Mallett or Newton

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SF69ers:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:


What about last year when a healthy Locker was:

~ranked 55th in the nation in total passer rating i dont care about that rating...a lot of s**tty QBs have very good ratings but they stay s**tty.
~68th in completion % absolute number is sth i care even less about...
~59th in yards per attempt same here
~Tied for 63rd with total number of interceptions thrown (11) 11 INTs to 21 TDs is ok.

i'm tired of see some stats as an argument...stats tell you only the half of truth, at max...

Yah, those pesky stats/facts.

Ok, so please explain the positive side of those stats, since you say they are only "half the truth."

I've tried for two months with communist, but he's a Locker-maniac.

What he's essentially saying is, "in just about every measure of a QB (wins, losses, stats), Locker isn't very good...except to the naked eye and my personal opinion and that's all that matters."

He recently agreed with me that Locker's play this season may have dropped his stock to the 2nd round. However, he and I went back and forth in the Locker vs. Luck thread when he continued to praise Locker's strong arm and feet, but not Luck's.

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

What he's essentially saying is, "in just about every measure of a QB (wins, losses, stats), Locker isn't very good...except to the naked eye and my personal opinion and that's all that matters."

i said that i dont care about stats that much like u do...
you are talking about ratings, here we go:
would you really pick kellen moore from boise state over locker, or tolzien from wisconsin or dalton from tcu or mcelroy from bama??? b/c all of these guys have better ratingt than luck.
if you are talking about the td:int ratio, then you have to go after moore.

we can do it the whole day long...my point is plain and simple: you have to watch the games. stats are way too bad indicators for qb-abilites.
I have alreadu said that locker could easily fall to the 2nd unless he plays a good bowl game, senior bowl etc.
but i would ask the scouts why they were that high on locker last season though his stats were so bad...

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

What he's essentially saying is, "in just about every measure of a QB (wins, losses, stats), Locker isn't very good...except to the naked eye and my personal opinion and that's all that matters."

i said that i dont care about stats that much like u do...
you are talking about ratings, here we go:
would you really pick kellen moore from boise state over locker, or tolzien from wisconsin or dalton from tcu or mcelroy from bama??? b/c all of these guys have better ratingt than luck.
if you are talking about the td:int ratio, then you have to go after moore.

we can do it the whole day long...my point is plain and simple: you have to watch the games. stats are way too bad indicators for qb-abilites.
I have alreadu said that locker could easily fall to the 2nd unless he plays a good bowl game, senior bowl etc.
but i would ask the scouts why they were that high on locker last season though his stats were so bad...

I'm not saying stats are everything and you just go by that (only an idiot would take that approach). I'm saying, they're "something" and not so easily dismissed. They tell part of the story, meaning it's something to pay attention to (especially around issues of accuracy) and use as factor in scouting/projecting college QBs.

Clearly, Luck is the QB with the best overall skills, and will go #1. He also happens to be very productive, and has led his team to a winning record and a BCS bowl. All of that factors in.

The other guys you mention clearly don't have the skill-set/potential of even a Locker...much less luck, so I wouldn't take any of those other guys over Luck/Locker regardless of their stats (this is where the overall evaluation comes into play).

That said, I would pass on Locker (at least in the first 2 rounds), given how much he struggles to complete passes at a decent rate (even for college). I just can't see a team willing to invest that much money/that high a pick on someone who has a hard time doing the basics as a QB (completing passes). That's just my take.

^^^^ Locker has more to work on then even Tebow and you just cant invest to much money into him when he is at lest 3 years away from being ready to see game action. What QB has been successful when he couldn't complete 60% of his passes in college??

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

That said, I would pass on Locker (at least in the first 2 rounds), given how much he struggles to complete passes at a decent rate (even for college). I just can't see a team willing to invest that much money/that high a pick on someone who has a hard time doing the basics as a QB (completing passes). That's just my take.

you are talking about locker's percentage as if it is clearly under 50%...

