Deshaun Watson.

[BuffLuke80]

No **** on that.

 

[BuffLuke80]

I agree. It's tough with NFL QB evaluation.

Some won't take a guy who is slightly built, no matter the talent. They see it as an inevitable physical breakdown. That's the Tony Eason/ Teddy Bridgewater camp.

Some won't take a guy unless he's got a cannon for an arm. I see this more with the teams in the northern states who have to deal with throwing through wind and other weather. Corollary to that being that the hand measurement has to be freakish so he can grip a slick ball in the cold or wet.

Some value accuracy over everything else. These are the scouts who will point to a Drew Brees or a Joe Montana and say that if you throw a catchable ball that goes exactly where it's supposed to go then that trumps everything else. On the flip side, they say that if you can't do that then none of the other stuff can make you successful.

Honestly, I'm mostly in that last camp. Marino is the prototype for that camp since he had elite accuracy to go along with being a big dude with a big arm who also made very quick decisions. I'm very skeptical when I hear that a QB needs work on his mechanics in order to improve his accuracy. I think it's something you either have or don't... and can't succeed if you don't.

But I don't see an accuracy issue with Watson. I saw some bad decisions on throws as he tried to do too much as what was causing his INT issues. I like his accuracy. Wasn't just easy throws in that Clemson offense, he was taking a beating with how much he ran and how defenses schemed, and he still consistently completed a little over 2/3s of his throws throughout his career.

Would you'd say Marino had prototype mechanics? To me, it really didn't matter with him. He got it done, that's all that matters. Elway had a cannon as well and went to the Super Bowl 5 times, almost six. Some guys can just ball.

 

[Buffnik]

Would you'd say Marino had prototype mechanics? To me, it really didn't matter with him. He got it done, that's all that matters. Elway had a cannon as well and went to the Super Bowl 5 times, almost six. Some guys can just ball.

I think it was Danny Kanell I heard telling a story about meeting Marino at some camp when he was a recruit. Anyway, the story goes that he asked Marino if he had any tips or drills to help with mechanics and accuracy. Marino's response was that you either have it or you don't and he's never done any of that stuff.

 

[BuffLuke80]

I think it was Danny Kanell I heard telling a story about meeting Marino at some camp when he was a recruit. Anyway, the story goes that he asked Marino if he had any tips or drills to help with mechanics and accuracy. Marino's response was that you either have it or you don't and he's never done any of that stuff.

That doesn't surprise me one bit and I agree with him lol.

 

[RalphieSpeaks]

I agree. It's tough with NFL QB evaluation.

Some won't take a guy who is slightly built, no matter the talent. They see it as an inevitable physical breakdown. That's the Tony Eason/ Teddy Bridgewater camp.

Some won't take a guy unless he's got a cannon for an arm. I see this more with the teams in the northern states who have to deal with throwing through wind and other weather. Corollary to that being that the hand measurement has to be freakish so he can grip a slick ball in the cold or wet.

Some value accuracy over everything else. These are the scouts who will point to a Drew Brees or a Joe Montana and say that if you throw a catchable ball that goes exactly where it's supposed to go then that trumps everything else. On the flip side, they say that if you can't do that then none of the other stuff can make you successful.

Honestly, I'm mostly in that last camp. Marino is the prototype for that camp since he had elite accuracy to go along with being a big dude with a big arm who also made very quick decisions. I'm very skeptical when I hear that a QB needs work on his mechanics in order to improve his accuracy. I think it's something you either have or don't... and can't succeed if you don't.

But I don't see an accuracy issue with Watson. I saw some bad decisions on throws as he tried to do too much as what was causing his INT issues. I like his accuracy. Wasn't just easy throws in that Clemson offense, he was taking a beating with how much he ran and how defenses schemed, and he still consistently completed a little over 2/3s of his throws throughout his career.

Different positions but I like to use my Zach Thomas analogy.

Zach Thomas, LB from Tech, was a highly successful college player but fell in the draft because of his height and he was short on athleticism. I believe he was drafted in the 5th or 6th but overcame the odds and became an All Pro. A lot of people were like "how did everyone miss him?". Well he did not fit the profile of a LB that is usually successful in the NFL. His makeup is usually that of one that will only stick around in the NFL if they are good at special teams.

However as a scout you do not change what you are looking for. When looking at LBs you are not all of the sudden going to start looking for 5-10 guys that lack speed.

Trying to find the next Zach Thomas or in this case the next Brady is foolish. Scouts are going to stick to what they believe has the highest chance of success in the NFL. That could be accuracy, arm strength, or any of the other traits you mentioned.

Unfortunately NFL teams are so desperate for QB help they over draft them and set their franchises back years. Like I said I am not saying Watson will not be successful but I would have a hard time pulling the trigger at the top of the first.

 

[Buffnik]

Different positions but I like to use my Zach Thomas analogy.

Zach Thomas, LB from Tech, was a highly successful college player but fell in the draft because of his height and he was short on athleticism. I believe he was drafted in the 5th or 6th but overcame the odds and became an All Pro. A lot of people were like "how did everyone miss him?". Well he did not fit the profile of a LB that is usually successful in the NFL. His makeup is usually that of one that will only stick around in the NFL if they are good at special teams.

However as a scout you do not change what you are looking for. When looking at LBs you are not all of the sudden going to start looking for 5-10 guys that lack speed.

Trying to find the next Zach Thomas or in this case the next Brady is foolish. Scouts are going to stick to what they believe has the highest chance of success in the NFL. That could be accuracy, arm strength, or any of the other traits you mentioned.

Unfortunately NFL teams are so desperate for QB help they over draft them and set their franchises back years. Like I said I am not saying Watson will not be successful but I would have a hard time pulling the trigger at the top of the first.

