Niners Trade for #3 Pick

scott bankheadcase

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 1, 2006
1,212
hoboken
Lead beat writer for the Niners suggests that the Niners moving up another spot would not be a surprise. Hard to imagine the Jets doing that unless they really like one of the other qbs more than Wilson.

View: https://twitter.com/MaioccoNBCS/status/1378398796648878082?s=19
This is interesting as Shanahan is reported to have Wilson as his top qb (above Lawrence). They also already tried to trade with the jets but the jets wouldn’t move (though moving 2 to 3 is a lot different than 2 to 12).

even the people who report that Jones is the target will say that with caveat what Wilson is gone.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
68,245
Oregon
Yeah, I see no real upside for the Jets here ... unless they get a guarantee from the 49ers that they will not pick who the Jets want ... and if they do, it costs them a first-rounder down the road.

Reads more like reporter wish-casting
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
38,356
Lead beat writer for the Niners suggests that the Niners moving up another spot would not be a surprise. Hard to imagine the Jets doing that unless they really like one of the other qbs more than Wilson.

View: https://twitter.com/MaioccoNBCS/status/1378398796648878082?s=19
Yup. Jets only do this if they like Wilson and Fields/Lance equally. If they are fine with someone other than Wilson, then they can certainly bluff and probably pick up SF’s 2nd rounder (#43) and maybe more in the process.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
28,417
BB's admiration for Shanahan and Lynch may not survive the 49ers' enrichment of drafts for AFC East opponents.
 

scott bankheadcase

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 1, 2006
1,212
hoboken
Yeah, I see no real upside for the Jets here ... unless they get a guarantee from the 49ers that they will not pick who the Jets want ... and if they do, it costs them a first-rounder down the road.

Reads more like reporter wish-casting
The only upside is if the Jets actually want fields. If that’s the case you get to move down a spot and pick up most likely a 2nd round pick (and maybe more).
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
68,245
Oregon
The only upside is if the Jets actually want fields. If that’s the case you get to move down a spot and pick up most likely a 2nd round pick (and maybe more).
Unless that's who the Niners would pick. No team is telling the truth about their wish list.

But they sure as heck not move from 3 to 2 for Jones
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
38,356
Unless that's who the Niners would pick. No team is telling the truth about their wish list.

But they sure as heck not move from 3 to 2 for Jones
Yeah, you only do this if you’re perfectly happy with either Fields or Wilson. But I find it hard to believe that they would evaluate them equally. You don’t mess around with your franchise QB over a 2nd round pick. Even if you barely like one over the other, you have to get your guy.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
12,236
So this would be the exact mirror of the 2017 49ers trade when they dropped from 2 to 3 and picked up two thirds and a fourth and got the guy they wanted anyway. And the Bears could super relax knowing they had their guy, even though they probably already knew could relax and they had their guy and were set for the next decade 99% (nobody is a sure thing).
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
68,245
Oregon
Yeah, you only do this if you’re perfectly happy with either Fields or Wilson. But I find it hard to believe that they would evaluate them equally. You don’t mess around with your franchise QB over a 2nd round pick. Even if you barely like one over the other, you have to get your guy.
Exactly. That's what I'm getting at. The Jets know for absolute certainty that they can choose anyone in the draft not named Trevor Lawrence. I can't think of a team that would make the mistake of playing this too cute and spend the next five years second-guessing themselves.

Well, I can think of one ...
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
20,214
Yeah, I see no real upside for the Jets here ... unless they get a guarantee from the 49ers that they will not pick who the Jets want ... and if they do, it costs them a first-rounder down the road.

Reads more like reporter wish-casting
Jets have a Shanny Offense guy; would think they would grade the QBs similarly.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
9,985
So this would be the exact mirror of the 2017 49ers trade when they dropped from 2 to 3 and picked up two thirds and a fourth and got the guy they wanted anyway. And the Bears could super relax knowing they had their guy, even though they probably already knew could relax and they had their guy and were set for the next decade 99% (nobody is a sure thing).
Hey, man, you don't screw around when you have the chance to draft a Mitch Trubisky. Guys like that don't come around very often...
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
68,245
Oregon
Jets have a Shanny Offense guy; would think they would grade the QBs similarly.
Yep, forgot that ... another reason why trading down to 3 would make little sense ... if they have the same QB priority list
 

scott bankheadcase

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 1, 2006
1,212
hoboken
Yep, forgot that ... another reason why trading down to 3 would make little sense ... if they have the same QB priority list
eh, I disagree a bit here. Yes same scheme but shanahan and the other niners internal team had a bunch of disagreements on QBs.

