Bradford/Foles - Who Has More Pure Talent (Financial/Medical Aside) (1 Viewer)

[Bob Magaw]

Strictly based on QB ability, stripping away all financial and medical considerations.

 

[Junior McSpiffy]

Who has more talent? Bradford. Hands down.

Who has had the worst opportunity to put their talent on display over their career? Bradford. Hands down.

He may be destined to be the Archie Manning of our generation.

 

[Bigboy10182000]

@SeniorBowlPhil: At Sam Bradford Pro Day, many said it was most impressive display of arm talent since Troy Aikman in 1989. @Eagles betting on that version.

 

[Bob Magaw]

@SeniorBowlPhil: At Sam Bradford Pro Day, many said it was most impressive display of arm talent since Troy Aikman in 1989. @Eagles betting on that version.

Casserly called him the most accurate top QB prospect he EVER graded, pretty sure that wasn't based merely on his Pro Day (where his pinpoint accuracy was reportedly spooky and historically good, coming from people like Gil Brandt who have been around forever).

 

[mr roboto]

Who the #### voted for comparable?

 

[Bob Magaw]

The 2013 27/2 TD/INT season was impressive (but I realize he appeared to regress last season).

 

[cstu]

@SeniorBowlPhil: At Sam Bradford Pro Day, many said it was most impressive display of arm talent since Troy Aikman in 1989. @Eagles betting on that version.

Casserly called him the most accurate top QB prospect he EVER graded, pretty sure that wasn't based merely on his Pro Day (where his pinpoint accuracy was reportedly spooky and historically good, coming from people like Gil Brandt who have been around forever).

"The best Pro Day I ever saw as a quarterback was JaMarcus Russell. . . . I've never seen a quarterback throw the football like that in my life."

 

[Bob Magaw]

Touché, but Bradford doesn't have any work ethic issues remotely like Russell. A week or two ago, Millen was saying he kicked Russell out of his office during the interview for looking at his watch three times in a 5-10 minute span. He claimed if OAK had taken Calvin, they would have taken Peterson.

Did Casserly or Brandt say that, or possibly Mayock?

Clearly, the poll consensus appears to be Bradford has the talent edge, it isn't close so far.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Interesting that the poll is so lopsided, and yet we were all shocked the Eagles had to pay a fairly hefty price to make the swap, even taking on that stupid contract.

 

[cstu]

Chip on Foles "I think he's got an outstanding skill set," Kelly said. "He's a big, strong, physical quarterback. He's over 6-4, he's 240 pounds, he's smart, he's intelligent. He's one of the most accurate throwers when you see him throw the football. I think he's smart; I think he's wired right."

Foles is bigger and taller than Bradford so what Chip is saying is that Bradford is more accurate and smarter than Foles.

 

[cstu]

Interesting that the poll is so lopsided, and yet we were all shocked the Eagles had to pay a fairly hefty price to make the swap, even taking on that stupid contract.

Talking only physical talent here, not contract or injuries. The injuries are a big question mark - not only did he have back to back ACL tears but he also missed 10 games in 2011 from a high ankle sprain that bothered him all the way up to the 2012 training camp.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Bob Magaw, how do you feel about this? You've been leading the "Bradford will put it together" train for years, right? Do you think a future 2nd was enough to move on, and do you like Foles?

I know exactly how Eagles fans are reacting to this but haven't seen as much from Rams fans.

 

[Donnybrook]

@SeniorBowlPhil: At Sam Bradford Pro Day, many said it was most impressive display of arm talent since Troy Aikman in 1989. @Eagles betting on that version.

Since when have Pro days proven to be accurate depiction of a QBs ability. It not like Johnny Manziel and Blaine Gabbert are going to inducted into the HOF soon

 

[Bob Magaw]

Interesting that the poll is so lopsided, and yet we were all shocked the Eagles had to pay a fairly hefty price to make the swap, even taking on that stupid contract.

I purposefully backed out attendant medical/financial factors because I was genuinely interested in perceived relative talent.Of course, in actuality, those factors have to go into the overall evaluation. Two blown ACLs makes him a huge risk. As a Rams fan, it definitely scared the daylights out of me. I think Kelly is clearly a risk taker and not playing it safe. He doesn't just want to make the playoffs. He seems to think that if Bradford's health issues are behind him, he has the potential to be special in his system, and is worth the risk.

How much more likely an athlete with two torn ACLs is to have a recurrence is an empirical question, and I assume he consulted with the medical staff to properly evaluate that risk.

