753: A Quarterback Class We Can Work With

00:00:02
Speaker 1: This is the Lady Podcast with your host jaj Zacher rethas y.

00:00:06
Speaker 2: Jake Zacher Reason.

00:00:12
Speaker 1: What's up everyone, It's jj zach er esen in. This is episode seven hundred and fifty three of the Late Round Fantasy Football podcast sponsored by FanDuel. Thanks for tuning in. Each year, I bring on Number Fivere's Jim SNAs to top quarterbacks. This year is no different. Jim and I had a conversation about the twenty twenty three quarterback class, and I peppered in with questions about Bryce Young's size, Anthony Richardson's ceiling, Will Leffis's overall profile, and more. Jim's had some great hits on the show in the past, and I'm sure his analysis will help you all out during your upcoming rookie drafts too. So sit back, relax, and listen to Jim breakdown this year's quarterback class. All right, Jim, So we do this episode each year, but for anyone who hasn't listened to this episode in the past, you do an article on number fire dot com where you analyze that particular year's draft class to find which quarterbacks are statistically superior. So can you talk through that study and sort of the things that you're looking for.

00:01:08
Speaker 2: Yeah, basically, I want to find what things we can quantify and what quantifiable things matter when looking at a player's collegiate resume, because obviously the film stuff matters. Scouts are actually pretty good at what they do. Honestly, you look at like hit rates and quarterbacks based on draft capital, they're a lot better than what we give them credit for. So film does matter, But I want to look at the stats and decide which of these numbers matter, and to me, efficiency stats matter. Experience matters, like number of games you had ten plus pass attempts, and in your age, because age is kind of like an indicator of talents, Like you forced your way on the field right away and you played a lot of games. That's an indicator of talent. Whereas if you're older waiting to get your first shot can't quite crack through, it means that you weren't better than the same guys in your depth chart, and that can be kind of a red flag, which is why age and experience are both pretty important things within the model. So they might sound like afterthoughts, but they definitely do matter, and if you combine those things together, you can get a decent quarterback model. I've got us since twenty ten. It looks at all quarterbacks invited to the combine. There have been twelve first round quarterbacks who have ranked inside the top ten in number fires expected points model in one third of their qualified season, So twelve out of I think it's like thirty three or forty five quarterbacks in that time, but the s production of the number, but it's twelve quarterbacks in that sample. Those twelve quarterbacks in my pre draft model, on average were in the eighty six percentile, So that is not including draft capital eighty six percentile. They're looking at just their statistical resumes. Whereas the guys who were less successful first round picks, they were in the sixty third percentile. So eighty six versus sixty third it's a pretty big gap. So you can have a Josh Allen who hits from the thirty fourth percentile, you can have a Baker Mayfield who bus from the ninety ninth percentile. But on average, it can give give you a good idea will be who will be good in the NFL. So I think on the whole, looking at collegiate resumes do matter. Draft capital matters more. But I think adding this in can be pretty helpful too.

00:03:11
Speaker 1: I think if we were to focus on this draft class, I think that most people would agree that this is definitely a better draft class at the quarterback position than what we saw last year. It seems like CJ. Stroud and Bryce Young are the top guys in the class at this point. Maybe something changes over the next month, maybe we see you know, an Anthony Richardson jump up there. But do your numbers agree with that? And then which one of those two guys out of CJ. Stroud and Bryce Young do you tend to favor, because I feel like it's a fifty to fifty split with people right now.

00:03:38
Speaker 2: Yeah, I do think that these two are definitively the top two. I would say they're in a tier of their own, and I would say they are the top tier. And if you look at like past first round picks, they both grade out as being good relative to just first round picks. So looking at my pre draft model again no draft capital in there, Stroud ranks from the ninety third percentile among all guys invited the combines in twenty ten. Bryce Young, ah, so both those above the average for a successful first round quarterbacks, which is a good thing for sure, and like, I think it makes a lot of sense Stroud last year his total QBR was eighty seven point seven. That's a good number because factors in sacks, it factors in rushing, factors in schedule. Stroud eighty seven point seven there, which is actually a step down from what he was as a red shirt freshman. And I think that it was cool to see Stroud do that with losing Chris Olavey, Garrett Wilson, he basically didn't have Jackson, Smith and Jigba for the entire year either, so he still had talent. I mean, Marvin Harrison Junior should be a high end pick next year. But losing three future first rounders effectively and still being good, I think is huge. And you saw that you could do it, you know, creating off schedule against Georgia. It's important not to overweight one game, but that was a game against the best defense in football, the two time national champions, and he did the thing people didn't think he could do. He's young, decently experienced, he's very efficient. Those are the boxes you want to check, so I have Stroud number one. Young does check those boxes as well. He also lost talents Jamison Williams, Johnny Metchi left and didn't have the best offensive line the past couple of years either, and he still played very well. He can make some magic when things break down, which is encouraging to me. You want to see guys in adverse situations thrive, and he did do that. So I prefer Stroud. He's a bit younger, doesn't have the size concerns. But both these guys are very fun and I do think that they are both good relative to first round picks and in a tier of their own for this year.