We agree. Just have different criteria or perceptions here. I see all the tools along with what I believe to be the most important thing with leadership/winning/thriving under pressure, etc. Having "it" is my big thing, but I only think it matters if the other tools are in place. When I see a guy with "it" who also has the other tools, I'm making him my QB pick if I need one.

 

[Alfred91]

Personally, I think drafting QBs is as big of a crap shoot as it's ever been. The spread, run/pass option, and just the way that college offenses are run anymore makes the transition from college to pro much more difficult than it was 20 or even 10 years ago.

For example, I saw that Falk is listed as Mel Kiper's #4 QB in the draft. I wouldn't touch him with a 10-foot pole - how many of Leach's QBs have made an impact in the NFL?

But then you see a guy like Russell Wilson, who I wouldn't have touched, either.

 

[Buffnik]

Personally, I think drafting QBs is as big of a crap shoot as it's ever been. The spread, run/pass option, and just the way that college offenses are run anymore makes the transition from college to pro much more difficult than it was 20 or even 10 years ago.

For example, I saw that Falk is listed as Mel Kiper's #4 QB in the draft. I wouldn't touch him with a 10-foot pole - how many of Leach's QBs have made an impact in the NFL?

But then you see a guy like Russell Wilson, who I wouldn't have touched, either.

I think the hardest thing these days is the due diligence to know whether a guy cares more about winning and becoming great than he does about becoming rich or becoming a celebrity. For some guys, making the NFL is the goal and the hunger is gone at that point. Loving to compete and loving the game seem like bigger factors than ever. On that note, this is where I worry about Paxton Lynch with the Broncos and whether he has "it".

 

[RalphieSpeaks]

We agree. Just have different criteria or perceptions here. I see all the tools along with what I believe to be the most important thing with leadership/winning/thriving under pressure, etc. Having "it" is my big thing, but I only think it matters if the other tools are in place. When I see a guy with "it" who also has the other tools, I'm making him my QB pick if I need one.

I hope you are right. This has Bears written all over it.

 

[Big Jim]

Leadership and physical tools to be a legit NFL QB. Throwing mechanics need a lot of work. I didn't care for Mariotta as an NFL QB; he is winning. The guys I've loved as NFL guys in the past few drafts Winston, Bridgewater, and Carr. Two out of three ain't bad. Should have known that Bridgewater's weird mechanics and arm strength were going to be a problem. Anyway, throw Watson in the bucket of guys that a GM has to draft if they need a QB but will hold their breath for a couple of years praying he works out. Watson is a much better prospect than most of the 1st round reaches the past few years.

 

[BuffLuke80]

When you lose the desire to work and get better, that's a problem. If settling to make your dream come true, great. Some want more and it's not hard to tell who.

 

[White_Rabbit]

I never have a good feel for where QBs end up going, but I'll say if I had an early pick this year I'd take Trubinsky, I'd avoid Kizer like the plague, I'd have no idea what to make of Watson, and I'd be eyeing Brad Kaaya in the 2nd or 3rd and thinking he might be the best value.

 

[BuffLuke80]

I never have a good feel for where QBs end up going, but I'll say if I had an early pick this year I'd take Trubinsky, I'd avoid Kizer like the plague, I'd have no idea what to make of Watson, and I'd be eyeing Brad Kaaya in the 2nd or 3rd and thinking he might be the best value.

That's fair but Watson is a guy I think will make it happen.

 

[RalphieSpeaks]

Just saw Kiper still has Watson as a second rounder and says success last night due to Alabama getting tired. Now that is just dumb.

 

[BuffLuke80]

I think he's a first rounder, that's me though. There was a reason they got tired. He had a lot to do with it and their depth wasn't what it has been.

 

[Buffnik]

Regarding QB breakdowns prior to the NFL draft, my impression is that Walter Football is usually very close to how the NFL scouts see guys.

Here's where they had it yesterday (surely to be updated): https://walterfootball.com/draft2017QB.php

Deshaun Watson*, QB, Clemson
Height: 6-2. Weight: 205.
Projected 40 Time: 4.60.
Projected Round (2017): 1-4.
1/9/17: I surveyed teams around the league to see where their initial draft grades were for Watson. Two playoff teams told me they had third-round grades on Watson. One said it was on the low end as a third- to fourth-rounder. Another playoff team told Walt that they had a third-round grade on Watson. Two other teams said they had second-round grades on Watson. Another team thought that Watson still could be a late first-round quarterback, similar to Teddy Bridgewater, because of the dire need at the position across the NFL.

In this draft analyst's opinion, I would grade Watson as a third-round pick for the 2017 NFL Draft. Watson has been off with his accuracy this year, displaying poor ball placement, especially when going downfield. He has missed a lot of potential touchdowns as a result. Watson's performance against Louisville confirmed the accuracy and ball-placement problems we've seen all season. He hasn't dominated, and his play is not that of a top quarterback prospect. All of this illustrates that Watson still has room for improvement with his field vision, ball placement, and accuracy. He did finish the regular season playing better, but that doesn't make up for the struggles in the first two-thirds of the season.

Also, Watson is undersized compared to your average NFL starting quarterback. On top of that, he plays in a college spread offense that doesn't correlate well to the NFL. Thus, he's going to need to learn working under center, operating the huddle, footwork, and not being a running quarterback. There is no doubt that Watson has great intangibles as a hard worker with good character off the field and leadership in the locker room.

 

[BuffLuke80]

Idk if he's 205, he looks bigger than that to me. He's a rangy athlete though so who knows?

 

[BuffLuke80]

Either way, I'd definitely take a shot with him.