else does. The only way I see them passing is if both Adrian Peterson and Quinn are both on the board and I don't know how that could happen. I'm not really worried about Minnesota though. I think their needs would best be met with a trade down and any interest they show is predominantly posturing to strengthen the tradability of their pick. Of course we also have to worry about other teams (such as Carolina) trading up ahead of us and nabbing him as well. We are under the disadvantage that pretty much the whole league knows that either Houston or we will take him if no one else does.

I'm pretty sure the only way we will get Quinn will be to trade up at least in front of Houston. And this involves him falling by the teams early in the draft. (Which is not so big a lock as others on this board seem to think it is.) Whether trading up is worth it is another subject which can and will be debated ad nauseum around here. However, I seriously doubt we draft Quinn at the nine spot.

Finfan Griff
02-22-2007, 02:26 PM
Teams drafting in front of us



1: Raiders: NEED A QB
2: Lions: NEED A QB
3: Buccaneers: Simms isn't the answer, NEED A QB
4: Browns: are the browns sold on incumbant Charlie Frye, thin ice
5: Cardinals: Matt Lienart, not drafting qb
6: Redskins: Jason Campbell not drafting qb
7: Vikings: NEED A QB
8: Texans: Looks like Carr may be gone, NEED A QB
9: Dolphins: ?


So inconclusion 6 of the 8 (Frye situation could go either way)teams picking before us need a qb more than we do. If Quinn is as good as some of you believe do you really believe he'll still there when we pick ?

1. Raiders: take Russell
2. Lions: Kitna did well for them and will do better behind improved o-line after selecting Thomas
3. Bucs: They have Gradkowski and re-signed Simms....dont see them picking a Qb
4. Browns: Have Frye and Anderson both still young. I see them picking a RB
5. Cards: Leinart
6. Skins: Campbell
7. Vikes: Have Travares Jackson who could learn from Johnson
8. Texans: Will go after Plummer.

LarryFinFan
02-22-2007, 02:32 PM
The Vikings drafted a QB in the 2nd round last year. You may say they need a QB, but for all intents and purposes that is not true. I would be comfortable saying that IF a team has ever drafted a first round QB the year after drafting a second round QB, then it only happened maybe once in the history of the league.

CK...what's your opinion on Quinn ?? Do you think we'll jump on him if he's there ?? It just doesn't appear, to me, that Cam is too tickled about CPep. I would love for us to not take Quinn, give CPep the chance to get back to his pre-2005 status and take a player in a position we have more need at...(you can just about name the position and there is a player, although CB seems to be weak where we draft at....)

JFoxx
02-22-2007, 03:05 PM
1. Raiders: take Russell
2. Lions: Kitna did well for them and will do better behind improved o-line after selecting Thomas
3. Bucs: They have Gradkowski and re-signed Simms....dont see them picking a Qb
4. Browns: Have Frye and Anderson both still young. I see them picking a RB
5. Cards: Leinart
6. Skins: Campbell
7. Vikes: Have Travares Jackson who could learn from Johnson
8. Texans: Will go after Plummer.

Finfan Griff, you beat me to the post. I had the same list as you regarding reasons it could happen. Too early to tell for sure yet. Remember how far Matt L. fell last year? He was up there with Bush as a potential #1 pick a month or two before the draft and then he started to fall after that. We'll know more after the combine.

Super Duper
02-22-2007, 03:14 PM
Teams drafting in front of us



1: Raiders: NEED A QB
2: Lions: NEED A QB
3: Buccaneers: Simms isn't the answer, NEED A QB
4: Browns: are the browns sold on incumbant Charlie Frye, thin ice
5: Cardinals: Matt Lienart, not drafting qb
6: Redskins: Jason Campbell not drafting qb
7: Vikings: NEED A QB
8: Texans: Looks like Carr may be gone, NEED A QB
9: Dolphins: ?


So inconclusion 6 of the 8 (Frye situation could go either way)teams picking before us need a qb more than we do. If Quinn is as good as some of you believe do you really believe he'll still there when we pick ?

For the sake of argument lets put some numbers to it. Here are the chance I personally think each team will pass on Quinn in tems of percentages:


1: Raiders: 100%
2: Lions: 50%
3: Buccaneers: 75%
4: Browns: 50%
5: Cardinals: 100%
6: Redskins: 100%
7: Vikings: 75%
8: Texans: 75%

Multiply the percentages in decimal form and:

Mathamatically that would give about a 10% chance of him being there when we pick. Acutually thats about the chance I think he will be there off the top of my head.

Captain Lou
02-22-2007, 03:20 PM
For the sake of argument lets put some numbers to it. Here are the chance I personally think each team will pass on Quinn in tems of percentages:


1: Raiders: 100%
2: Lions: 50%
3: Buccaneers: 75%
4: Browns: 50%
5: Cardinals: 100%
6: Redskins: 100%
7: Vikings: 75%
8: Texans: 75%

Multiply the percentages in decimal form and:

Mathamatically that would give about a 10% chance of him being there when we pick. Acutually thats about the chance I think he will be there off the top of my head.