00:05:30
Speaker 1: Let's talk about those size concerns. I think that that's sort of like a huge separator for people, especially when it comes to fantasy football, because we've seen, you know, Kyler Murray be someone who's fine in fantasy football for the most part, but maybe the durability isn't there. Maybe we are questioning that side of things a little bit. Do you have those concerns for Bryce Young and is that sort of like the key differentiator for you between Stroud and Young?

00:05:53
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean if you made them the same size, it'd probably be Bryce Young as like the top guy, just because, like you know, I think the ability to create when the brown stuff hits the fan is very valuable. So I like Young a lot from that perspective, and I think the key reason that it matters is because the NFL thinks it matters. And again, scouts are actually very good at what they do. I want to give them full respect for what they do. And if you look at my post draft model, there is a pretty big draw off between being the first overall pick, second overall pick, and stuff like that, Like it's a great and it's not linear from one pick to the next. So the further he falls down the board, to me, that means the higher of the odds that he busts. So I care about it from that perspective because the NFL cares, and again they're good at what they do, so I care about it. I don't care about it to the extent where I would push him into the same tier as Richardson or Levis, but I think that that does really kind of break the tie for me between him and CJ. Stroud.

00:06:50
Speaker 1: So, speaking of that draft capital stuff, if Bryce Young were to go one oh one, would that change your opinion between or your model's opinion between Shroud and Young?

00:07:00
Speaker 2: It would probably put actually I could put it in, but yeah, yeah.

00:07:03
Speaker 1: This is something that wasn't in the show sheets Jurny. I'm just curious based on what you just said about the draft cap.

00:07:07
Speaker 2: But let's just do this right here. So if I make CJ. Stroud the second overall pick and I make Bryce Young the first overall pick, the post draft model would favor Young by a bit, so that would matter. I I might still go Stroud personally, but it would definitely make it a lot tougher. Just that's a personal preference kind of thing. But I think that having him go first overall be a really big endorsement of Bryce Young from the NFL, which is kind of what you want there.

00:07:33
Speaker 1: Yeah, so Stroud goes one on one. We feel very very good about Stroud, but if Bryce Young goes one on one, then you know there's more conversation there. Yeah, for sure. So from a fantasy football perspective, Anthony Richardson is very very intriguing. His passing numbers weren't that great, but we know the Russian component can really make quarterbacks successful in fantasy football, and he's basically the most athletic quarterback that we've just ever seen I mean period. So do you think that there are valid concerns with his passing or do you think that some team can work with him and the rushing upside is just so immense and the athleticism is just so great that he could even be considered the one oh one from a quarterback perspective, I guess the number one a QB one within this draft class. From a fantasy perspective, I think both.

