sbk92
2
- Messages
- 12,134
- Reaction score
- 6
Wes Answers Your Cowboys Questions: The Quarterbacks Will Rise -- As Usual
Posted by Rafael at Tuesday, February 08, 2011
Thanks to all who sent in their draft questions. In part one of Cowboys Nation's weekly chat with the National Football Post's Wes Bunting, Wes reviews the quarterback crop, the fullback crop, interior offensive linemen, his ratings system and talks about the degree to which the Indianapolis Combine affects draft grades.
Cowboys Nation: Of the quarterbacks in the first round of your mock, how many of them are there because they're legitimate first rounders, and how many of them are there because teams simply need a quarterback?
Second, which member of this first quarterback group has the best chance to emerge as a standout pro?
Wes Bunting: None of them are first-rounders, in my mind. They're going to go high because teams need quarterbacks, and these are the best of the bunch.
I wouldn't take any in the first round. The one who has the best chance to be a standout is Blaine Gabbert, but I have some questions about him. I would say the safest of the bunch is Christian Ponder, because he gets it from the neck up, but his physical skill set isn't anywhere near [Cam] Newton's or [Ryan] Mallett's. I think he can be a solid starter.
Those other four guys are just boom-or-bust picks. You might get lucky with one of them, you might not, but there's just too much risk, in my opinion. I don't have convictions on any of them, so when I don't have convictions on a player I won't give them a high grade.
CN: Let's talk about each of them, and have you assess the riskiest parts of their respective games. I'll put out a name, and you tell me what your biggest misgiving is. Let's start with Mallett.
WB: With Mallet there's a character concern. He transferred from Michigan. There are some off-the-field things that really worry some scouts who I've talked to.
On the field he doesn't have great ball placement. He's not an overly accurate quarterback. He makes these ''mirage throws'' as I call them, because they just blind you, these stick throws in the intermediate level. But he's got this long windup where he gets overextended in his footwork. He doesn't move his feet very well. He's got a long release. If you make him move his feet in the pocket he's pretty inefficient, and that's the biggest thing that scares me. I don't think he'll ever complete more than 60% of his passes in the NFL.
He's a guy who you have to measure like Allen Iverson. You're going to get a lot of bad plays, but does he have enough good plays to make up for it? That's what you have to figure out with Ryan Mallett. I think he needs to play in a Norv Turner like offensive, where he can sling the ball down the field and ride the run game if he hopes to be effective.
CN: Talk about Blaine Gabbert, since you've said you like him.
WB: He's the cleanest off-the-field guy of all the juniors, which I like. He's mature, he's been productive. He can make all the throws. At 6'5'', he's a pretty good athlete. But we talk about balance and being compact with your footwork. He gets a bit long with his footwork. He's not as bad as Mallett, but he's got a bit of a windup in his release. That's a big thing with him because it causes his timing to be off. He can't get the ball off as quickly and it causes his accuracy to drop a bit.
At the same time he doesn't have a great feel in the pocket; his eye level drops very quickly and he flushes himself from pressure way too fast. Where a tall QB like Big Ben can slide and has a good feel in tight areas, Gabbert is almost as good of an athlete but he just doesn't have that same type of feel and if you're a big quarterback like him it's all about being balanced, being able to move in tight areas and getting the ball out on time and he doesn't do that well enough.
When he has time to set, he can throw the ball down-field better than any quarterback in the draft, and that's why I have him number one but I have some big concerns about his game.
CN: Let's move to Cam Newton.
WB: Newton is as physically gifted as anyone. He's got some Big Ben to his game, some Josh Freeman to his game. You just worry, is this a guy who wants to be a franchise quarterback? I've heard that he's got great on-the-field character. His teammates rally around him. He brought his team back from 24 down against Alabama, and there's a lot to be said for that. However you spin it, that's impressive.
But at the same time, he's texting at the Heisman Trophy ceremony. He comes off as this likeable guy but there were a lot of character issues that popped up when he was at Florida. You know, Reggie Bush came off as this likeable guy and it all came back and bit him. I've heard some rumors that he's selfish, a me-first kind of guy and that scares me.
