If Tua is the pick do you draft 2 QBs this year due to health?

[meatpardle]

It clearly bugs you. If he hadn't had those surgeries he would have seen substantial bench time and be even more "injured" in our opinion. He also would not have the stats that would support him to potentially go as high. I'm not framing it in a way that's untrue. He got hurt four times and had four procedures to fix what got hurt. So, we can go the delusion route and pretend that was just simple maintenance or we can call it what it is, he's fragile. Plenty of gas in my tank to help you accept it.

At the risk of having to repeat myself to help you understand, I haven’t said he isn’t fragile, hasn’t missed games or hasn’t had injuries that require attention. I don’t need to ‘accept it’. I haven’t said that it was ‘just simple maintenance’. I’m not doubting that if he hadn’t elected to have the surgery he would have missed more time, or have been ‘more injured’, but in that case just tell it like it is. My point was that in building a case that he is fragile you lied about number of surgeries he had to have, the result of which was to make the situation sound worse than it was; if he was injured say he’s injured, if he missed games say he missed games, but if you can’t be bothered to go into detail and be correct about the surgeries, presumably because, hey who cares about the detail, he’s injury-prone and fragile right, then I think it’s fair to point it out. I guess that puts me in the frame to be accused of being delusional about Tua’s injury status.

 

[Mach2]

At the risk of having to repeat myself to help you understand, I haven’t said he isn’t fragile, hasn’t missed games or hasn’t had injuries that require attention. I don’t need to ‘accept it’. I haven’t said that it was ‘just simple maintenance’. I’m not doubting that if he hadn’t elected to have the surgery he would have missed more time, or have been ‘more injured’, but in that case just tell it like it is. My point was that in building a case that he is fragile you lied about number of surgeries he had to have, the result of which was to make the situation sound worse than it was; if he was injured say he’s injured, if he missed games say he missed games, but if you can’t be bothered to go into detail and be correct about the surgeries, presumably because, hey who cares about the detail, he’s injury-prone and fragile right, then I think it’s fair to point it out. I guess that puts me in the frame to be accused of being delusional about Tua’s injury status.

After following this whole pointless exchange, I wouldn't say delusional, but you sure are going way too far in rationalization for an arguement that is paramount to the organization of deck chairs on the Titanic.

Surgery isn't something done for "kicks". It is almost always done to correct an injury or percieved flaw. You can say it was "elective" but does that really make a difference? It wasn't a tummy tuck, or a nose job.

 

[meatpardle]

After following this whole pointless exchange, I wouldn't say delusional, but you sure are going way too far in rationalization for an arguement that is paramount to the organization of deck chairs on the Titanic.

Surgery isn't something done for "kicks". It is almost always done to correct an injury or percieved flaw. You can say it was "elective" but does that really make a difference? It wasn't a tummy tuck, or a nose job.

I agree, the reason I’ve continued is because by pointing out an inaccuracy in the OP I’ve been accused of refusing to accept that Tua is fragile or that he didn’t have injuries. Not what I’ve said at all. So yeah, the initial point was minor (although I think reasonable given the untruths and misinformation spread about the situation), but not really the argument now.

Someone has said previously that tribalism had taken over reasonable debate over Tua. If you argue a point with someone who is anti-Tua then you’re pro-Tua, it’s with us or against us, we and they, black or white and nothing in between. Objecting that someone hasn’t been correct about his injuries is now claiming that he doesn’t have an injury issue apparently.

 

[Fin-Loco]

At the risk of having to repeat myself to help you understand, I haven’t said he isn’t fragile, hasn’t missed games or hasn’t had injuries that require attention. I don’t need to ‘accept it’. I haven’t said that it was ‘just simple maintenance’. I’m not doubting that if he hadn’t elected to have the surgery he would have missed more time, or have been ‘more injured’, but in that case just tell it like it is. My point was that in building a case that he is fragile you lied about number of surgeries he had to have, the result of which was to make the situation sound worse than it was; if he was injured say he’s injured, if he missed games say he missed games, but if you can’t be bothered to go into detail and be correct about the surgeries, presumably because, hey who cares about the detail, he’s injury-prone and fragile right, then I think it’s fair to point it out. I guess that puts me in the frame to be accused of being delusional about Tua’s injury status.