00:08:16
Speaker 2: I think it can be a concern, but he can still be in the consideration for one oh one in terms of fantasy. That might feel weird because it sounds like, you know, if there's a risk with passing, if a guy's not a good passer, probably not going to get a long string in the NFL. But I think that the question is do you want to focus on floor or ceiling? And I play a lot of DFS, so I care about ceiling. And you know, the payout structure in dynasty is also that where you should be gunning for first place, you should shoot for the upsides. I think that like the upside justifies it. Looking at my model, Richardson ranks in the thirty six percent tell my pre draft model, which is pretty low but if you're looking for guys who have been first round picks lower ranked in the model and who have paid off, they have the physical traits of Richison has Josh Allen athletic has a big arm, same for Richardson, Carson Wentz somewhat of a hit down there, Ryan Tannehill kind of same thing. Both those guys were lower in my model though than Richard. I think that's worth noting because they were older. So he does check the boxes you want for a guy to be a successful first round pick despite not being viewed well by the model. And the rushing is valuable in the NFL too, not just for fantasy. Like I think that's an important thing to note is it's not just for fantasy, but like the NFL should want guys who do what he does too, so I think that's important to note. So really, for Richardson, it's kind of just it's a range of outcomes kind of thing where the odds that he busts are high, and that's fine. You know that we can acknowledge that while still saying that he's a really fun player. He has just fourteen games with ten plus pass attempts in college. The average for the successful first round picks is thirty three point three, so twenty almost games fewer than them. He's a bit older than Stroud and young, like a tiny bit older, so it's not like he's Sam Darnold Jameis Winston, these super young guys who he didn't have a ton of experience. He's a little bit older, but he seems to understand playing quarterback really well. His sack rates in college was very low, in part because he was athletics so he could get out of sex, but also he was smart. He got rid of the ball, so you look at like his numbers on third and six, like his adjuice yards per attempt was terrible, but it's because he got fleshed out of the pocket, had to throw the ball away a lot. And I think that throwing the ball away, rather than taking sacks and throwing picks, is actually a pretty good thing. So the trades matter. I think the upside here is huge. The bus rate is high, and that does matter. But again I think we should be okay taking on risk if the trade off is a massive mass of ceili and he has that, I think I would still go if I had the one ozh one and needed a quarterback, you know, or if Bijon's gone or whatever. I think that I would probably go Young and Stroud above Richardson. But I can't push back in anyone who wants to flip those around. I think that's fully justifiable.

00:10:56
Speaker 1: Yeah, the way that I've kind of been viewing it is, if you're in a super flex league, you might want to look at safety a little bit more than if you're in a one quarterback league. Right you want that floor, you want that longevity at the quarterback position, so you don't have to worry about that position, even if Stroud and Young are more like low nqb ones or something throughout their career as opposed to like a Patrick Mahomes Josh Allen type player. You know, I do think that looking at that safety makes plenty of sense, especially pre draft, because right now, while we're recording this, we have no idea if Richardson is going to go in the top five for the top ten, you know, and if he does slip, then that obviously switches the way that you view him in your model, and it just switches his hit rate a little bit as well. And so I do think though, if you're in a one quarterback league, swing for the.

00:11:38
Speaker 2: Fences, and like the the downside of a bust in a one quarterback league is a lot lower because it's a lot easier to replace guys there. So I think that like the upside matters more, but the four also matters less, so it kind of combines to make him a lot better in that format.

00:11:52
Speaker 1: Yeah, you're also in a rookie draft. Whenever you're drafting in a single quarterback league, the opportunity cost is completely different. You know, if you're taking Anthony Richardson over a Bryce Young or a CJ. Stroud or even a Jackson Smith and Jigba, then that's a pretty big opportunity cost. But if you're in a single quarterback league and you're taking him over second round rookie picks, it's not that big of a deal if he doesn't work out. So it's totally fine if you want to go I think if you want to go Anthony Richardson, you know, QB one and single quarterback, I still think it's as you do. It's still totally fine if you want to do it in a super flex league, but there's just a lot more volatility to do that in the super flex format. Another quarterback who has questionable passing is Will Levis. You know, he seems to have the raw tools, but the numbers really weren't there in college. But many are still interested because he could be maybe this like Josh Allen type. You know, that's sort of the way that people are viewing. You know, those those raw tools, but what are you seeing? What's your model seeing? Yeah?