CN: Jake Locker
WB: Locker is just so inconsistent. There are times when he looks like a first-round pick, and others where it's not there. I just don't think he trusts what he sees. I think he's a reps-only guy. I don't think he decipers information quickly on the field. He gets caught staring down his initial read and throwing into coverage. He started out at the Senior Bowl working against cover-one and cover three, which are basic coverages he'll see in the NFL but if he doesn't see them, his accuracy struggles, and he'll see a lot more sophisticated schemes in the league.
CN: That gets us to Christian Ponder
WB: Ponder is worked himself back into the mix because he's been kicked in the teeth so often, and instead of moaning about it, he's dusted himself off and kept working. I thought he was the best senior prospect coming into the year. He hurt his shoulder against Clemson in 2009. He hurt his forearm, against Oklahoma I believe, then he hurt his elbow on his throwing arm, and he had a real candy arm all year. And when your throwing arm is that injured, that's to be expected.
When he's been healthy, he's very good. He had an impressive junior year and he had a very good Senior Bowl. What I take from his senior year is that he's a guy who's willing to play through pain and he's got some injury concerns. I don't know it he can make it through an entire pro year.
Someone said Ponder is like a poor-man's Chad Pennington. He's got a much better arm than Pennington. If you watched him as a senior only, you would think he's Chad Pennington, but if you watched him at Mobile and spinning it as a junior, I think he's got a good enough arm to make all the throws. Does he have the ability to weather the pounding he'll take in a pro year? That's the biggest concern.
CN: Someone asked about J.J. Watt, and where he fits in the DE totem. We've talked about Cam Jordan so much, and there's a sentiment to trade down among a lot of fans. I think the reasoning might be, how would Watt factor as a possible Dallas target in a deal down.
WB: I think he'll be a solid pro. He's a push-pull pass rusher. He's got decent short-area quickness,but he's not a great athlete. He can anchor against the run. He's nasty. He plays the game hard. He uses his hands well. I think he's a 5-technique only. Maybe with some teams like the Seattle Seahawks who want to use a 5-technique in a 4-3 he could be a fit. They used Red Bryant in that role this year.
Some people I've talked to think he can be a 3-technique in a 4-3, but I think he's too tall to hold up inside. I see him as a 5. I think the Patriots would be a good fit for him. He could work for Dallas. I think the Steelers would be a good fit for him. I have him going 32nd right now to the Packers.
CN: I've had two questions about fullbacks, about Pitt's Henry Hynoski and Stanford's Owen Marecic. You put a lot of fullbacks in your top 32 and that surprised some folks. Let's fold those two into the same question. Talk about each and how their games compare?
WB: I gave them the same grades. I think they're both NFL starters. I think Hynoski is more physically dominant. He's got more pop. He can kick out people in the hole. He's not as technically sound but he loves to finish blocks.
Owen Marecic is a little more cerebral, more technically sound. I don't want to say he's a finesse player by any means, its just that maybe as lead blockers Hynoski is a 9, whereas Marecic is a 7.
CN: Say more about your grading system. I think some folks were a bit surprised to see fullbacks in your top 30 and to be clear, you grade each player within his position, not overall, correct. So when they see a really high grade on a fullback, it means you're grading them as fullbacks.
WB: We grade these guy as potential starters at their positions. Okay. Hynoski isn't a top-30 pick. He's in the top 30 on my board, but we don't grade these guys as ''first round picks." All that means is you were taken in the top 32 picks. It doesn't mean you're gonna be a Pro Bowler. It's doesn't mean you're good or bad.
That doesn't mean anything in the NFL so when we grade guys out we tell you where we think they're going to be. Is he a potential pro bowler? A dirty starter? A potential starter? For me, that's much more effective than saying, ''he's a first-round pick'' because it won't tell you if the guy is a good or bad player.
CN: Given that, where do you think those two fullbacks go?
WB: I gave them both higher grades than John Conner (Jets) who was taken in the 5th round last year, so I'd say 4th to 5th round. The 5th round is usually where you see the top fullbacks come off the board, and I think these guys are better than most, so I'd say late 4th to the 5th round.
CN: I got a question about Patrick Peterson. Does Dallas have a snowball's chance at getting him?