Shanahan wanted to wait for cousins and had to be convinced into the jimmy g trade (watch the press conferences around that trade and you can tell). Shanahan wanted beathard to be the heir apparent and eventually had to be talked into the fact that nick mullens from the practice squad was the better option.

I could easily see LaFleur and Shanahan having different ideas on guys as talented as Wilson and fields.
 

djbayko

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
15,161
Waltham, MA
Yeah, I see no real upside for the Jets here ... unless they get a guarantee from the 49ers that they will not pick who the Jets want ... and if they do, it costs them a first-rounder down the road.

Reads more like reporter wish-casting
By extension, such a deal wouldn't make much sense for the 49ers either. In a lot of scenarios, the only way the Jets make this trade if they don't really care too much for Wilson anyways. Sure, there is a possiblity that they simply don't see much difference between Wilson and someone like Fields, and therefore who they pick is a coin flip.. But do you really pay the prices over such a chance? Maybe. I don't know. I suppose it depends on how much more YOU value Wilson than his peers.

Reminiscent of Fultz/Tatum.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
26,787
Hingham, MA
By extension, such a deal wouldn't make much sense for the 49ers either. In a lot of scenarios, the only way the Jets make this trade if they don't really care too much for Wilson anyways. Sure, there is a possiblity that they simply don't see much difference between Wilson and someone like Fields, and therefore who they pick is a coin flip.. But do you really pay the prices over such a chance? Maybe. I don't know. I suppose it depends on how much more YOU value Wilson than his peers.

Reminiscent of Fultz/Tatum.
Man seeing Fultz / Tatum in writing is scary for these teams but that’s kind of the reality here - at least one or two of the big five QBs is going to bust (maybe entirely due to environment). Wonder which teams / QBs will be on the side of the ledger. Probably the Jets. Maybe someone else.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
Man seeing Fultz / Tatum in writing is scary for these teams but that’s kind of the reality here - at least one or two of the big five QBs is going to bust (maybe entirely due to environment). Wonder which teams / QBs will be on the side of the ledger. Probably the Jets. Maybe someone else.
Joe Douglas is a competent GM. Johnsons seem to be giving him autonomy.

Douglas knew last season would be a tire fire. He chose to let Gase preside over it. People who follow this stuff more closely than I do say the Jets’ 2020 draft class looked decent as rookies. Douglas now has his guy in place — I think Saleh was a great hire. And they’ve got their pick of the non-Lawrence QBs.

The Jets have been star-crossed for 50 years, and of course that might continue. And even an optimistic Jets fan would concede (I think) that they’ll be below average for at least one more season. But for the first time in forever, their long-term outlook is legitimately good.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
18,868
Philadelphia
Joe Douglas is a competent GM. Johnsons seem to be giving him autonomy.

Douglas knew last season would be a tire fire. He chose to let Gase preside over it. People who follow this stuff more closely than I do say the Jets’ 2020 draft class looked decent as rookies. Douglas now has his guy in place — I think Saleh was a great hire. And they’ve got their pick of the non-Lawrence QBs.

The Jets have been star-crossed for 50 years, and of course that might continue. And even an optimistic Jets fan would concede (I think) that they’ll be below average for at least one more season. But for the first time in forever, their long-term outlook is legitimately good.
We’ll see. I don’t really know what Joe Douglas or Robert Saleh has proven to be considered even in the upper half of NFL people in their respective positions.

IMO, there is nothing about Saleh that could not also have been said about Todd Bowles when he was hired. Accomplished coordinators who flop as HCs are all over the NFL.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
25,158
Agreed, plus bad ownership rarely learns its lesson. The smart money is in continued chaos there, seems to me
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
20,214
IMO, there is nothing about Saleh that could not also have been said about Todd Bowles when he was hired. Accomplished coordinators who flop as HCs are all over the NFL.
Todd Bowles was fine and should get another opportunity. Saleh seems to be able to recruit assistant coaches more easily for whatever reason.