00:12:45
Speaker 2: I think that the key difference between Allen and Levis and the reason why I can't make Allen or Levis have a comp of Allen is that Allen is a lot younger, two years younger coming out than Levis is right now. So what that means is Josh Allen was finishing up his second year in the NFL at the age that Will Levis is right now, and it's a lot harder for me to expect a guy to suddenly fix his mechanics become a great thrower when that's the case. Also with little Levis, he's not super experienced. He was at Penn State, had to transfer because they preferred Shan Clifford. That's not a perfect thing because obviously justin Field's transferred because of Jake from So it's not perfect, but like the coaches picked Sean Clifford over Will Levis, so at some point that probably matters. So when you add in the age and the lack of experience, Levis actually winds up being if he's a first round pick, which I assume he will be, he would be the lowest ranked first round pick in my model dating back to twenty ten, lower than Tannahill, lower than everyone else. So I think that's actually why Tannehill and Wentz are better comps, better optimistic comps for Will Levis, because both those guys were older coming out, they weren't as experienced. Levis would actually be the third oldest first round pick at quarterback since twenty ten, only guys old Brandon Whedon, Kenny Pickett, So like he's old, and I think that people don't talk about that as much as they should. You can point to the injuries he had this year, the talented loss with Wandill Robinson being gone, Liam Cohen the offensive coordinator leaving, But I can look at last year, the year everyone points to you for Levis, his total qbr are still to have been below average for a first round pick. So I feel like, to me, the age factor is why I can't comp him to Josh Allen. I think that that pushes him more towards again on optimistic side, Carson Wentz, Ryan Tannehill. If you're looking for more pessimistic comps, he fits kind of the same mold as Christian Ponder and EJ. Manuel. But both those guys were actually more experienced than Levi's coming out.

00:14:41
Speaker 1: So in your model without draft capital input, it is Anthony Richardson looking better than Will Levis.

00:14:47
Speaker 2: Yeah, he is. He's like like let Richardson is in like probably like the twenty six percent style of first round picks. If he winds up going there, he is very similar. Like he's almost the exact same as Josh Allen. My model, if you want a Josh Allen comp it's actually Anthony Richardson more so than Will Levis, because again the age is there. He had a better QBR last year because at factors in sacks, Levis took a ton of sacks, maybe because he was hurt, maybe because the offensive system was stupid, which I think it was at Kentucky. That's a very fair criticism. But Richardson is like not like carbon coffee Josh Allen. In the model but he's a lot closer than Levis's.

00:15:23
Speaker 1: So we have this big four at quarterback generally speaking, maybe a big two and then these other two, or maybe a big two and then one and then one however we want to view it. But then there's Head and Hooker who's been rising in these mocked drafts, but he's generally more of sort of an afterthought within this class, you know, after those big four quarterbacks. Do you think that he's being overlooked a little bit within this class in general?

00:15:45
Speaker 2: Not?

00:15:45
Speaker 1: Really.

00:15:47
Speaker 2: It comes down to age again, because he's old, Like we were if you were watching during the college football playoffs, people just making fun of Stetson Bennett relentlessly for his age, you know, grandpa and stuff like that. He's actually just a tiny bit older than Hendon Hooker. So like, let's say, hypothetically, the Eagles don't sign Marcus Mariota, they draft Heendon Hooker in like the fourth or third or whatever round. He's older than Jalen Hurts, like Jale hurts about he's gonna get a second contract, and he's older younger than Hendon Hooker. So I think that's a downside his offense. At tennis, he is pretty gimmicky, so I would be shocked if he went the first round. I would say, though, like it's not to dismiss what Hooker did in college because it was credit like. He played well. He took advantage of the gimmicks and not every quarterback can do that. Any team to run a gimmicky offense, and they just ran it really well. His total KVR eighty nine point four that ranks tops in this class he had. He has thirty eight games in college with ten plus pass attempts. And if you look at him at Virginia Tech when he first played, he was afishing immediately. So it's not a Levi situation where he had a transfer to play. He was already playing and playing very well, but then transferred to a bigger school, you know, a school where he get more attention, which he has. So I think the age stuff is the reason why he's unlikely to be a big needle mover, and the gimmicky offense stuff matters too. But you know, he did play well, so I don't think he's an afterthought in super flex leagues. But it's hard for me to get super jazzed or to expect him to go with a lot of draft capital.

00:17:20
Speaker 1: Let me ask you one off the cuff question. That's not something that I had sent, you know, pre show, But I'm curious about this because let's say Will Levis goes mid first, you know, just fifteenth overall, something like that, and then let's say that Hooker goes in the second in your rookie draft. Then when you when you figure where these guys would be drafted, because you know, Will Levis would be a mid first rounder more than likely in a super flex rookie draft, maybe towards the late, but then Hooker's probably gonna be a mid second round pick. Is that more attractive to you when you consider that value for Hooker versus Levis in the first.