I LIED? He had four surgeries that were necessitated by hits he took only playing until halftime in many games behind a very dominant O Line. I don't know what LYING I did. Are you Chris Grier? Are you the one pulling the draft trigger? I don't know if I would bandy about liar labels when merely discussing an oft injured draft prospect. It's supposed to be fun but spirited conversation here. I don't know when moral compasses started being applied here. The guy gets injured a lot and that won't change in the NFL. I don't know what part you don't get, and if you get it, agree with it.

 

[tazthenomad]

IMO, if you need to draft two QBs because you're that concerned about the first one you've already made a mistake. I think it's an ineffective strategy for several reasons. It's not like buying a spare keyboard for your computer and having it ready in case your first one goes bad. Some reasons why I don't think it works include:

1. If you spend high draft capital on a QB you feel an obligation to yourselves, the QB himself, the players, and the fans to develop him.

If the QB isn't starting then those development opportunities including playing and practice time is limited. There's even less for the number 2 QB. Development will be slow at best for that person. It will be very difficult to know what you have at #2 QB.

2. If you draft a QB with a high pick they expect you to commit to them (and it's a reasonable expectation) through some growing pains. Unless QB 1 gets injured and can't play, likely QB #2 never gets a real shot for at least 2 years.

Given a timeline like that why draft a second QB this year? At least get a sense of what's happening after a year before drafting a second QB and letting them sit. Use the resources for something this year.

I'd suggest if you are that concerned about your first choice then it needs more thought.

 

[meatpardle]

The guy gets injured a lot and that won't change in the NFL. I don't know what part you don't get, and if you get it, agree with it.

Dude I don’t know how many times I have to say that I don’t disagree with this. I don’t know if you’re just seeing someone pointing out an inaccuracy in your post and assume that I’m disagreeing with everything, or just not reading posts fully, but constantly making that accusation is baffling.

 

[Gonzofinfan]

IMO, if you need to draft two QBs because you're that concerned about the first one you've already made a mistake. I think it's an ineffective strategy for several reasons. It's not like buying a spare keyboard for your computer and having it ready in case your first one goes bad. Some reasons why I don't think it works include:

1. If you spend high draft capital on a QB you feel an obligation to yourselves, the QB himself, the players, and the fans to develop him.

If the QB isn't starting then those development opportunities including playing and practice time is limited. There's even less for the number 2 QB. Development will be slow at best for that person. It will be very difficult to know what you have at #2 QB.

2. If you draft a QB with a high pick they expect you to commit to them (and it's a reasonable expectation) through some growing pains. Unless QB 1 gets injured and can't play, likely QB #2 never gets a real shot for at least 2 years.

Given a timeline like that why draft a second QB this year? At least get a sense of what's happening after a year before drafting a second QB and letting them sit. Use the resources for something this year.

I'd suggest if you are that concerned about your first choice then it needs more thought.

I don't think that is necessarily true, You shouldn't be beholden to a player just because of his draft status. Yes we had Ballage and Drake but thats how guys like Raheem Mostert get passed over even though they perform better in games.

Draft Tua but I don't give a damn if he is the number 5 pick, He is just another player and he deserves to be pushed.. Hell every single player on this team should be pushed why should a first round QB be different?

I doubt we do draft 2 QB's because most G.M.s are like your opinion and won't risk a 4th rounder outplaying the 1st rounder but really if you want to build an effective team nobody should just be handed a job with no competition.. That is how you let players become lazy and underachieve.

 

[SmokyFin]

I've been saying for months that we should draft 2 qbs this year. If they want Tua or someone else high then take them (but don't trade up) but also look to add another in the 3rd or 4th. Star QBs are drafted in most of the rounds every year and by taking two you obviously double your chances of finding one.

 

[Padrefinfan]

Perhaps the Dolphins could waste a very valuable draft pick on Tua and turn him into a sideline reporter... you know, after the Dolphins find out he is too injured or he actually gets too injured? The Dolphins could pay him millions of wasted dollars for an on field ticket so he can tell us what it is like? He is a smart kid, so it should be good at least!?

 

[brumdog44]

Draft pick value chart has the #3 pick as worth 2200 points.