Joe D is at a minimum competent which is a vast improvement over the last 2 guys.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,223
Mansfield MA
We’ll see. I don’t really know what Joe Douglas or Robert Saleh has proven to be considered even in the upper half of NFL people in their respective positions.
Maybe not as GM, but what I really liked about the Douglas hire was that he rebuilt that Eagles scouting staff from the ground up. I assumed it was largely Reid holdovers, but it wasn't. Howie's coming from the cap side and Douglas brought in a ton of new blood from the Ravens (/ Patriots) tree to the Philadelphia scouting department. So he's run a scouting department before, with success - we'll see if that translates to the other parts of the GM job.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
68,245
Oregon
I might be on an island about this, but I wonder what the 49ers do with Josh Rosen — whether they'll see enough to keep as a 3, and eventual 2 if/when JG is moved.

The guy's career fascinates me.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
20,214
There is some debate whether or not Zach Wilson is a great fit for a boot-action and wide zone system. I know Ben Solak had some reservations about it. Doug Farrar and Mark Schofield think it would be a fit though as do I.

I think Trey Lance is the move at 3. Falcons were rumored to be locked onto him at 4. I think with Jimmy G for a year it makes too much sense too.
What do you think about these Mac Jones rumors. Jeremiah was saying it doesn’t make sense to him but he says it is real actual sourced information.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
6,922
Dallas
I might be on an island about this, but I wonder what the 49ers do with Josh Rosen — whether they'll see enough to keep as a 3, and eventual 2 if/when JG is moved.

The guy's career fascinates me.
HAH! You and me both!! I have a Josh Rosen autographed football too. I really thought him and Lamar Jackson were the guys that year with Baker.

I think he's comfortable and working there. Could see him refine his craft and I wouldn't be surprised if he was cut or if in a few years he has a decent little career.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
301
Add Mike Tannenbaum to the list of lol talent evaluators who are sure the 49ers are taking Jones...

"That they’re drafting Mac Jones," former NFL executive Mike Tannenbaum said on the latest episode of "49ers Talk," "and they see Mac Jones like Matt Ryan, Matt Schaub and Jimmy Garoppolo.

"They got a young guy who’s really smart and accurate with the ball who’s functionally athletic enough. I would be shocked if they don’t draft Mac Jones with the third pick."
https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/49ers/2021-nfl-draft-49ers-not-picking-mac-jones-would-stun-mike-tannenbaum
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
68,245
Oregon
"That they’re drafting Mac Jones," former NFL executive Mike Tannenbaum said on the latest episode of "49ers Talk," "and they see Mac Jones like Matt Ryan, Matt Schaub and Jimmy Garoppolo."
1 out of 3 ain't bad
 

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
4,690
CT
HAH! You and me both!! I have a Josh Rosen autographed football too. I really thought him and Lamar Jackson were the guys that year with Baker.

I think he's comfortable and working there. Could see him refine his craft and I wouldn't be surprised if he was cut or if in a few years he has a decent little career.
Daniel Jeremiah talked about it on his podcast last year I believe. He said going back and looking at his tape the thing that sticks out is Rosen lacks twitch and urgency in the pocket. Meaning he doesn’t really have any explosiveness in his lower half when he climbs the pocket or to evade a pass rush. He also doesn’t get through his reads quickly.

Obviously that’s hindsight being 20/20, but Jeremiah said it’s something he was going to watch for closer on future prospects because he missed on Rosen. FWIW, I see the same thing in Mac Jones.
 

Rico Guapo

lurker
Apr 24, 2009
1,529
New England's Rising Star
Daniel Jeremiah talked about it on his podcast last year I believe. He said going back and looking at his tape the thing that sticks out is Rosen lacks twitch and urgency in the pocket. Meaning he doesn’t really have any explosiveness in his lower half when he climbs the pocket or to evade a pass rush. He also doesn’t get through his reads quickly.

Obviously that’s hindsight being 20/20, but Jeremiah said it’s something he was going to watch for closer on future prospects because he missed on Rosen. FWIW, I see the same thing in Mac Jones.
Almost every scouting report I read on Rosen lauded his intelligence and ability to read the field yet none of his college tape translated to the pros.
 

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
4,690
CT
Almost every scouting report I read on Rosen lauded his intelligence and ability to read the field yet none of his college tape translated to the pros.
People were legitimately worried he was too smart.

The thing that should worry teams about Mac Jones is what does he look like when he doesn’t have a bunch of first and second round picks in front of him? He seems to have the brain to get to his hot reads, but he doesn’t seem to have a great deal escapability.