Would you be as kind to show forth the math from which you derived your statical analysis for likely percentage each team will pass. There are way too many unknowns to come up with such numbers. :rolleyes:

nuttie_buddie
02-22-2007, 03:21 PM
:egads:nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo....... oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ................:blowup:

Kyndig
02-22-2007, 03:21 PM
Teams drafting in front of us



1: Raiders: NEED A QB
2: Lions: NEED A QB
3: Buccaneers: Simms isn't the answer, NEED A QB
4: Browns: are the browns sold on incumbant Charlie Frye, thin ice
5: Cardinals: Matt Lienart, not drafting qb
6: Redskins: Jason Campbell not drafting qb
7: Vikings: NEED A QB
8: Texans: Looks like Carr may be gone, NEED A QB
9: Dolphins: ?


So inconclusion 6 of the 8 (Frye situation could go either way)teams picking before us need a qb more than we do. If Quinn is as good as some of you believe do you really believe he'll still there when we pick ?

The biggest worries on that list are the texans if they don't sign Jake Plummer, and the Browns, who have a couple of young guys and also need a running back. I reckon Romeo is under pressure to win now and that a running back might help him do that in the short term more than using that pick on a rookie QB. The Lions Matt Millen is on such thin ice, he will use that pick for a safe position like Joe Thomas. The raiders will probably take Jamarcus Russell, the Buccaneers are okay at QB and would be better served taking The top player in the draft if he's still available, i.e. Calvin Johnson, and then if they really want another QB, take one in the second or third round, they sure pick high enough. The Vikings took a second round qb last year who by all reports seem happy with, so they would probably be better served drafting the best player available at another position, plenty of good ones will be available with that pick.

Motion
02-22-2007, 03:23 PM
nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.......:egads: oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ..................................................................:blowup:


Well thought out post.

Finfan Griff
02-22-2007, 03:24 PM
Finfan Griff, you beat me to the post. I had the same list as you regarding reasons it could happen. Too early to tell for sure yet. Remember how far Matt L. fell last year? He was up there with Bush as a potential #1 pick a month or two before the draft and then he started to fall after that. We'll know more after the combine.

yeah, i was pretty suprised how far leinart fell. i'm hoping the same will happen for Quinn so we can get him.

TotoreMexico
02-22-2007, 03:28 PM
Teams drafting in front of us



1: Raiders: NEED A QB
2: Lions: NEED A QB
3: Buccaneers: Simms isn't the answer, NEED A QB
4: Browns: are the browns sold on incumbant Charlie Frye, thin ice
5: Cardinals: Matt Lienart, not drafting qb
6: Redskins: Jason Campbell not drafting qb
7: Vikings: NEED A QB
8: Texans: Looks like Carr may be gone, NEED A QB
9: Dolphins: ?


So inconclusion 6 of the 8 (Frye situation could go either way)teams picking before us need a qb more than we do. If Quinn is as good as some of you believe do you really believe he'll still there when we pick ?

How do you know that?

Super Duper
02-22-2007, 03:36 PM
Would you be as kind to show forth the math from which you derived your statical analysis for likely percentage each team will pass. There are way too many unknowns to come up with such numbers. :rolleyes:


No problem:

Raiders: Al Davis likes Athletes so he goes either Russel or C.J. No chance
Detroit - Kitna is average to below average and I feel Millen priortizes the passing game. 50% chance to take Quinn.
Tampa Bay - They have a guy in Sims but he's injury prone and didn't light it up before hand. C.J. may sway their pick to WR though. 25% to take Quinn.
Clevland - Frye??? Need I say more. Would be higher if Peterson wasn't so good and Romeo needs to win to save his job. Still if Quinn plays well toward the end of the season, then a preceived bright future may save his job. 50%
Arizona- Leinart is Franchise worthy - 0%
Washington - Cambell maybe not Franchise yet, but showed enough to take Quinn off their radar regardless. - 0%
Minnesota - Travaris (Spelling?) is promissing enough to make QB not a high priority. Still the lure of a QB upgrade is tempting. 25%
Houston - I think they will keep Carr or trade for Plummer. - If neither then Quinn becomes more likely here. Either way with those two a young guy to groom, similar to Shanahan's move last year, is tempting. - 25%

I never claimed these were exact or accurate. Just my assesment which i need no equation to prove. They are estimates, maybe not very good, but they show what i think of each team's chances of passing on Quinn.

Captain Lou
02-22-2007, 03:37 PM
just go down the list

Oakland - Al Davis wants JaMarcus Russel
Detriot - Jon Kitna minimizes an immediate need at QB, they love Joe Thomas and will pick him
Cleveland - will give Fyre another year, Adrian Peterson fits their need at RB
TB - need a WR and Gradkowski shows promise, they also have Simms
Arizona - don't need a QB
Washington - don't need a QB
Minnesota - just drafted a 2nd round QB last year, they won't go QB
Houston - will have their choice of Garcia, Plummer, or maybe even Schuab. have been rumored to want to trade down with Denver, and Denver doesn't want QB

There is a better argument Miami will not take Quinn ?