WB: I have him going to Buffalo right now. I can see him in discussion for the first overall pick, to be honest. When you have an elite corner like him, even when you have teams that don't have a glaring need at corner, it's tough to overlook him.
CN: You got a question about interior linemen. Which interior line prospects are the best at pass protection; also, which ones are best blocking in space and getting to the second level?
WB: Rodney Hudson is a good player on the move, but he's more of zone-only player. I don't see him as a good fit for the Cowboys. Schilling is a good guard in space, the player from Michigan. He gets overwhelmed a bit in pass protection and he's got to build up his base a bit but he'll be good in time.
He started out as a right tackle about 303 lbs. and he's put on a little weight. In that option attack they run at Michigan he's had to get out on the edge, so he could be a good player to look at on the move.
If you talk Benny Ijalana, he's another great player in space too.
CN: You made a lot of readers nervous when you put Ijalana at the bottom of the first round in your initial mock. Don Banks from CNNSI did the same thing and I know he's an information guy, so I'm wondering if he's hearing from his people that Ijalana is a guy being eyed by teams at the bottom of the first round.
WB: It's an interesting question. A lot of teams down at the bottom of the round could use offensive linemen. The Packers could use one. The Steelers could use one. The Jets need a guard. Supply versus demand.
Danny Watkins could slip in from Baylor and then Ijalana's another guy you could look at. You like to say, oh I'd like him in the 2nd, but if you have a need and he's a talented player...
CN: Is Danny Watkins that high now, even with his age?
WB: You know I had this discussion with a scout. There's not many people who would admit that he's a 1st round pick, and I'd have a tough time taking him there, but his talent... I mean, he dominated during Senior Bowl week as a guard. He's a mature kid, and I was discussing this with a scout. He's 26, but he has very little football mileage on him. He's played some hockey, he's played some rugby, but he doesn't have that brute-force banging on him from football. If he plays 7-8 years, he's still only 34, and there are 34 year old guards in the NFL, and he won't be as beat up as they are at that age.
CN: We discussed him initially as a 3rd round pick, and I put him in my first two mocks there, but now I'm thinking he probably won't last to pick 50.
WB: I think he's a 2nd rounder now. If you can pull him at your pick in the 2nd round, you've done some good business there.
Posted by Rafael at Tuesday, February 08, 2011
Thanks to all who sent in their draft questions. In part one of Cowboys Nation's weekly chat with the National Football Post's Wes Bunting, Wes reviews the quarterback crop, the fullback crop, interior offensive linemen, his ratings system and talks about the degree to which the Indianapolis Combine affects draft grades.
Cowboys Nation: Of the quarterbacks in the first round of your mock, how many of them are there because they're legitimate first rounders, and how many of them are there because teams simply need a quarterback?
Second, which member of this first quarterback group has the best chance to emerge as a standout pro?
Wes Bunting: None of them are first-rounders, in my mind. They're going to go high because teams need quarterbacks, and these are the best of the bunch.
I wouldn't take any in the first round. The one who has the best chance to be a standout is Blaine Gabbert, but I have some questions about him. I would say the safest of the bunch is Christian Ponder, because he gets it from the neck up, but his physical skill set isn't anywhere near [Cam] Newton's or [Ryan] Mallett's. I think he can be a solid starter.
Those other four guys are just boom-or-bust picks. You might get lucky with one of them, you might not, but there's just too much risk, in my opinion. I don't have convictions on any of them, so when I don't have convictions on a player I won't give them a high grade.
CN: Let's talk about each of them, and have you assess the riskiest parts of their respective games. I'll put out a name, and you tell me what your biggest misgiving is. Let's start with Mallett.
WB: With Mallet there's a character concern. He transferred from Michigan. There are some off-the-field things that really worry some scouts who I've talked to.
On the field he doesn't have great ball placement. He's not an overly accurate quarterback. He makes these ''mirage throws'' as I call them, because they just blind you, these stick throws in the intermediate level. But he's got this long windup where he gets overextended in his footwork. He doesn't move his feet very well. He's got a long release. If you make him move his feet in the pocket he's pretty inefficient, and that's the biggest thing that scares me. I don't think he'll ever complete more than 60% of his passes in the NFL.