You can say the same caveat applied for Tua, but IMO Tua is a far better athlete than Mac Jones and showed the ability to get out of pressure and make plays with his legs both in college and in the NFL.

Again, all of this essentially says that I don’t buy Mac Jones at 3 until I see it with my own eyes. I’m still thinking it’s Lance or Fields.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
43,666
Again, all of this essentially says that I don’t buy Mac Jones at 3 until I see it with my own eyes. I’m still thinking it’s Lance or Fields.
Maybe, but why would Shanahan choose to fly to watch Mac Jones throw and not Fields when the workouts were the same day? You don't need to smokescreen.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
18,868
Philadelphia
People were legitimately worried he was too smart.

The thing that should worry teams about Mac Jones is what does he look like when he doesn’t have a bunch of first and second round picks in front of him? He seems to have the brain to get to his hot reads, but he doesn’t seem to have a great deal escapability.

You can say the same caveat applied for Tua, but IMO Tua is a far better athlete than Mac Jones and showed the ability to get out of pressure and make plays with his legs both in college and in the NFL.

Again, all of this essentially says that I don’t buy Mac Jones at 3 until I see it with my own eyes. I’m still thinking it’s Lance or Fields.
I'm not enough of a QB evaluator to have a strong opinion on Mac Jones or really any of these other guys in the draft. Nor do I really have a strong opinion on whether Jones, Lance, or Fields will be picked third.

But I think we should be circumspect about the broad proposition - which seems to be repeated almost as an article of faith these days by many draftnik types - that the NFL game has evolved in a way that mobility and playmaking is like this sin qua non quality for an upper tier QB. The whole draft commentary and player evaluation media industry contains a lot of incentives for journalists/podcasters/draftniks to converge and embrace whatever language and opinions sound the most cutting edge in the football world, as this drives clicks and listens. So every person talking about QBs these days is talking about making plays out of structure and throwing off-platform and running boot-action and whatever.

I'm not saying that this unimportant, but its also possible that the draftnik/media industry ends up placing more importance on that stuff than the actual NFL talent evaluators. Someone like BB or Kyle Shanahan might just think, "Sure, all that is great...but given the choice of a guy with those qualities in spades who is lacking in other areas and the guy who has only functional mobility but who is a great competitor, makes good quick decisions, and delivers the ball accurately and on time from the pocket, I'll take the second all day everyday."
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,343
Listen Shanahan has shown himself to be great at creating offense. I'll just say, if I were an NFL GM, I'd be very wary of using a top 3 pick on anyone about whom the phrase "should be functional" is a major component of the scouting report.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
12,926
New York City
I'm not enough of a QB evaluator to have a strong opinion on Mac Jones or really any of these other guys in the draft. Nor do I really have a strong opinion on whether Jones, Lance, or Fields will be picked third.

But I think we should be circumspect about the broad proposition - which seems to be repeated almost as an article of faith these days by many draftnik types - that the NFL game has evolved in a way that mobility and playmaking is like this sin qua non quality for an upper tier QB. The whole draft commentary and player evaluation media industry contains a lot of incentives for journalists/podcasters/draftniks to converge and embrace whatever language and opinions sound the most cutting edge in the football world, as this drives clicks and listens. So every person talking about QBs these days is talking about making plays out of structure and throwing off-platform and running boot-action and whatever.

I'm not saying that this unimportant, but its also possible that the draftnik/media industry ends up placing more importance on that stuff than the actual NFL talent evaluators. Someone like BB or Kyle Shanahan might just think, "Sure, all that is great...but given the choice of a guy with those qualities in spades who is lacking in other areas and the guy who has only functional mobility but who is a great competitor, makes good quick decisions, and delivers the ball accurately and on time from the pocket, I'll take the second all day everyday."
The emphasis on QB mobility will also end very quickly when a Mahomes or Fields or Lance suffers a horrendous injury on a designed QB run. I know people like to say things like Lamar Jackson is able to avoid big hits, but no one with a ball in the NFL is able to prevent getting blown to smithereens every once and a while.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
38,356
Feel like it'll always depend on the team. For a team like the Pats, a mobile QB makes more sense. For a team like SF, a guy like Mac probably makes sense given the receiving talent surrounding him and the need to just get the ball out and accurately. I'm starting to believe (and hope) that Mac actually is the pick at #3.
 

brandonchristensen

mad photochops
SoSH Member
Feb 4, 2012
28,106
The emphasis on QB mobility will also end very quickly when a Mahomes or Fields or Lance suffers a horrendous injury on a designed QB run. I know people like to say things like Lamar Jackson is able to avoid big hits, but no one with a ball in the NFL is able to prevent getting blown to smithereens every once and a while.
Especially since both of them were concussed in the playoffs.
 