Originally posted by Jcool:
^^^^ Locker has more to work on then even Tebow and you just cant invest to much money into him when he is at lest 3 years away from being ready to see game action. What QB has been successful when he couldn't complete 60% of his passes in college??

what does the completion pct have to do with someones success in the nfl???

To the original question, I'd take Newton over Mallett, mostly because Mallett seems like an a*****e. I don't like QBs who boast and blame others and I'm not sure he could carry a team. I actually like Locker, if we were drafting in the 20s or if he dropped to the 2nd. The guy has talent but hasn't been fit and will need a year to sit and learn. I saw enough last year of him to think he has a chance to be very good.

In saying all that I'd probably send 2 firsts and some others to pick Luck, he looks on another planet to most QB prospects and he'd easily be worth the risk. Why settle for second best?

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

That said, I would pass on Locker (at least in the first 2 rounds), given how much he struggles to complete passes at a decent rate (even for college). I just can't see a team willing to invest that much money/that high a pick on someone who has a hard time doing the basics as a QB (completing passes). That's just my take.

you are talking about locker's percentage as if it is clearly under 50%...

Originally posted by Jcool:
^^^^ Locker has more to work on then even Tebow and you just cant invest to much money into him when he is at lest 3 years away from being ready to see game action. What QB has been successful when he couldn't complete 60% of his passes in college??

what does the completion pct have to do with someones success in the nfl???

Completing a pass is pretty important for a QB

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

That said, I would pass on Locker (at least in the first 2 rounds), given how much he struggles to complete passes at a decent rate (even for college). I just can't see a team willing to invest that much money/that high a pick on someone who has a hard time doing the basics as a QB (completing passes). That's just my take.

you are talking about locker's percentage as if it is clearly under 50%...

Originally posted by Jcool:
^^^^ Locker has more to work on then even Tebow and you just cant invest to much money into him when he is at lest 3 years away from being ready to see game action. What QB has been successful when he couldn't complete 60% of his passes in college??

what does the completion pct have to do with someones success in the nfl???

Completing below 60% of your passes is still not something to brag about. His accuracy is the main reason why his completion percentage is so low. Yes, the talent level around him is crap and he was injured all year, but he did have similar issues in passing last season.

Completion percentage has plenty to do with a QB being successful!! You have to be able to complete your passes to your receivers to be able to move down the field and score TDs.

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

What he's essentially saying is, "in just about every measure of a QB (wins, losses, stats), Locker isn't very good...except to the naked eye and my personal opinion and that's all that matters."

i said that i dont care about stats that much like u do...
you are talking about ratings, here we go:
would you really pick kellen moore from boise state over locker, or tolzien from wisconsin or dalton from tcu or mcelroy from bama??? b/c all of these guys have better ratingt than luck.
if you are talking about the td:int ratio, then you have to go after moore.

we can do it the whole day long...my point is plain and simple: you have to watch the games. stats are way too bad indicators for qb-abilites.
I have alreadu said that locker could easily fall to the 2nd unless he plays a good bowl game, senior bowl etc.
but i would ask the scouts why they were that high on locker last season though his stats were so bad...

The difference is Auburn is a better team than Washington by a lot...

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

What he's essentially saying is, "in just about every measure of a QB (wins, losses, stats), Locker isn't very good...except to the naked eye and my personal opinion and that's all that matters."

i said that i dont care about stats that much like u do...
you are talking about ratings, here we go:
would you really pick kellen moore from boise state over locker, or tolzien from wisconsin or dalton from tcu or mcelroy from bama??? b/c all of these guys have better ratingt than luck.
if you are talking about the td:int ratio, then you have to go after moore.

we can do it the whole day long...my point is plain and simple: you have to watch the games. stats are way too bad indicators for qb-abilites.
I have alreadu said that locker could easily fall to the 2nd unless he plays a good bowl game, senior bowl etc.
but i would ask the scouts why they were that high on locker last season though his stats were so bad...

The difference is Auburn is a better team than Washington by a lot...

Thanks to Cam Newton!

