Draft strategy if your rookie QB becomes a star?

[Bengalholic]

Jason Fitzgerald from OverTheCap offers an interesting take on positional drafting/focus if you get a stud rookie QB:

'Having a rookie QB will always be the biggest “moneyball” advantage a team can have. Lets assume Joe Burrow becomes a star. His contract will effectively be undervalued by about $30M per year if that happens which is huge if the team can spend it effectively. But why just focus on the savings of a QB?

Once that same team know they have to deal with the high price of the QB (which they should know by 3 years in) maybe they should be moving their draft strategy in the first and second rounds away from taking linebackers, running backs, safeties, non-rush linemen, tight ends, centers, and guards to exclusively drafting cornerbacks, edge rushers, receivers, left tackles, and defensive tackles with rush ability. If you hit on an edge rusher late in the first at $3.3M a year well that’s about $17M in value. A corner would be around $12M. A left tackle in the ballpark of $13M and so on. Hit on a few picks using that kind of strategy in two or three seasons and you just made up the obvious “competitive edge” of the cheap QB with the less obvious one of hitting on premier positions in the draft.

There are ways to build a very successful team around an expensive QB. The problem is that too often team maybe get away from doing things the right or logical way and things get out of control and optically it looks really bad. But if a team develops a strategy early in the process and does its best to stick to the strategy it should never compromise their ability to make deep playoff runs year after year.'

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(02-14-2020, 09:34 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: Jason Fitzgerald from OverTheCap offers an interesting take on positional drafting/focus if you get a stud rookie QB:

'Having a rookie QB will always be the biggest “moneyball” advantage a team can have. Lets assume Joe Burrow becomes a star. His contract will effectively be undervalued by about $30M per year if that happens which is huge if the team can spend it effectively. But why just focus on the savings of a QB?

Once that same team know they have to deal with the high price of the QB (which they should know by 3 years in) maybe they should be moving their draft strategy in the first and second rounds away from taking linebackers, running backs, safeties, non-rush linemen, tight ends, centers, and guards to exclusively drafting cornerbacks, edge rushers, receivers, left tackles, and defensive tackles with rush ability. If you hit on an edge rusher late in the first at $3.3M a year well that’s about $17M in value. A corner would be around $12M. A left tackle in the ballpark of $13M and so on. Hit on a few picks using that kind of strategy in two or three seasons and you just made up the obvious “competitive edge” of the cheap QB with the less obvious one of hitting on premier positions in the draft.

There are ways to build a very successful team around an expensive QB. The problem is that too often team maybe get away from doing things the right or logical way and things get out of control and optically it looks really bad. But if a team develops a strategy early in the process and does its best to stick to the strategy it should never compromise their ability to make deep playoff runs year after year.'

Those sure are some good thoughts. We can think about this after we see how good Burrow comes along and if our LB's come
along on Defense. Need to shore up that O-line #1 for the guy to become a star and he will need a good RB similar to Heclair, 
which it seems Mixon is just that. This is a good strategy to a point but you have to build the foundation first for the QB to 
succeed. This starts with O-line and weapons for a rookie QB.

Not to mention if your Defense sucks because of your LB's which has been our biggest problem on D.

What is nice is we have some good edge rushers, DT's (if we bring back Billings) and a talented Secondary.

[*Synric*]

(02-14-2020, 09:34 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: Jason Fitzgerald from OverTheCap offers an interesting take on positional drafting/focus if you get a stud rookie QB:

'Having a rookie QB will always be the biggest “moneyball” advantage a team can have. Lets assume Joe Burrow becomes a star. His contract will effectively be undervalued by about $30M per year if that happens which is huge if the team can spend it effectively. But why just focus on the savings of a QB?

Once that same team know they have to deal with the high price of the QB (which they should know by 3 years in) maybe they should be moving their draft strategy in the first and second rounds away from taking linebackers, running backs, safeties, non-rush linemen, tight ends, centers, and guards to exclusively drafting cornerbacks, edge rushers, receivers, left tackles, and defensive tackles with rush ability. If you hit on an edge rusher late in the first at $3.3M a year well that’s about $17M in value. A corner would be around $12M. A left tackle in the ballpark of $13M and so on. Hit on a few picks using that kind of strategy in two or three seasons and you just made up the obvious “competitive edge” of the cheap QB with the less obvious one of hitting on premier positions in the draft.

There are ways to build a very successful team around an expensive QB. The problem is that too often team maybe get away from doing things the right or logical way and things get out of control and optically it looks really bad. But if a team develops a strategy early in the process and does its best to stick to the strategy it should never compromise their ability to make deep playoff runs year after year.'

With the evolution to interior rushers to the premium position list I would add interior offensive line to the premium list as well.

But I agree you want to attack the premium positions always. Quarterback, Passrushers, Offensive Line, Cornerback, and Wide Receivers. These are also the positions you pay the big contracts.