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
4,690
CT
I'm not enough of a QB evaluator to have a strong opinion on Mac Jones or really any of these other guys in the draft. Nor do I really have a strong opinion on whether Jones, Lance, or Fields will be picked third.

But I think we should be circumspect about the broad proposition - which seems to be repeated almost as an article of faith these days by many draftnik types - that the NFL game has evolved in a way that mobility and playmaking is like this sin qua non quality for an upper tier QB. The whole draft commentary and player evaluation media industry contains a lot of incentives for journalists/podcasters/draftniks to converge and embrace whatever language and opinions sound the most cutting edge in the football world, as this drives clicks and listens. So every person talking about QBs these days is talking about making plays out of structure and throwing off-platform and running boot-action and whatever.

I'm not saying that this unimportant, but its also possible that the draftnik/media industry ends up placing more importance on that stuff than the actual NFL talent evaluators. Someone like BB or Kyle Shanahan might just think, "Sure, all that is great...but given the choice of a guy with those qualities in spades who is lacking in other areas and the guy who has only functional mobility but who is a great competitor, makes good quick decisions, and delivers the ball accurately and on time from the pocket, I'll take the second all day everyday."
I think the biggest point with a QB with mobility is it gives your offense margin for error. When a protection breaks down, a player like Mahomes or Aaron Rodgers has the ability to extend the play or get out of the pocket and make a play on their own. Mac Jones doesn’t give you that margin for error.

Like when the play call is good, the protection is good, the receiver gets open, he can hit his man probably as well as any of the other QBs.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,223
Mansfield MA
Maybe, but why would Shanahan choose to fly to watch Mac Jones throw and not Fields when the workouts were the same day? You don't need to smokescreen.
Alabama had already had one Pro Day so this was the last chance to see Jones. Fields is going to have another throwing session. This is not just a SF problem.
Kyle Shanahan said:
Also, Alabama has already had one. This is their second one. Just talking with Fields' agent and everything, we'll get another one from him too. So we'll be able to see him so that kind of made it an easy decision.
There is also potentially some value in them smokescreening since NYJ at 2 is running a very similar system.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,343
The emphasis on QB mobility will also end very quickly when a Mahomes or Fields or Lance suffers a horrendous injury on a designed QB run. I know people like to say things like Lamar Jackson is able to avoid big hits, but no one with a ball in the NFL is able to prevent getting blown to smithereens every once and a while.
Mobility and designed running are very different things.
Designed runs are a very specific thing.
Ability to escape and run for a 1st is usually what more people mean by mobility.
The next level down in mobility is simply... the ability to evade the pass rush, and avoid hits.

Immobile QBs take a lot of hits that mobile QBs don't.
Here are the bottom 4 full time starting QBs in hits taken last year.... Lamar Jackson, Kyler Murray, Baker Mayfield, Aaron Rodgers, Cam Newton
Here are the top 4 full time starting QBs in hits taken last year: Cousins, Ryan, Herbert, Wilson, Tannehill

So sure, designed rushing QBs are going to take hits, but that is a different issue than mobile QBs vs. immobile. I wouldn't consider Rodgers a rushing QB, but he is mobile and he greatly decreases his hits taken that way.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
11,985
You all know that I think Mac Jones could be pretty good. But I never envisioned trading UP to get him, and I never remotely envisioned picking him at #3. Good lord.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
12,926
New York City
I think the biggest point with a QB with mobility is it gives your offense margin for error. When a protection breaks down, a player like Mahomes or Aaron Rodgers has the ability to extend the play or get out of the pocket and make a play on their own. Mac Jones doesn’t give you that margin for error.

Like when the play call is good, the protection is good, the receiver gets open, he can hit his man probably as well as any of the other QBs.
I don't think it's quite a mobility issue. Mac Jones's mobility isn't Dan McGwuire and his athletic ability isn't that bad --his 40 and shuttle times are pretty close to those of Mahomes (4.85 to 4.80, 4.08 and 6.88 for Mahomes to 4.38 and 7.04 for Jones).