Dolphins #5 pick is worth 1700 points; Dolphins last first round pick is worth 700 points. By that chart, the two first round picks are too much for the third pick. More in line would be the #5 pick and the Dolphins #5 pick in the second round, which total 2230 points.

Simple question: is Tua an abnormally valuable #3 overall pick? I say with the injury concerns.....absolutely not. If we had the #3 pick to begin with and wanted to draft him there, fine -- it's no loss of other draft capital. But why would you trade up for someone who is overvalued at #3?

Guys taken in the top five are overvalued if there is a significant injury risk associated with them. So if you have a top five pick and use it on them it is with the knowledge of the risk. But what you should never do is trade UP for a risky investment.

We don't need to trade up to #3 -- especially if they want an additional first -- for someone whose health is already uncertain. Drafting him at #5 is already a risk.

 

[tazthenomad]

I don't think that is necessarily true, You shouldn't be beholden to a player just because of his draft status. Yes we had Ballage and Drake but thats how guys like Raheem Mostert get passed over even though they perform better in games.

Draft Tua but I don't give a damn if he is the number 5 pick, He is just another player and he deserves to be pushed.. Hell every single player on this team should be pushed why should a first round QB be different?

I doubt we do draft 2 QB's because most G.M.s are like your opinion and won't risk a 4th rounder outplaying the 1st rounder but really if you want to build an effective team nobody should just be handed a job with no competition.. That is how you let players become lazy and underachieve.

I think that being "beholden" is not the main point, although it is related. It also is not about "pushing" anyone or competition per se. It is about after very early in the process, say OTAs, that real decisions are made about who gets the focus and opportunity to develop with playing and practice time with quality NFL players. It takes time to go through that process and I can't think of a single example in all my years of watching football where two young QBs were developed simultaneously. Can you?

 

[Gonzofinfan]

I think that being "beholden" is not the main point, although it is related. It also is not about "pushing" anyone or competition per se. It is about after very early in the process, say OTAs, that real decisions are made about who gets the focus and opportunity to develop with playing and practice time with quality NFL players. It takes time to go through that process and I can't think of a single example in all my years of watching football where two young QBs were developed simultaneously. Can you?

Yeah it hasn't but i will it would be nice for our coaching staff to innovate something, Don't forget the Wildcat didn't work in the NFL till we did it.

Also I want to point out Dallas has Dak Prescott and Cooper Rush but Cooper is a UDFA.. Thats an ideal situation for me because i say you backup QB should always be a young and ascending player with upside to get better should you have to rely on him over a long period of time.

Also I wouldn't mind if we brought Cooper Rush in here I think he is a good player who hasn't been given a shot in dallas.

 

[Atila]

If a team drafts someone like Tua or anyone in the 1st round and still wants to draft another QB, it's always going to be a developmental guy in the backend of the draft.

No one drafts a QB in the 1st and then 3rd round, or 1st and 2nd round, etc. Plenty of teams draft a QB *to develop* in the back end of the draft, and that really isn't mutually exclusive to drafting one in the front end of the draft, as your expectations for those two players is VASTLY different.

/thread

 

[39wildman]

I think that being "beholden" is not the main point, although it is related. It also is not about "pushing" anyone or competition per se. It is about after very early in the process, say OTAs, that real decisions are made about who gets the focus and opportunity to develop with playing and practice time with quality NFL players. It takes time to go through that process and I can't think of a single example in all my years of watching football where two young QBs were developed simultaneously. Can you?

In Tua case I would draft a qb in rd 4.to cover my ass in case it dont work. .I would do same thing Redskins did in 2012..we all know this guy get hurt. None of us need medical report on that. He ain't going get hurt in nfl pls. Yall fooling yall self..

 

[tazthenomad]

If a team drafts someone like Tua or anyone in the 1st round and still wants to draft another QB, it's always going to be a developmental guy in the backend of the draft.

No one drafts a QB in the 1st and then 3rd round, or 1st and 2nd round, etc. Plenty of teams draft a QB *to develop* in the back end of the draft, and that really isn't mutually exclusive to drafting one in the front end of the draft, as your expectations for those two players is VASTLY different.

/thread

You're right teams do what you suggested. The difference in this case is that some are suggesting that a second QB be drafted IN CASE the first one goes down. That's nowhere near the same expectation of drafting late round to develop someone long term.