I'm sure on some other teams websites are saying similar things about Miami passing on Brady. Take everything you said now here's what that fan would say about us:


Oakland - Al Davis wants JaMarcus Russel
Detriot - Jon Kitna minimizes an immediate need at QB, they love Joe Thomas and will pick him
Cleveland - will give Fyre another year, Adrian Peterson fits their need at RB
TB - need a WR and Gradkowski shows promise, they also have Simms
Arizona - don't need a QB
Washington - don't need a QB
Minnesota - just drafted a 2nd round QB last year, they won't go QB
Houston - will have their choice of Garcia, Plummer, or maybe even Schuab. have been rumored to want to trade down with Denver, and Denver doesn't want a qb
Miami- still believe Culpepper will make a comeback, and they really like Lemon too

Captain Lou
02-22-2007, 03:40 PM
No problem:

Raiders: Al Davis likes Athletes so he goes either Russel or C.J. No chance
Detroit - Kitna is average to below average and I feel Millen priortizes the passing game. 50% chance to take Quinn.
Tampa Bay - They have a guy in Sims but he's injury prone and didn't light it up before hand. C.J. may sway their pick to WR though. 25% to take Quinn.
Clevland - Frye??? Need I say more. Would be higher if Peterson wasn't so good and Romeo needs to win to save his job. Still if Quinn plays well toward the end of the season, then a preceived bright future may save his job. 50%
Arizona- Leinart is Franchise worthy - 0%
Washington - Cambell maybe not Franchise yet, but showed enough to take Quinn off their radar regardless. - 0%
Minnesota - Travaris (Spelling?) is promissing enough to make QB not a high priority. Still the lure of a QB upgrade is tempting. 25%
Houston - I think they will keep Carr or trade for Plummer. - If neither then Quinn becomes more likely here. Either way with those two a young guy to groom, similar to Shanahan's move last year, is tempting. - 25%

I never claimed these were exact or accurate. Just my assesment which i need no equation to prove. They are estimates, maybe not very good, but they show what i think of each team's chances of passing on Quinn.

Fair enough :tongue:

MrTree
02-22-2007, 04:04 PM
Why does everyone seem to feel that the possible acquisition of Jake Plummer necessitates Houston won't take a QB? PLummer would be acquired to hold down the fort and nothing more. I don't think anyone in the league looks at Plummer as a long term investment anymore.

Todd347347
02-22-2007, 04:24 PM
Alot of you guys are only looking at teams ahead of us in the draft, WHAT ABOUT TEAMS UPTO 4-6 PICKS BEHIND US? Its very possible someone trades up in front of us as well.

Finfan Griff
02-22-2007, 04:29 PM
Why does everyone seem to feel that the possible acquisition of Jake Plummer necessitates Houston won't take a QB? PLummer would be acquired to hold down the fort and nothing more. I don't think anyone in the league looks at Plummer as a long term investment anymore.

IMO i think that if the texans do get plummer, they will be fine at QB for a year or 2. i remember when kubiak benched carr and put in rosenfels....he kicked a$$ that game so he would be great back-up to plummer. if houston does decide to get a qb, i dont think they use their first pick on quinn. maybe stanton or someone else

WelcomeBack
02-22-2007, 04:31 PM
Why does everyone seem to feel that the possible acquisition of Jake Plummer necessitates Houston won't take a QB? PLummer would be acquired to hold down the fort and nothing more. I don't think anyone in the league looks at Plummer as a long term investment anymore.

Plummer was upset in Denver when they drafted Cutler in round 1, who eventually took Plummer's job.

Do you think the Texans would pay Plummer to be upset and draft a round 1 QB as well?

If they want Plummer there to groom a QB, I don't think it'll be a first rounder.

ckparrothead
02-22-2007, 04:37 PM
Hey CK, i can't ever recall a team taking a qb in the first/second rounds of successive years... but we did just invest (not draft) a second on DC last year, and I am one of many dolfans who would love to use our first on brady this year. Just thought that was kind of funny.

You have a point, however when you trade for a veteran it is a different animal altogether. Trading for a veteran, you expect him to show you something right away. Maybe he won't be fully acclimated to your new system, but you expect to see some of the positives for why you got him.

When you draft a rookie, you don't expect to see much right away...not even necessarily in practice...because in addition to learning a system he's got to learn whole different ways of thinking, and become lightning fast mentally where he didn't need to be before.

When you draft a QB you don't expect him to be formidable at his position until really his 3rd year. When you trade for a guy you expect him to be formidable at his position within the year.

Having a traded veteran and drafted rookie on the roster at the same time is also more compatible, as the veteran can play while the rookie develops.

