The "drafting a QB late" folly.

The odds of getting good, great, Hall of Fame quarterbacks are MUCH higher when drafting as the top 2 rounds. So while the entire draft is a crapshoot like you said, the odds are way better in getting a perennial starting quarterback if you attempt to draft one high.

Phoenix I'm surprised at you putting Jim Sorgi in the bad category. He is the American Dream, best seat in the house on Sundays, making millions as a never used back-up, playing golf with Peyton on off days. Getting paid for being at Peyton's camps during the offseason. Having an immaculate MRI and a CTE resembling a new born baby. He is my Idol.

Originally posted by strickac:

Originally posted by tatdwolf49:

Want tha Alabama quarterback Jake Coker in tha 5th or 6th round think after everything he shown he could be a real gem ...

We can just wait to sign him as an UDFA

Thats IF he would wanna sign with us ...

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
The odds of getting good, great, Hall of Fame quarterbacks are MUCH higher when drafting as the top 2 rounds. So while the entire draft is a crapshoot like you said, the odds are way better in getting a perennial starting quarterback if you attempt to draft one high.

But when the odds are so low, it really doesn't matter.

It's best to use those picks on the rest of the team. With a good team you can plug and play just about any serviceable QB and have winning seasons. You don't need a HOF QB with a HOF defense or OL.

Your position would carry more weight IF there were some truly NFL-ready QB's...but, sadly I don't really see any in the upcoming draft. I know many think Goff is the next coming, but I just don't see that. It also wouldn't surprise me to see Baalke trade down, particularly if he gets a very sweet offer. I'd be more than happy with Dak Prescott, for example. He's improved his play at QB big-time and is the kind of athletic player Kelly loves. We have to remember the team's invested a lot in Kaepernick, and unless he just fails miserably to pick up and execute Kelly's offense, he's likely not going anywhere. Why spend a 1st rd pick on a QB who'll probably be carrying a clipboard his first few years. I liked what I saw of Wentz at the Senior Bowl, but he'll have a big adjustment to make playing all-American type talent every week in the NFL. Mariota and Winston were a ton more ready for the NFL than anyone I see in this draft...so, I don't see the wisdom in picking a QB high if the capability to start immediately's not there.

Originally posted by Rascal:

Great post! I said it from day one, if we are serious about drafting the next franchise QB, we cannot afford to mess around but to take a legit prospect in the 1st. I am even reluctant about the 2nd if I am being honest simply because I don't like the idea of settling. Kap was a 2nd rounder, I just don't want any excuse if the guy turns out to be trash. Let's put our best foot forward and go for the guy we want.

That would make a lot of sense if this team had any semblance of an oline. General consensus from many Zone fans is that the Oline needs at least 3 starters added to this roster. I think many of us hope they fill some of those holes in FA, but this roster needs to fill some holes with premier picks before they target QB in a weak class.

Originally posted by jedediahyork:
But when the odds are so low, it really doesn't matter.

It's best to use those picks on the rest of the team. With a good team you can plug and play just about any serviceable QB and have winning seasons. You don't need a HOF QB with a HOF defense or OL.

Which works fine for about 2-3 years until you have to pay everyone and you start the rebuilding process all over again. Having a franchise QB means you're already a lot closer to contending than any team without one. Its the most important position in the NFL by far. Having to depend on finding one that is "serviceable" means you're hoping that the stars will align for you on one particular season.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by jedediahyork:
But when the odds are so low, it really doesn't matter.

It's best to use those picks on the rest of the team. With a good team you can plug and play just about any serviceable QB and have winning seasons. You don't need a HOF QB with a HOF defense or OL.

Which works fine for about 2-3 years until you have to pay everyone and you start the rebuilding process all over again. Having a franchise QB means you're already a lot closer to contending than any team without one. Its the most important position in the NFL by far. Having to depend on finding one that is "serviceable" means you're hoping that the stars will align for you on one particular season.

The same can be said about finding a "franchise" QB. That's all it really is when drafting a QB. Vince Young and JaMarcus Russel are two very recent picks that come to mind.

At least by building a decent team through the draft you have a shot every year at winning, even with a serviceable QB. A serviceable QB can be found in FA, or via trade... you're not limited to rolling the dice in the draft, especially in weak draft classes.

Originally posted by CorvaNinerFan:
Your position would carry more weight IF there were some truly NFL-ready QB's...but, sadly I don't really see any in the upcoming draft. I know many think Goff is the next coming, but I just don't see that. It also wouldn't surprise me to see Baalke trade down, particularly if he gets a very sweet offer. I'd be more than happy with Dak Prescott, for example. He's improved his play at QB big-time and is the kind of athletic player Kelly loves. We have to remember the team's invested a lot in Kaepernick, and unless he just fails miserably to pick up and execute Kelly's offense, he's likely not going anywhere. Why spend a 1st rd pick on a QB who'll probably be carrying a clipboard his first few years. I liked what I saw of Wentz at the Senior Bowl, but he'll have a big adjustment to make playing all-American type talent every week in the NFL. Mariota and Winston were a ton more ready for the NFL than anyone I see in this draft...so, I don't see the wisdom in picking a QB high if the capability to start immediately's not there.

Not having immediate starters isn't the same thing as lacking in talent. I think Goff can be a very good QB in the NFL for example....even if he isn't ready to start from Day 1. The talent is legit, even if you let the guy sit for a year, you still have 4 years where you don't have to pay a QB a whole lot of money, thus enabling you to spend that money to build up the team elsewhere.

Originally posted by jedediahyork:
The same can be said about finding a "franchise" QB. That's all it really is when drafting a QB.

At least by building a decent team through the draft you have a shot every year at winning, even with a serviceable QB. A serviceable QB can be found in FA, or via trade... you're not limited to rolling the dice in the draft, especially in weak draft classes.

But you really don't. Without a QB you're basically just spinning your wheels. Look at the Rams and Texans. Its a QB driven league, either you have "the guy" or you are looking for him. Because otherwise you just hope that everything works out just right so you can take a couple swings at the playoffs before you have to tear the team apart.

Meanwhile teams like New England, Pittsburgh and Green Bay have had massive roster turnover but always have that puncher's chance at winning it all due to their exceptional quarterbacks.

I have said it before on the Goff thread, if that is what the 9ers are thinking then they might as well forget about drafting a QB at all. Is just totally pointless.

But, if this franchise is serious about winning at some point, then they need to have some conviction and take a QB at 7th overall, is as simple as that.

This is like tha 05 draft when we had tha 1st pick there is no clear #1 type QB to take so take a pass rusher and a QB later in tha 3rd and Coker in tha 6th

Originally posted by tatdwolf49:

This is like tha 05 draft when we had tha 1st pick there is no clear #1 type QB to take so take a pass rusher and a QB later in tha 3rd and Coker in tha 6th

No there was, we just took the wrong one

Originally posted by Rascal:

I have said it before on the Goff thread, if that is what the 9ers are thinking then they might as well forget about drafting a QB at all. Is just totally pointless.

But, if this franchise is serious about winning at some point, then they need to have some conviction and take a QB at 7th overall, is as simple as that.

Goff is the only QB I'd take at 7

Originally posted by joaosoarrs99:
Most good QBs are drafted in the first 2 rounds.

Yes, we need a great QB, and he's not on the current roster, and he won't be available after rd2. Therefore we should draft the best QB in the draft in rd 1 or 2.
They need to get one of the big four = Goff / Lynch / Wentz or . . . . . rd 2-3 Dax Prescott.
I would pick Goff, even if it required a trade up. But if one of the other 3 looks great after detailed analysis, get whoever is the best one