[Luvnit2]

(02-14-2020, 09:34 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: Jason Fitzgerald from OverTheCap offers an interesting take on positional drafting/focus if you get a stud rookie QB:

'Having a rookie QB will always be the biggest “moneyball” advantage a team can have. Lets assume Joe Burrow becomes a star. His contract will effectively be undervalued by about $30M per year if that happens which is huge if the team can spend it effectively. But why just focus on the savings of a QB?

Once that same team know they have to deal with the high price of the QB (which they should know by 3 years in) maybe they should be moving their draft strategy in the first and second rounds away from taking linebackers, running backs, safeties, non-rush linemen, tight ends, centers, and guards to exclusively drafting cornerbacks, edge rushers, receivers, left tackles, and defensive tackles with rush ability. If you hit on an edge rusher late in the first at $3.3M a year well that’s about $17M in value. A corner would be around $12M. A left tackle in the ballpark of $13M and so on. Hit on a few picks using that kind of strategy in two or three seasons and you just made up the obvious “competitive edge” of the cheap QB with the less obvious one of hitting on premier positions in the draft.

There are ways to build a very successful team around an expensive QB. The problem is that too often team maybe get away from doing things the right or logical way and things get out of control and optically it looks really bad. But if a team develops a strategy early in the process and does its best to stick to the strategy it should never compromise their ability to make deep playoff runs year after year.'

There is a reason teams with young QB's who are very good like Ravens, KC and even Cowboys could field more complete teams. The way the salary cap is structured for rookies is huge if a team can hit on any first round QB as they have 5 years of cap savings at the QB position.

Great post!

[samhain]

I'm not sure if this applies to the team we follow.

The Bengals had Andy and AJ locked up for their rookie deals at a fraction of what they were worth and didn't seem to be in a big hurry to load up on talent with the extra money. Expecting the people that own this team to change in any meaningful way is always a big stretch. They're still butthurt that free agency is even a thing.

I doubt that this relatively new concept of making hay while the sun is shining on your star quarterback's rookie contract is something they will employ. If anything, they'll spend under the cap to create rollover, then use it to pay Burrow in his walk year. They'll use the star rookie as an excuse to be even more frugal, not less. They did it for years when old Hobspin would explain that we couldn't pursue significant FAs due to the fact that there were in house guys who would be due extensions soon. Bengal Way Yay.

[TJHoushmandzadeh's Shiny Shoes]

(02-14-2020, 09:34 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: Jason Fitzgerald from OverTheCap offers an interesting take on positional drafting/focus if you get a stud rookie QB:

'Having a rookie QB will always be the biggest “moneyball” advantage a team can have. Lets assume Joe Burrow becomes a star. His contract will effectively be undervalued by about $30M per year if that happens which is huge if the team can spend it effectively. But why just focus on the savings of a QB?

Once that same team know they have to deal with the high price of the QB (which they should know by 3 years in) maybe they should be moving their draft strategy in the first and second rounds away from taking linebackers, running backs, safeties, non-rush linemen, tight ends, centers, and guards to exclusively drafting cornerbacks, edge rushers, receivers, left tackles, and defensive tackles with rush ability. If you hit on an edge rusher late in the first at $3.3M a year well that’s about $17M in value. A corner would be around $12M. A left tackle in the ballpark of $13M and so on. Hit on a few picks using that kind of strategy in two or three seasons and you just made up the obvious “competitive edge” of the cheap QB with the less obvious one of hitting on premier positions in the draft.

There are ways to build a very successful team around an expensive QB. The problem is that too often team maybe get away from doing things the right or logical way and things get out of control and optically it looks really bad. But if a team develops a strategy early in the process and does its best to stick to the strategy it should never compromise their ability to make deep playoff runs year after year.'

Why when you've got a rookie QB and not all the time?

[*ochocincos*]

It'd be the smart move financially to bring in good vets at the less-premium positions and draft for the premium positions.
Safety, RB, TE, and LB.

Save money on WRs, CBs, OL, DL, and QB by drafting replacements and only extending the elite guys.

[bengals67]

This is a very interesting post.

I am thinking more short term and want them to sign two first tier free agents- preferably an O lineman and a linebacker.

That would open the draft to take bpa each round.

I can't understand how you have a chance to draft a potential top 5 QB but refuse to do something in free agency to improve two of the worst units in the NFL- and they have been bad for years now.

Can anyone remember when we had a linebacker who was above average in pass defense , in particular, covering tight ends?

Has it been decades?

[Hammerstripes]

(02-20-2020, 05:26 PM)bengals67 Wrote: This is a very interesting post.

I am thinking more short term and want them to sign two first tier free agents- preferably an O lineman and a linebacker.

That would open the draft to take bpa each round.

I can't understand how you have a chance to draft a potential top 5 QB but refuse to do something in free agency to improve two of the worst units in the NFL- and they have been bad for years now.

Can anyone remember when we had a linebacker who was above average in pass defense , in particular, covering tight ends?

Has it been decades?

Brian Simmons