Having a guy you just drafted last year as well as a guy you just drafted this year, is not compatible. Highly unlikely that EITHER player will be ready to play this year...and then what?

ckparrothead
02-22-2007, 04:44 PM
CK...what's your opinion on Quinn ?? Do you think we'll jump on him if he's there ?? It just doesn't appear, to me, that Cam is too tickled about CPep. I would love for us to not take Quinn, give CPep the chance to get back to his pre-2005 status and take a player in a position we have more need at...(you can just about name the position and there is a player, although CB seems to be weak where we draft at....)

I think Brady Quinn is too compelling a prospect to ignore at #9. I rate him the third best player in the draft behind Calvin Johnson and Adrian Peterson (in that order).

The thing about taking Brady Quinn is that even if we take him, Culpepper still has a full two years to get himself back to form...while Brady develops. Daunte would at least have all of 2007 for that purpose, and if he shows well in 2007, he'd probably have 2008 as well. And then if he's fresh off 2 good years then guess what we've got the same situation as San Diego did with Brees and Rivers...except our Brees would still be under contract and therefore is more tradeable. Hopefully Culpepper wouldn't blow out his shoulder to kingdom come just before the end of that 2008 season, either.

And who is to say that Daunte would be the guy we trade? Maybe someone offers us a first for Brady Quinn. Daunte would be 32 heading into that 2009 season and maybe we decide that he's still got three years left at a high level and it would be best to sell off Quinn for picks and start over grooming another QB.

Now, on the other hand, how likely is it for that scenario to play out like that? Not very, IMO. More likely is that Daunte plays pretty well the next two years but that we're still anxious to see what Quinn's got.

rafael
02-22-2007, 04:54 PM
I think Brady Quinn is too compelling a prospect to ignore at #9. I rate him the third best player in the draft behind Calvin Johnson and Adrian Peterson (in that order).

The thing about taking Brady Quinn is that even if we take him, Culpepper still has a full two years to get himself back to form...while Brady develops. Daunte would at least have all of 2007 for that purpose, and if he shows well in 2007, he'd probably have 2008 as well. And then if he's fresh off 2 good years then guess what we've got the same situation as San Diego did with Brees and Rivers...except our Brees would still be under contract and therefore is more tradeable. Hopefully Culpepper wouldn't blow out his shoulder to kingdom come just before the end of that 2008 season, either.

And who is to say that Daunte would be the guy we trade? Maybe someone offers us a first for Brady Quinn. Daunte would be 32 heading into that 2009 season and maybe we decide that he's still got three years left at a high level and it would be best to sell off Quinn for picks and start over grooming another QB.

Now, on the other hand, how likely is it for that scenario to play out like that? Not very, IMO. More likely is that Daunte plays pretty well the next two years but that we're still anxious to see what Quinn's got.

I just don't see that much value in trading this year's #9 for insurance and a couple of picks three years from now.

nick1
02-22-2007, 04:57 PM
There is a better argument Miami will not take Quinn ?


I'm sure on some other teams websites are saying similar things about Miami passing on Brady. Take everything you said now here's what that fan would say about us:


Oakland - Al Davis wants JaMarcus Russel
Detriot - Jon Kitna minimizes an immediate need at QB, they love Joe Thomas and will pick him
Cleveland - will give Fyre another year, Adrian Peterson fits their need at RB
TB - need a WR and Gradkowski shows promise, they also have Simms
Arizona - don't need a QB
Washington - don't need a QB
Minnesota - just drafted a 2nd round QB last year, they won't go QB
Houston - will have their choice of Garcia, Plummer, or maybe even Schuab. have been rumored to want to trade down with Denver, and Denver doesn't want a qb
Miami- still believe Culpepper will make a comeback, and they really like Lemon too

Lemon is a back-up period, there is much unknown surrounding Culpepper. he is 30 years old coming off of a major injury. he may or may not have two good years left but he is not the future (the next 5+ years). we have to find our future and Quinn would be just that

rafael
02-22-2007, 04:59 PM
Lemon is a back-up period, there is much unknown surrounding Culpepper. he is 30 years old coming off of a major injury. he may or may not have two good years left but he is not the future (the next 5+ years). we have to find our future and Quinn would be just that

I disagree about both of those players. IMO DC will most likely be good for about 5 years and Lemon has enough talent to be a starter.

fishyanks
02-22-2007, 05:14 PM
Now I do. He just shot himself in the foot by skipping the combine.

Regan21286
02-22-2007, 05:18 PM
I think Brady Quinn is too compelling a prospect to ignore at #9. I rate him the third best player in the draft behind Calvin Johnson and Adrian Peterson (in that order).

The thing about taking Brady Quinn is that even if we take him, Culpepper still has a full two years to get himself back to form...while Brady develops. Daunte would at least have all of 2007 for that purpose, and if he shows well in 2007, he'd probably have 2008 as well. And then if he's fresh off 2 good years then guess what we've got the same situation as San Diego did with Brees and Rivers...except our Brees would still be under contract and therefore is more tradeable. Hopefully Culpepper wouldn't blow out his shoulder to kingdom come just before the end of that 2008 season, either.

And who is to say that Daunte would be the guy we trade? Maybe someone offers us a first for Brady Quinn. Daunte would be 32 heading into that 2009 season and maybe we decide that he's still got three years left at a high level and it would be best to sell off Quinn for picks and start over grooming another QB.