00:17:54
Speaker 2: So the draft capital like thing that I use in my model is the they like a draft capital chart to great trades, not the Jimmy Johnson chart, but the other chart. I use that chart to assign values, so I can get like a non linear fall off between picks. If you look at like the fifteenth overall pick, that's still worth a lot more draft capital than a mid second And I think that's a pretty good indicator. You don't see a lot of non first round picks who are successful in the NFL, who get a lot of chances in the NFL. So I would still favor Levis there over Hendon Hooker. But the smaller that gap becomes, the more willing I am to consider it. And it's not just because of Levis. It'd because that means the NFL is endorsing Hendon Hooker, which matters. Yeah, So I would need that gap to be a bit smaller, or for Levis to fall outside the first round, then I'd have that discussion, But it's at least a consideration just because I want that signal the NFL thinks Hendon Hooker is good because I trust them more than I trust myself.

00:18:54
Speaker 1: Yeah, makes total sense, all right. So the last question I have for you for those of us who are in these dynasty superflex leagues, you know, because I think that only those quarterbacks we just talked about in single quarterback leagues, even Hooker is probably not even a thought for a lot of people at this moment in single quarterback leagues. But if you're in a super flex league, are there any cheap dart throw quarterbacks that could be flying completely under the radar in this class? Maybe someone who could just appreciate in value from year one to year two. Who could go day two, day three, what have you? You know, someone who were really just drafting, not because we think that he's going to be this ultra producer, but maybe in year two we could get a second round rookie pick for him or something like that.

00:19:32
Speaker 2: Yeah, so I think if you're looking for like a brock Party, I think that's kind of like the mold you're looking for here. Brock Party coming out was very experienced Eyowa States, didn't know the best efficiency numbers. He was pretty good as a as a freshman, then kind of tailed off from there. But then when the seventh round, I think the guy who best fits that mold is Max Dugin at a TCU, and I need to see where he goes in the draft because there is no buzz around this guy, which is a big red flag because again what the NFL says matters. Like Kellen more Or coming out of college was graded very highly by my prospect model, and he could be Kellen Moore, I don't know, but my model does like him a lot. It actually has dug In in the ninety second percentile before the draft, which is aggressive, right, behind c. J. S. Stroud, But that's how we factor in draft capital. That's why it matters. Dug In not well regarded by big boards, that again does matter, but looking at his resume forty six games with ten plus pass attempts, he's only twenty two point one years old on draft day, and that's a really good combination. That is rock perty esque in that regard. My model does not know he got benched entering this year, doesn't know TCU wanted to not use him, so that I think that matters in terms of like, if I'm gonna ding Levis for getting, you know, transferred to avoid Sean Clifford, I should ding dug In for the same thing here. My model does not know that, because again he's young and very experienced. It doesn't realize that that happened. But he's a little slender. He did run a four or five two forty, so I like that. I think that's kind of fun. So Duggan's the one guy I would look to like if the NFL puts a lot of faith in him, that would get my attention really fast. The other one is Dorian Thompson Robinson. He ranks in the sixty nine percent on my model, so just a bit behind Hooker. He's also older, not quite as old as Hooker. I think he's closer to this. Yeah, he's a little bit younger than will Levis. Actually he's twenty three point five. Levis twenty three point eight, so a little bit younger than Levis. Very experienced as well, forty seven games of ten plus pass attempts. He, like Dougan, had a great forty yard desh great ten yard split. His broad jump was good. So if either Duggan or Dorian Thompson Robinson were to go high, it would get my attention. And by high, I mean third or fourth round. I don't think there's any chance to go before that, but if they do get any draft capital tied to their names, I'll be very interested because they're very athletic. They're actually they're each other's top comps mock draftable terms of athleticism. Another top com for doug And is Jamal Williams or no, his is Zeke Zeke Elliott, and another top comp for dtr is Jamal Williams. So if the quarterback thing doesn't work out, running back Max dug And running back Dorian Thompson Robinson.

00:22:06
Speaker 1: Jim, thanks so much for hopping on as usual. I really really appreciate it. For those of you who are not following Jim, you can find him on Twitter at Jim SNAs that's j I M. S A N n e S. And check out his work and his podcast overrun number fire dot com. You can find me on Twitter at lateround QB and as usual, don't forget to check out this year's Late Round Prospect Guide, which is available right now for fourteen ninety nine over on lateround dot com. Thanks for listening, everyone, I'll talk to you later in the week.