Daniel Jones Comparison

and takes him at #4

If that's the case I would have preferred to just sign Foles, at least you know he can play in the NFL.

Jones is a stay away for me. Arm strength is not the end all but I think it's a minimum requirement. Can't wrap my head around taking a first round QB who has limited arm strength/can't make all the throws.

When it's in the air with Jones similar to Tannehill. Future coach killer

How does he compare to Lauletta? I have not studied either but from the comments people have made about his limited athleticism and below average arm, he sounds alot like Lauletta.

Thoughts?

Nice size and can move a little, enough to where you even throw in some design runs and zone read things, but not enough for teams to really gameplan for. Decent arm and decent accuracy, nothing special but not awful. Carried an outgunned program a little in college and probably a little better than most give him credit for as a prospect.

He's not a guy I want at the top of round 1 but not somebody I would write off completely. If you're sinking all of your resources into the OL and Barkley, there's a place for him. Especially on a first contract.

?

In comment 14352989 AcesUp said:

Quote:

Nice size and can move a little, enough to where you even throw in some design runs and zone read things, but not enough for teams to really gameplan for. Decent arm and decent accuracy, nothing special but not awful. Carried an outgunned program a little in college and probably a little better than most give him credit for as a prospect. He's not a guy I want at the top of round 1 but not somebody I would write off completely. If you're sinking all of your resources into the OL and Barkley, there's a place for him. Especially on a first contract.

The latter part of your post about making the focus on SB and OL makes me think they could take a chance on a Jones or Grier with a lower pick so they can use the premiums on other areas. If you aren’t looking for your QB to totally carry the team this could be the model they are thinking. Stout D, great OL and run game. QB just needs to do enough to be above average in the short term and develop confidence and skill along the way to know how to be a winner in the long term.

In comment 14352989 AcesUp said:

Quote:

If you're sinking all of your resources into the OL and Barkley, there's a place for him. Especially on a first contract.

I hope this will never be their thought process. The most important position on the football field and the GMEN "would settle" for a mediocre QB. That's so "wrong" for them to "settle."

Jones seems to be a more polished pocket passer. Gannon got there, but it took about ten years.

In comment 14352903 giants#1 said:

Quote:

and takes him at #4

LOL...well played.

Yes, absolutely. It took Gannon a while to "arrive."

Duke's running game consisted of a number of
pre-planned Jones runs. I guess that's why I
thought of Gannon. Kind of a Jack of all trades.
But there is value in that. Maybe not in the first round,
but you get the feeling he'll figure it out.

Tough kid as well.

saw him live and was very unimpressed with his ball velocity and tightness. I think the term he used was "float" when describing his passes. And that confirmed what I saw on TV.

In comment 14353275 giantstock said:

Quote:

In comment 14352989 AcesUp said: Quote: If you're sinking all of your resources into the OL and Barkley, there's a place for him. Especially on a first contract. I hope this will never be their thought process. The most important position on the football field and the GMEN "would settle" for a mediocre QB. That's so "wrong" for them to "settle."

I do think that they should be aggressive at the top of the draft at QB but I don't consider executing a contingency plan as settling. A mediocre QB on a rookie deal is a competitive advantage considering most mediocre QBs in the league are making 15-20X what a Day 2 contract would pay. Also, upside projections are always off. Brees was a low ceiling guy. Brady too, he was drafted to be a career backup. These weren't Mahomes-like boom/bust picks.

Holding out for the next Elway is an unrealistic fan fantasy. It's probably not in the cards. I think that's the wrong strategy.

the ball doesn't seem to jump out of his hand, and he under-throws a ton of receivers- even on intermediate routes or throws to the shallow curl/flat areas. In addition, it seems like he has no sense for the rush on his blindside. Lastly, some say he has a beautiful throwing motion but I don't see it. Seems like he has a bit of a wind-up/hitch of sorts on his deep throws. He is a C+ QB prospect and not worth a top 50 pick IMO.

is not an NFL caliber QB. If Dave Cutliffe wasn't his QB coach he'd be a 5th round pick (or later).

that came to mind when I watched him were two players. Neither with a good NFL career, but one that was a top pick:

- Tim Couch
- Ryan Nassib

to tell us Jones is the next Joe Montana?

Turned it in a few minutes ago and they had the Giants drafting Jones with the 17th pick. Jonah Williams was taken at 18.

Didn’t hear who was picked at 6.

But now I hope he’s drafted at 6 just so I could see you people meltdown and run to be Browns fans.

In comment 14353312 AcesUp said:

Quote:

In comment 14353275 giantstock said: Quote: I do think that they should be aggressive at the top of the draft at QB but I don't consider executing a contingency plan as settling. A mediocre QB on a rookie deal is a competitive advantage considering most mediocre QBs in the league are making 15-20X what a Day 2 contract would pay. Also, upside projections are always off. Brees was a low ceiling guy. Brady too, he was drafted to be a career backup. These weren't Mahomes-like boom/bust picks. Holding out for the next Elway is an unrealistic fan fantasy. It's probably not in the cards. I think that's the wrong strategy.

There are different degrees of "contingency plans." The 49ers have a contingency plan if Zona takes Murray or Bosa more than likely. While you could argue that taking Jones or Lock in rd 1 at 17 "is a contingency plan" if you don't take/lose out on the other 2 - it is also "settling" if as you say even if they are mediocre. A "contingency plan" can also be considered as"settling."

It is the wrong strategy to have a "contingency plan" that is based on selecting a mediocre QB with the 17th pick when in fact the QB is the most important position on the football field. And further to look at it in a way that you are willing to settle for a mediocre QB just so the 1st few years you can save a few bucks is extremely short-sighted.

The GMEn do not need to wait for John Elway." They just need to make sure they can get a good long=term QB. He doesn't have to be "Elway."

In comment 14353605 GoDeep13 said:

Quote:

But now I hope he’s drafted at 6 just so I could see you people meltdown and run to be Browns fans.

It won't be that bad. There will be a silver lining. DG would have ensured that he won't have a long career as a GMAN GM.

need to be near the top and he needs to be a winner who can put a team on his back. Murray and Haskins appear to be winners, but are short on experience. The other top candidates just don’t show enough. I would rather have a small school QB who is an obvious winner and hope he can handle the big jump in competition level.