Now, on the other hand, how likely is it for that scenario to play out like that? Not very, IMO. More likely is that Daunte plays pretty well the next two years but that we're still anxious to see what Quinn's got.

I'd love for us to be in that position. I think Quinn might actually be more NFL-ready than Rivers since he comes from a Pro style offense, learns quickly, and has great work ethic. I can imagine him starting instantly if (when?) Culpepper falters again.

nick1
02-22-2007, 05:31 PM
I disagree about both of those players. IMO DC will most likely be good for about 5 years and Lemon has enough talent to be a starter.

Lemon has only started 1 game and didn't show anything special, I'm not saying he shouldn't compete for the starting job next year because he should but what about him makes you so sure that you would pass on Quinn? he hasn't done anything yet

and Culpepper don't get me started, this guy is coming off of a major injury, he played last year showed nothing before going onto IR. he has proven nothing for us to warrent us sticking with him either. the guy hasn't done a thing in years and is 30 years old, he's done. it isn't a common thing for a QB to play well into his mid 30s anyway and thats what you proposed he'd do

LarryFinFan
02-22-2007, 05:40 PM
I think Brady Quinn is too compelling a prospect to ignore at #9. I rate him the third best player in the draft behind Calvin Johnson and Adrian Peterson (in that order).

The thing about taking Brady Quinn is that even if we take him, Culpepper still has a full two years to get himself back to form...while Brady develops. Daunte would at least have all of 2007 for that purpose, and if he shows well in 2007, he'd probably have 2008 as well. And then if he's fresh off 2 good years then guess what we've got the same situation as San Diego did with Brees and Rivers...except our Brees would still be under contract and therefore is more tradeable. Hopefully Culpepper wouldn't blow out his shoulder to kingdom come just before the end of that 2008 season, either.

And who is to say that Daunte would be the guy we trade? Maybe someone offers us a first for Brady Quinn. Daunte would be 32 heading into that 2009 season and maybe we decide that he's still got three years left at a high level and it would be best to sell off Quinn for picks and start over grooming another QB.

Now, on the other hand, how likely is it for that scenario to play out like that? Not very, IMO. More likely is that Daunte plays pretty well the next two years but that we're still anxious to see what Quinn's got.


Thanks...It would be pretty hard to pass up a guy that you'd project as a franchise QB. As you said, Cam knows all about how to handle two capable QBs...We can only hope....

DaPoppaP23
02-22-2007, 05:46 PM
Teams drafting in front of us



1: Raiders: NEED A QB
2: Lions: NEED A QB
3: Buccaneers: Simms isn't the answer, NEED A QB
4: Browns: are the browns sold on incumbant Charlie Frye, thin ice
5: Cardinals: Matt Lienart, not drafting qb
6: Redskins: Jason Campbell not drafting qb
7: Vikings: NEED A QB
8: Texans: Looks like Carr may be gone, NEED A QB
9: Dolphins: ?


So inconclusion 6 of the 8 (Frye situation could go either way)teams picking before us need a qb more than we do. If Quinn is as good as some of you believe do you really believe he'll still there when we pick ?

the only teams i see really needing a qb here are the raiders... the lions picked up kitna and McCown last season and I believe that they should give McCown a chance, the same thing with the Bucs and Browns they both have young talents, chris simms got injured early last season but from what he played he did an honorable job, Charlie Frye i think just needs a little more experience. The Vikings drafted Jackson in the last draft to me he could put up good stats with that cannon he calls an arm. Maybe, I can possibly see the Texans drafting a QB but I think that once they get the o-line situation taken care of and draft adrain peterson (if available) i think that David Carr will do a good for them. To me the Dolphins have a great chance to draft Quinn the teams before don't really need a QB, they have bigger needs than that. Plus, now that Quinn has said he will not workout at the combine, i think that the Dolphin and better than a 65% chance of being able to draft our future QB.

Phanatical
02-22-2007, 06:18 PM
OK, so there are eight teams in front of us, but they all aren't going to want QB's.

Raiders will likely draft Jamarcus Russell
Lions will not likely draft another QB with both Kitna and McKown on the roster ( leaving them with Johnson, Peterson or Thomas)
Buccaneers will stick with Simms who played pretty darned good til he was hurt (leaving them with Johnson, Peterson or Thomas)
Browns will likely will stick with Frye or Dorsey (Leaving them with Adams, Branch, Revis, Anderson or Landry)
Cardinals aren’t drafting a QB (Leaving them with Adams, Branch, Revis, Anderson or Landry)
Redskins aren’t drafting a QB (Leaving them with Adams, Branch, Revis, Anderson, or Landry)
Vikings aren’t likely to draft another QB having picked up Jackson last year (Leaving them with Adams, Branch, Revis, Anderson, or Landry)
Texans still have Carr, and a shot at a F/A QB (Leaving them with Adams, Branch, Revis, Anderson, or Landry)
Dolphins: With the ninth pick of the draft select: Brady Quinn!!