Where Mahomes and Rodgers are different is that they can make unbelievable throws on the run because of their laser rocket arms. I haven't watched Fields or Lance enough to know if they have a similar ability to make amazing passes while scurrying around avoiding pressure.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
18,868
Philadelphia
I think the biggest point with a QB with mobility is it gives your offense margin for error. When a protection breaks down, a player like Mahomes or Aaron Rodgers has the ability to extend the play or get out of the pocket and make a play on their own. Mac Jones doesn’t give you that margin for error.

Like when the play call is good, the protection is good, the receiver gets open, he can hit his man probably as well as any of the other QBs.
I don't think there is any doubt that mobility and the ability to extend plays is an asset for a QB. The issue is really the relative importance of that ability vis-a-vis the many other characteristics that are also important for a QB. And the very real possibility that media/podcasters/draftniks place more relative import on it than actual NFL talent evaluators.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,223
Mansfield MA
Mobility and designed running are very different things.
Designed runs are a very specific thing.
Ability to escape and run for a 1st is usually what more people mean by mobility.
The next level down in mobility is simply... the ability to evade the pass rush, and avoid hits.

Immobile QBs take a lot of hits that mobile QBs don't.
Here are the bottom 4 full time starting QBs in hits taken last year.... Lamar Jackson, Kyler Murray, Baker Mayfield, Aaron Rodgers, Cam Newton
Here are the top 4 full time starting QBs in hits taken last year: Cousins, Ryan, Herbert, Wilson, Tannehill

So sure, designed rushing QBs are going to take hits, but that is a different issue than mobile QBs vs. immobile. I wouldn't consider Rodgers a rushing QB, but he is mobile and he greatly decreases his hits taken that way.
QB hits aren't the only hits QBs take though. There are also sacks (and mobile guys, like Wilson and Watson, often take a lot) and hits on scrambles or designed runs. A guy like Brady who doesn't take many sacks and almost never runs is going to get hit less than a guy like Wilson who scrambles a lot and takes a lot of sacks.

EDIT:
And I 100% agree mobility and designed running are two different things that often get conflated and it's important to be specific about which we are talking about when we discuss QBs and their potential fits.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
12,926
New York City
Mobility and designed running are very different things.
Designed runs are a very specific thing.
Ability to escape and run for a 1st is usually what more people mean by mobility.
The next level down in mobility is simply... the ability to evade the pass rush, and avoid hits.

Immobile QBs take a lot of hits that mobile QBs don't.
Here are the bottom 4 full time starting QBs in hits taken last year.... Lamar Jackson, Kyler Murray, Baker Mayfield, Aaron Rodgers, Cam Newton
Here are the top 4 full time starting QBs in hits taken last year: Cousins, Ryan, Herbert, Wilson, Tannehill

So sure, designed rushing QBs are going to take hits, but that is a different issue than mobile QBs vs. immobile. I wouldn't consider Rodgers a rushing QB, but he is mobile and he greatly decreases his hits taken that way.
I think we're in general agreement--certainly being mobile, being able to escape pressure and being able to throw on the run are great assets. I'd push back a little on designed runs--I do think both talking heads, draftniks, and an increasing numbers of NFL teams are looking for a quarterback who can not just escape pressure or run for the occasional first down when things breaks down, but are looking to use the threat of a running QB as a bigger part of their offense.

Now personally if I had a great QB who was also very mobile-(a young Andrew Luck or Trevor Lawrence, who can run a bit) -I personally would virtually never use that guy for designed runs.
 
Last edited:

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,343
QB hits aren't the only hits QBs take though. There are also sacks (and mobile guys, like Wilson and Watson, often take a lot) and hits on scrambles or designed runs. A guy like Brady who doesn't take many sacks and almost never runs is going to get hit less than a guy like Wilson who scrambles a lot and takes a lot of sacks.
Wilson is the obvious outlier on that list in that his line is garbage and he holds too long. A lot of Wilson's hits, and sacks come from him holding the ball for insane amounts of time, having the chance to avoid the hit and throw away and choosing not to.