He's a guy who you have to measure like Allen Iverson. You're going to get a lot of bad plays, but does he have enough good plays to make up for it? That's what you have to figure out with Ryan Mallett. I think he needs to play in a Norv Turner like offensive, where he can sling the ball down the field and ride the run game if he hopes to be effective.
CN: Talk about Blaine Gabbert, since you've said you like him.
WB: He's the cleanest off-the-field guy of all the juniors, which I like. He's mature, he's been productive. He can make all the throws. At 6'5'', he's a pretty good athlete. But we talk about balance and being compact with your footwork. He gets a bit long with his footwork. He's not as bad as Mallett, but he's got a bit of a windup in his release. That's a big thing with him because it causes his timing to be off. He can't get the ball off as quickly and it causes his accuracy to drop a bit.
At the same time he doesn't have a great feel in the pocket; his eye level drops very quickly and he flushes himself from pressure way too fast. Where a tall QB like Big Ben can slide and has a good feel in tight areas, Gabbert is almost as good of an athlete but he just doesn't have that same type of feel and if you're a big quarterback like him it's all about being balanced, being able to move in tight areas and getting the ball out on time and he doesn't do that well enough.
When he has time to set, he can throw the ball down-field better than any quarterback in the draft, and that's why I have him number one but I have some big concerns about his game.
CN: Let's move to Cam Newton.
WB: Newton is as physically gifted as anyone. He's got some Big Ben to his game, some Josh Freeman to his game. You just worry, is this a guy who wants to be a franchise quarterback? I've heard that he's got great on-the-field character. His teammates rally around him. He brought his team back from 24 down against Alabama, and there's a lot to be said for that. However you spin it, that's impressive.
But at the same time, he's texting at the Heisman Trophy ceremony. He comes off as this likeable guy but there were a lot of character issues that popped up when he was at Florida. You know, Reggie Bush came off as this likeable guy and it all came back and bit him. I've heard some rumors that he's selfish, a me-first kind of guy and that scares me.
CN: Jake Locker
WB: Locker is just so inconsistent. There are times when he looks like a first-round pick, and others where it's not there. I just don't think he trusts what he sees. I think he's a reps-only guy. I don't think he decipers information quickly on the field. He gets caught staring down his initial read and throwing into coverage. He started out at the Senior Bowl working against cover-one and cover three, which are basic coverages he'll see in the NFL but if he doesn't see them, his accuracy struggles, and he'll see a lot more sophisticated schemes in the league.
CN: That gets us to Christian Ponder
WB: Ponder is worked himself back into the mix because he's been kicked in the teeth so often, and instead of moaning about it, he's dusted himself off and kept working. I thought he was the best senior prospect coming into the year. He hurt his shoulder against Clemson in 2009. He hurt his forearm, against Oklahoma I believe, then he hurt his elbow on his throwing arm, and he had a real candy arm all year. And when your throwing arm is that injured, that's to be expected.
When he's been healthy, he's very good. He had an impressive junior year and he had a very good Senior Bowl. What I take from his senior year is that he's a guy who's willing to play through pain and he's got some injury concerns. I don't know it he can make it through an entire pro year.
Someone said Ponder is like a poor-man's Chad Pennington. He's got a much better arm than Pennington. If you watched him as a senior only, you would think he's Chad Pennington, but if you watched him at Mobile and spinning it as a junior, I think he's got a good enough arm to make all the throws. Does he have the ability to weather the pounding he'll take in a pro year? That's the biggest concern.
CN: Someone asked about J.J. Watt, and where he fits in the DE totem. We've talked about Cam Jordan so much, and there's a sentiment to trade down among a lot of fans. I think the reasoning might be, how would Watt factor as a possible Dallas target in a deal down.
WB: I think he'll be a solid pro. He's a push-pull pass rusher. He's got decent short-area quickness,but he's not a great athlete. He can anchor against the run. He's nasty. He plays the game hard. He uses his hands well. I think he's a 5-technique only. Maybe with some teams like the Seattle Seahawks who want to use a 5-technique in a 4-3 he could be a fit. They used Red Bryant in that role this year.