Also, don't forget, any one of those teams that might want to draft a QB ahead of us might pickup a F/A QB and/or might decide they like someone else better (Smith, Stanton or Leak come to mind) or might decide to pickup a project in rounds 2 or 3. It is quite possible Brady might be available at 9. If he's not, then I think Stanton or Leak would be solid picks also.

GO PHINS~!

Dolfan3773
02-22-2007, 06:21 PM
Brady Quinn will NOT be a Dolphin. Here's what i think will happen.

Raiders-Brady Quinn
Lions-JaMarcus Russell
*Browns-Joe Thomas
*Bucs-Calvin Johnson
Cardinals-Gaines Adams
Redskins-Alan Branch
Vikings-Ted Ginn Jr
Texans-Adrian Peterson
Dolphins-???

ckparrothead
02-22-2007, 06:22 PM
I just don't see that much value in trading this year's #9 for insurance and a couple of picks three years from now.

If that's how you want to think of it, then that's fine. The way I see it you're fitting together probabilities and scenarios into an expected value...and as I just said before, I don't find it to be a high probability at all that the situation happens as laid out...to where Daunte plays great the next two years and we think he'd be our best option until he's 35 years old...etc.

As Daunte gets older, his age will do to him what his knee did to him this year...and that process could either happen gracefully, or decidedly UNgracefully.

Either way, I had a three year focus when I evaluated the Daunte Culpepper trade and I still have a three year focus. That means two years left.

ckparrothead
02-22-2007, 06:24 PM
I disagree about both of those players. IMO DC will most likely be good for about 5 years and Lemon has enough talent to be a starter.

Boy, I'm accused all the time of being way too optimistic on Culpepper...and even I would never make the statement that "DC will most likely be good for about 5 years".

ckparrothead
02-22-2007, 06:35 PM
I'd love for us to be in that position. I think Quinn might actually be more NFL-ready than Rivers since he comes from a Pro style offense, learns quickly, and has great work ethic. I can imagine him starting instantly if (when?) Culpepper falters again.

It is possible he's ready to play earlier but there's no harm done to him by sitting him for that second year IF we have a quarterback that is performing well.

But as I see it there are three major chance scenarios that could happen within those two years that would make the Brady Quinn drafting entirely worth it:

1. Daunte falls flat on his face
2. Daunte plays pretty well, but is not compelling
3. Daunte gets hurt again

Meanwhile there are other scenarios under which our drafting Brady Quinn would be a negative:

4. Daunte lights it up for two straight years and stays healthy
5. Daunte gets hurt or loses his starting job to Cleo Lemon in 2007 and Lemon becomes a highly compelling QB
6. Brady Quinn turns out to be a bust

From a POSITION basis, one of the two bases used to evaluate draft picks, the first five possibilities come into play. What I find is that the downside of #4 and #5 is highly limited. If either happens, to where we decide to keep Lemon on or we decide Daunte should be our guy until he's 35, Brady Quinn is a highly tradeable commodity. You still get to recoup much of the lost value by trading him off somewhere.

From a PROSPECT basis, which would be what everyone is talking about with all this BPA, BPA, BPA nonsense that everyone keeps spouting off without thinking about what it actually means...possibility #6 is what you have to worry about. But, you have to worry about this with any player you draft, period.

If you add up the chances of possibilities #1-5, score it, tack on the possibility of #6 according to your player ratings...you may find that the fact that he's the #3 prospect on your draft board outweighs the positional considerations compared to the guys that you could take that play positions that are of more "need".

Phanatical
02-22-2007, 06:41 PM
It is possible he's ready to play earlier but there's no harm done to him by sitting him for that second year IF we have a quarterback that is performing well.

But as I see it there are three major chance scenarios that could happen within those two years that would make the Brady Quinn drafting entirely worth it:

1. Daunte falls flat on his face
2. Daunte plays pretty well, but is not compelling
3. Daunte gets hurt again

Meanwhile there are other scenarios under which our drafting Brady Quinn would be a negative:

4. Daunte lights it up for two straight years and stays healthy
5. Daunte gets hurt or loses his starting job to Cleo Lemon in 2007 and Lemon becomes a highly compelling QB
6. Brady Quinn turns out to be a bust

From a POSITION basis, one of the two bases used to evaluate draft picks, the first five possibilities come into play. What I find is that the downside of #4 and #5 is highly limited. If either happens, to where we decide to keep Lemon on or we decide Daunte should be our guy until he's 35, Brady Quinn is a highly tradeable commodity. You still get to recoup much of the lost value by trading him off somewhere.

From a PROSPECT basis, which would be what everyone is talking about with all this BPA, BPA, BPA nonsense that everyone keeps spouting off without thinking about what it actually means...possibility #6 is what you have to worry about. But, you have to worry about this with any player you draft, period.

If you add up the chances of possibilities #1-5, score it, tack on the possibility of #6 according to your player ratings...you may find that the fact that he's the #3 prospect on your draft board outweighs the positional considerations compared to the guys that you could take that play positions that are of more "need".