I do get the idea behind it, but mobility is better than non-mobility in every way.
If you are worried about hits don't design QB runs.
The worst hits for QBs (outside of MAYBE designed runs) are blindside pocket hits, and hits into the legs when stuck in the pocket. A mobile QB can be protected better, especially if you minimize designed runs, and emphasize getting out of bounds or sliding on scrambles.

Now, I think many teams want designed runs, it changes the math on defense. But... if you're worried about them don't call them.

The problem for immobile QBs is that they have no options to avoid hits. Brady has a quick release and is an elite mover in the pocket (one of the best ever(.... he still takes a lot of hits (58 last year). He has no way to avoid certain hits. Kyler has far more opportunity to avoid hits as an example... now he may choose to turn those into attempts to make positive yardage because he can and he's a weapon on the run, but if he chose to simply escape and then throw it away, he could, and he'd take far fewer hits than Brady.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
26,787
Hingham, MA
Peyton and Brady are two of the most "immobile" QBs ever and they never take hits.

Meanwhile we see Mahomes limping around every other week.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,343
Peyton and Brady are two of the most "immobile" QBs ever and they never take hits.

Meanwhile we see Mahomes limping around every other week.
Ummm... Brady takes hits, and missed an entire year on account of a hit.
Manning missed a year due to a bad neck from years of getting hit a lot.

Edit- you're also talking 2 all time greats, who played a significant portion of their careers in a different era of athleticism. More recent immobile QBs have struggled. I would guess part of it is, they never get the level of experience that helps you get the ball out quick and avoid hits.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
26,787
Hingham, MA
Ummm... Brady takes hits, and missed an entire year on account of a hit.
Manning missed a year due to a bad neck from years of getting hit a lot.

Edit- you're also talking 2 all time greats, who played a significant portion of their careers in a different era of athleticism. More recent immobile QBs have struggled. I would guess part of it is, they never get the level of experience that helps you get the ball out quick and avoid hits.
The hit to Brady wasn't illegal at the time. Also, not sure I would use Tom Brady as an example of someone who is prone to injury at the QB position.

Re: Manning, I don't know the reason for his surgery, you may be right. But both guys are annually amongst the least sacked and least hit QBs.

You are correct that they are all time greats, no argument there. But they're proof that you don't need to be "mobile" to avoid hits and be a great QB.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,223
Mansfield MA
Wilson is the obvious outlier on that list in that his line is garbage and he holds too long. A lot of Wilson's hits, and sacks come from him holding the ball for insane amounts of time, having the chance to avoid the hit and throw away and choosing not to.
Scrambling often leads to holding the ball too long, because you're scrambling. Wilson is an extreme, but he's not the only mobile QB to take a ton of hits. Rodgers used to take boatloads of sacks. Roethlisberger used to take tons of sacks, back when he was mobile; he takes a lot fewer now. It can be hard for OL to block for mobile guys, because they don't know where they are all the time.

I do get the idea behind it, but mobility is better than non-mobility in every way.
If you are worried about hits don't design QB runs.
The worst hits for QBs (outside of MAYBE designed runs) are blindside pocket hits, and hits into the legs when stuck in the pocket. A mobile QB can be protected better, especially if you minimize designed runs, and emphasize getting out of bounds or sliding on scrambles.
I understand what you're saying, but I don't think it reflects reality. A lot of scrambling / mobility is about mentality rather than athleticism. Some guys are going to scramble, hang on to the ball, and try to make something happen. Some guys stay in the pocket and play from there. Like Tony Romo ran an awful 40, over 5.00 seconds, but he was a guy who would try to make plays.

I would need to see evidence that certain kinds of hits are more prone to cause injuries than other kinds of hits. Anecdotally, it seems all over the place to me. I think any time you get hit, there's a chance for it to be the wrong kind of hit.

The problem for immobile QBs is that they have no options to avoid hits. Brady has a quick release and is an elite mover in the pocket (one of the best ever(.... he still takes a lot of hits (58 last year). He has no way to avoid certain hits. Kyler has far more opportunity to avoid hits as an example... now he may choose to turn those into attempts to make positive yardage because he can and he's a weapon on the run, but if he chose to simply escape and then throw it away, he could, and he'd take far fewer hits than Brady.
Brady took a lot of hits last year in an offense that emphasizes throwing the deep ball a lot. He took 20-something fewer hits the couple years prior in NE's offense that didn't. There's a lot that goes into this stuff.