Some people I've talked to think he can be a 3-technique in a 4-3, but I think he's too tall to hold up inside. I see him as a 5. I think the Patriots would be a good fit for him. He could work for Dallas. I think the Steelers would be a good fit for him. I have him going 32nd right now to the Packers.
CN: I've had two questions about fullbacks, about Pitt's Henry Hynoski and Stanford's Owen Marecic. You put a lot of fullbacks in your top 32 and that surprised some folks. Let's fold those two into the same question. Talk about each and how their games compare?
WB: I gave them the same grades. I think they're both NFL starters. I think Hynoski is more physically dominant. He's got more pop. He can kick out people in the hole. He's not as technically sound but he loves to finish blocks.
Owen Marecic is a little more cerebral, more technically sound. I don't want to say he's a finesse player by any means, its just that maybe as lead blockers Hynoski is a 9, whereas Marecic is a 7.
CN: Say more about your grading system. I think some folks were a bit surprised to see fullbacks in your top 30 and to be clear, you grade each player within his position, not overall, correct. So when they see a really high grade on a fullback, it means you're grading them as fullbacks.
WB: We grade these guy as potential starters at their positions. Okay. Hynoski isn't a top-30 pick. He's in the top 30 on my board, but we don't grade these guys as ''first round picks." All that means is you were taken in the top 32 picks. It doesn't mean you're gonna be a Pro Bowler. It's doesn't mean you're good or bad.
That doesn't mean anything in the NFL so when we grade guys out we tell you where we think they're going to be. Is he a potential pro bowler? A dirty starter? A potential starter? For me, that's much more effective than saying, ''he's a first-round pick'' because it won't tell you if the guy is a good or bad player.
CN: Given that, where do you think those two fullbacks go?
WB: I gave them both higher grades than John Conner (Jets) who was taken in the 5th round last year, so I'd say 4th to 5th round. The 5th round is usually where you see the top fullbacks come off the board, and I think these guys are better than most, so I'd say late 4th to the 5th round.
CN: I got a question about Patrick Peterson. Does Dallas have a snowball's chance at getting him?
WB: I have him going to Buffalo right now. I can see him in discussion for the first overall pick, to be honest. When you have an elite corner like him, even when you have teams that don't have a glaring need at corner, it's tough to overlook him.
CN: You got a question about interior linemen. Which interior line prospects are the best at pass protection; also, which ones are best blocking in space and getting to the second level?
WB: Rodney Hudson is a good player on the move, but he's more of zone-only player. I don't see him as a good fit for the Cowboys. Schilling is a good guard in space, the player from Michigan. He gets overwhelmed a bit in pass protection and he's got to build up his base a bit but he'll be good in time.
He started out as a right tackle about 303 lbs. and he's put on a little weight. In that option attack they run at Michigan he's had to get out on the edge, so he could be a good player to look at on the move.
If you talk Benny Ijalana, he's another great player in space too.
CN: You made a lot of readers nervous when you put Ijalana at the bottom of the first round in your initial mock. Don Banks from CNNSI did the same thing and I know he's an information guy, so I'm wondering if he's hearing from his people that Ijalana is a guy being eyed by teams at the bottom of the first round.
WB: It's an interesting question. A lot of teams down at the bottom of the round could use offensive linemen. The Packers could use one. The Steelers could use one. The Jets need a guard. Supply versus demand.
Danny Watkins could slip in from Baylor and then Ijalana's another guy you could look at. You like to say, oh I'd like him in the 2nd, but if you have a need and he's a talented player...
CN: Is Danny Watkins that high now, even with his age?
WB: You know I had this discussion with a scout. There's not many people who would admit that he's a 1st round pick, and I'd have a tough time taking him there, but his talent... I mean, he dominated during Senior Bowl week as a guard. He's a mature kid, and I was discussing this with a scout. He's 26, but he has very little football mileage on him. He's played some hockey, he's played some rugby, but he doesn't have that brute-force banging on him from football. If he plays 7-8 years, he's still only 34, and there are 34 year old guards in the NFL, and he won't be as beat up as they are at that age.
CN: We discussed him initially as a 3rd round pick, and I put him in my first two mocks there, but now I'm thinking he probably won't last to pick 50.
WB: I think he's a 2nd rounder now. If you can pull him at your pick in the 2nd round, you've done some good business there.