I hate to compliment you CK, cause you get so danged many of them and I don't like being another poster that kisses your derriere, but that was an ouststanding post. I get sick of the BPA BS too. The teams need to select the BPA for the positions at which they have a NEED.

Again, great post, and that is EXACTLY why I've revised my thinking that the Phins MUST draft a QB in the first round, either Quinn, Stanton, or Leak IMO, but draft a QB for pete's sake!

GO PHINS~!

ckparrothead
02-22-2007, 06:50 PM
I hate to compliment you CK, cause you get so danged many of them and I don't like being another poster that kisses your derriere, but that was an ouststanding post. I get sick of the BPA BS too. The teams need to select the BPA for the positions at which they have a NEED.

Again, great post, and that is EXACTLY why I've revised my thinking that the Phins MUST draft a QB in the first round, either Quinn, Stanton, or Leak IMO, but draft a QB for pete's sake!

GO PHINS~!

Right well I think it's just silly to do the whole thing need-blind. It would be rather silly to draft Adam Carriker or Amobi Okoye now that we've just signed Vonnie Holliday to a 4 year deal.

IMO, you do a position analysis, and you do a prospect analysis, and you mesh the two together in as consistent a way as is possible. All position factors must be considered. When I get annoyed is when someone talks about a position factor (definition of the word 'factor' comes into play here), we get five people springing up conveniently saying BPA, BPA, BPA.

But the fact of the matter is at the #9 spot you've likely got 6 or 7 players that all have about the same kind of rating...with only a baby's breath worth of room separating them from each other. So if you do feel you need some offense and you've got all these players rated next to each other and you go offense, then that's what you do. But the minute you say something like, I think we ought to try and focus on offense...BPA, BPA, BPA, BPA...

EDIT: BTW, you must be a Gators fan if you actually just suggested the possibility of Chris Leak in round one...

Regan21286
02-22-2007, 08:53 PM
It is possible he's ready to play earlier but there's no harm done to him by sitting him for that second year IF we have a quarterback that is performing well.

But as I see it there are three major chance scenarios that could happen within those two years that would make the Brady Quinn drafting entirely worth it:

1. Daunte falls flat on his face
2. Daunte plays pretty well, but is not compelling
3. Daunte gets hurt again

Meanwhile there are other scenarios under which our drafting Brady Quinn would be a negative:

4. Daunte lights it up for two straight years and stays healthy
5. Daunte gets hurt or loses his starting job to Cleo Lemon in 2007 and Lemon becomes a highly compelling QB
6. Brady Quinn turns out to be a bust

From a POSITION basis, one of the two bases used to evaluate draft picks, the first five possibilities come into play. What I find is that the downside of #4 and #5 is highly limited. If either happens, to where we decide to keep Lemon on or we decide Daunte should be our guy until he's 35, Brady Quinn is a highly tradeable commodity. You still get to recoup much of the lost value by trading him off somewhere.

From a PROSPECT basis, which would be what everyone is talking about with all this BPA, BPA, BPA nonsense that everyone keeps spouting off without thinking about what it actually means...possibility #6 is what you have to worry about. But, you have to worry about this with any player you draft, period.

If you add up the chances of possibilities #1-5, score it, tack on the possibility of #6 according to your player ratings...you may find that the fact that he's the #3 prospect on your draft board outweighs the positional considerations compared to the guys that you could take that play positions that are of more "need".

If #4 and 5 are considered downsides, I'd be wowed. Those positions are way better than the one quagmire we're in. I don't really think #6 is too much of an issue considering how well 1st round QB's are doing these days. You've got guys like Leinart and Young being sent in early and surviving. If there's a recently drafted QB that best resembles Brady Quinn, it's Matt Leinart. And we could've used a guy like that.

DeFINSeWins
02-22-2007, 09:24 PM
did anyone really think leinart would fall to 10th overall to the cardinals?? nope. most had leinart goin as the first qb and young 2nd both in the top 3 and def both top 5 in every mock draft

ChambersWI
02-22-2007, 09:33 PM
did anyone really think leinart would fall to 10th overall to the cardinals?? nope. most had leinart goin as the first qb and young 2nd both in the top 3 and def both top 5 in every mock draft

And I still believe Leinart should've gone before Young, and I will keep that opinion until year 3 of their careers.

Anyways, Leinart fell because of us. We traded for Daunte, Drew Brees signs with the Saints. Payton loved Leinart, and by all accounts was favoring him, but then they signed Brees. When that happened it became obvious that if Leinart didn't get drafted by the Titans he would fall to atleast 7 (the Jets were not going to take a QB especially after trading for Ramsey).

I think what some people don't realize all of the teams in front of us have more pressing needs than QB. It is actually a very good chance Quinn falls to us.

HOWEVER, IMO the team we need to worry about is Carolina. If Quinn gets past Cleveland, they will do everything in their power to trade ahead of us.