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

That said, I would pass on Locker (at least in the first 2 rounds), given how much he struggles to complete passes at a decent rate (even for college). I just can't see a team willing to invest that much money/that high a pick on someone who has a hard time doing the basics as a QB (completing passes). That's just my take.

you are talking about locker's percentage as if it is clearly under 50%...

Originally posted by Jcool:
^^^^ Locker has more to work on then even Tebow and you just cant invest to much money into him when he is at lest 3 years away from being ready to see game action. What QB has been successful when he couldn't complete 60% of his passes in college??

what does the completion pct have to do with someones success in the nfl???

I'm talking about Locker's inability to complete passes at a respectiabe clip (rule of thumb in college is, anything below 60% is flat-out bad), which speaks to his draft status/stock. I'm not saying he's a bum or that he'll never amount to anything...I'm just saying, I wouldn't select him with a high pick.

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

What he's essentially saying is, "in just about every measure of a QB (wins, losses, stats), Locker isn't very good...except to the naked eye and my personal opinion and that's all that matters."

i said that i dont care about stats that much like u do...
you are talking about ratings, here we go:
would you really pick kellen moore from boise state over locker, or tolzien from wisconsin or dalton from tcu or mcelroy from bama??? b/c all of these guys have better ratingt than luck.
if you are talking about the td:int ratio, then you have to go after moore.

we can do it the whole day long...my point is plain and simple: you have to watch the games. stats are way too bad indicators for qb-abilites.
I have alreadu said that locker could easily fall to the 2nd unless he plays a good bowl game, senior bowl etc.
but i would ask the scouts why they were that high on locker last season though his stats were so bad...

The difference is Auburn is a better team than Washington by a lot...

Thanks to Cam Newton!

Much more than Newton. They have SEC speed and talent. WA has nothing other than Locker. He's a 1 man team.

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

That said, I would pass on Locker (at least in the first 2 rounds), given how much he struggles to complete passes at a decent rate (even for college). I just can't see a team willing to invest that much money/that high a pick on someone who has a hard time doing the basics as a QB (completing passes). That's just my take.

you are talking about locker's percentage as if it is clearly under 50%...

Originally posted by Jcool:
^^^^ Locker has more to work on then even Tebow and you just cant invest to much money into him when he is at lest 3 years away from being ready to see game action. What QB has been successful when he couldn't complete 60% of his passes in college??

what does the completion pct have to do with someones success in the nfl???

I'm talking about Locker's inability to complete passes at a respectiabe clip (rule of thumb in college is, anything below 60% is flat-out bad), which speaks to his draft status/stock. I'm not saying he's a bum or that he'll never amount to anything...I'm just saying, I wouldn't select him with a high pick.

Broken rib + deep thigh bruise. When healthy he's pretty accurate. He just tried to tough it out this year.

Originally posted by Jcool:


Completing a pass is pretty important for a QB

catching a catchable ball either...or protecting his QB so that he can throw without any pressure.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

That said, I would pass on Locker (at least in the first 2 rounds), given how much he struggles to complete passes at a decent rate (even for college). I just can't see a team willing to invest that much money/that high a pick on someone who has a hard time doing the basics as a QB (completing passes). That's just my take.

you are talking about locker's percentage as if it is clearly under 50%...

Originally posted by Jcool:
^^^^ Locker has more to work on then even Tebow and you just cant invest to much money into him when he is at lest 3 years away from being ready to see game action. What QB has been successful when he couldn't complete 60% of his passes in college??

what does the completion pct have to do with someones success in the nfl???

I'm talking about Locker's inability to complete passes at a respectiabe clip (rule of thumb in college is, anything below 60% is flat-out bad), which speaks to his draft status/stock. I'm not saying he's a bum or that he'll never amount to anything...I'm just saying, I wouldn't select him with a high pick.

Broken rib + deep thigh bruise. When healthy he's pretty accurate. He just tried to tough it out this year.

But he was at 58.2 all of last year when he was healthy, and at 53.8 in 2008 before his season-ending injury. That's just not good, no matter how you slice it.