Phanatical
02-22-2007, 10:37 PM
EDIT: BTW, you must be a Gators fan if you actually just suggested the possibility of Chris Leak in round one...

Ha ha. Yeah I hear you. My wife is actually the gator, and yeah, probably a big reach at #1, but, we really really really need a QB and he's a bit underrated and under the radar IMO. Maybe he'd be a nice pickup for us in round 2 if we could fill LT and or C in round 1 if Thomas or Brown were available at 9.

Anyway, that's what I think our first priorities must be (QB, LT and C) and focus the BPA analysis while filling those spots. I'm hoping the coaching staff sees it that way too.

GO PHINS~!

CD13
02-22-2007, 11:39 PM
You have a point, however when you trade for a veteran it is a different animal altogether. Trading for a veteran, you expect him to show you something right away. Maybe he won't be fully acclimated to your new system, but you expect to see some of the positives for why you got him.

When you draft a rookie, you don't expect to see much right away...not even necessarily in practice...because in addition to learning a system he's got to learn whole different ways of thinking, and become lightning fast mentally where he didn't need to be before.

When you draft a QB you don't expect him to be formidable at his position until really his 3rd year. When you trade for a guy you expect him to be formidable at his position within the year.

Having a traded veteran and drafted rookie on the roster at the same time is also more compatible, as the veteran can play while the rookie develops.

Having a guy you just drafted last year as well as a guy you just drafted this year, is not compatible. Highly unlikely that EITHER player will be ready to play this year...and then what?


I am all for drafting Quinn, in fact I hope it happens, but playing devil's advocate, if Culpep, Lemon and Quinn turn out to be just adequate then in a two and a half year span we have spent a 1, 2, 5, and 6 on QB's. Don't even remind me about the 2nd wasted on Feeley. I just hope one of these guys comes through...or we will be really set back.

Tureo
02-23-2007, 12:01 AM
Teams drafting in front of us



1: Raiders: NEED A QB
2: Lions: NEED A QB
3: Buccaneers: Simms isn't the answer, NEED A QB
4: Browns: are the browns sold on incumbant Charlie Frye, thin ice
5: Cardinals: Matt Lienart, not drafting qb
6: Redskins: Jason Campbell not drafting qb
7: Vikings: NEED A QB
8: Texans: Looks like Carr may be gone, NEED A QB
9: Dolphins: ?


So inconclusion 6 of the 8 (Frye situation could go either way)teams picking before us need a qb more than we do. If Quinn is as good as some of you believe do you really believe he'll still there when we pick ?
If Oak takes Russel, Det. takes Thomas, Tampa will definitely take CJ. That could lead Cle to taking Peterson, Ariz. takes Adams or Branch. The Redskins take whichever of the 2 the skins don't take, and the Vikings could possibly take Jamaal Anderson. That would only leave the Texans who could move on Levi Brown unless they have already traded the pick to the Broncos who would definitely not take Quinn. They would probably look at Lynch or another RB at that slot. One way or the other we could be looking at a combination of either Quinn, Adams, Okoye, Anderson, Brown, Branch, and Landry. Let's think about what would happen if Brown and Jarret had good combines. Then the Texans would definitely look at Brown and the Vikes would look at Jarret. Confusing, but we can only wait and see.

Tureo
02-23-2007, 12:09 AM
I'd give it a 40% chance now. It's possible, but a lot would have to happen to make it possible, i.e. trades, signings that make QB less of a priority for the eight teams in front of us.

I'm all about trading up if that's what it takes! I know that's not popular (and I usually would agree) but that's my take on Quinn's potential.
I just don't see the need to trade up for a QB that may fall to us at 9 anyway and who isn't a sure thing in the league.

rafael
02-23-2007, 01:06 PM
Boy, I'm accused all the time of being way too optimistic on Culpepper...and even I would never make the statement that "DC will most likely be good for about 5 years".

If I had asked you this question before last season I would guess that you would have agreed that DC would most likely be good for about 5 years. Since then nothing has changed. DC suffered an injury that generally takes two years to recover from. Next season will be two years. Why would I now think any differently?

rafael
02-23-2007, 01:14 PM
Lemon has only started 1 game and didn't show anything special, I'm not saying he shouldn't compete for the starting job next year because he should but what about him makes you so sure that you would pass on Quinn? he hasn't done anything yet

and Culpepper don't get me started, this guy is coming off of a major injury, he played last year showed nothing before going onto IR. he has proven nothing for us to warrent us sticking with him either. the guy hasn't done a thing in years and is 30 years old, he's done. it isn't a common thing for a QB to play well into his mid 30s anyway and thats what you proposed he'd do

Lemon has showed the capability to be a starter, both in the game he started and before that. I would be willing to bet that Cam thinks he's capable of being a starter.

QBs regularly play well into their 30s. And DC is coming off of a major injury that nowadays almost always results in a full recovery. I've not heard of a single medical professional who has any doubts that he can make a full recovery (and BTW I've personally asked several). The catch is it takes time. Generally two years so the fact that he wasn't recovered prior to two years shouldn't be a shock.