Some people assume Bradford *IS* mediocre and always will be and his stats and winning percentage are what they are and are completely 100% his fault. If in a parallel universe Bradford's first half decade were with Kelly and he excelled, people would probably view him differently. IMO, sometimes individual performance in a consummate team sport is context sensitive and even dependent. Sure, elite top 3-5 QBs may succeed in almost any situation. But Bradford doesn't have to be as good Manning, Brady, Bree's, Rodgers to be very productive in PHI with a better supporting cast and surrounding talent than he had in his first few years in STL.

Kelly has the imagination to view Bradford in this context sensitive, dependent manner.

 

[Bob Magaw]

Bob Magaw, how do you feel about this? You've been leading the "Bradford will put it together" train for years, right? Do you think a future 2nd was enough to move on, and do you like Foles?

I know exactly how Eagles fans are reacting to this but haven't seen as much from Rams fans.

Connskin, a few things.

I was higher on Bradford before he tore his ACL in consecutive seasons. Prior to that, I was just trying to convey my sense that the CONTEXT of how historically bad a team he inherited was perhaps not being sufficiently accounted for. Same for the revolving door at OL and WR, injuries, lack of talent, etc. presenting at times almost insurmountable odds against success, imo.

In a perfect world, with the exception of his torn ACLs, ideally he would have taken a pay cut and remained with the team, ideally they wouldn't have gotten involved with so many expensive contracts with aging vets, drafted and developed from within better and surrounded him with a better team in a way there weren't so many salary cap space contraints in the first place, and done a better job coming up with a viable backup QB to better protect the team against injury risk the past few years.

I think the trade can be win win, and hope it is. Sometimes, players just need a change of scenery and new surroundings (clearly that goes for Foles as well as Bradford). I think Chip Kelly is incalculably better equipped to position Bradford for success than former OC Schottenheimer. If he becomes a Pro Bowler for PHI, good for him, I certainly wouldn't begrudge his success (and I do own him in a few dynasty leagues so will actively root for him, except when playing the Rams ), sometimes that's the breaks, and it wasn't meant to be in STL. I never blamed Bradford for having the last hyper-inflated, legacy old labor agreement contract, just bad timing and luck.

I think this trade caught a lot of people by surprise. Given the uncertainty of how Bradford's knees will hold up, the nightmare of trying to come to an agreement between the organization and his representation based on how to account for that risk (Rams presumably wanting to pay him less, Bradford gambling on how he viewed his capabilities if healthy presenting an almost intractable valuation chasm - the inherent difficulties in the looming extension parameters now PHIs challenge, as Bradford said at the presser, it required a leap of faith by Kelly, in which there may not be a lot of middle ground, I think Kelly will be richly rewarded for that if Bradford is healthy, or it could blow up in his face, but the point being, I can appreciate Fisher and Snead wanting to offload that risk, as they have been burned two years in a row, and arguably are not in the same place job security-wise as Kelly, coming off back to back 10-6 seasons?), I absolutely thought it was pretty close to a best case scenario to get a young QB that had a historically good season in 2013, better than Bradford ever had, one that was substantially cheaper and freeing up their salary cap space to nearly double the pre-trade amount, a bump of a fifth to a missing fourth in this draft, and a second next year, with the possibility of no other conditional pick if Bradford plays more than 50% of the snaps. Of course, if Foles does well, that will also present a similar need to extend him and lock him up for the future, but no doubt the franchise would like nothing more than for that to happen.

As to Foles, I'm not a scout like Bloom or Matt Waldman, and I wasn't that well versed on him. After some cursory scouting, I'm concerned that he regressed last year (but if he hadn't, probably wouldn't have been available or too expensive), so I view him as an unknown commodity, far from a sure thing. IMO he is almost certainly not as good as he looked in 2013 but hopefully better than he looked in 2014, so maybe somewhere in between. I like that he is described as a hard worker and leader-type that is about football (same as Bradford). It sounds like he sometimes makes bad decisions when he is pressured (like a lot of relatively inexperienced QBs), and being so immobile is somewhat of an alarming combination. But I think the Rams are trying to build their team around a SEA-like template, and if he is surrounded by a strong defense, run game, ST and improved receiving weapons through internal development and the draft, than I'm hopeful he can succeed. My biggest concern where the Rams stand today is the reckless lack of attention to the OL. Robinson and Saffold are the only sure fire starters, and Saffold has himself been injured in the past (may have had off-season shoulder surgery on the same joint that led to the flunked OAK physical).

 

[Rookie_Whisperer]

I don't think you can leave the medical issues out of this because playing the QB position does not happen in a bubble. Being a better "pure" passer means very little in the NFL if you are not available to play on Sundays and Bradford is rarely available to play when it counts, regardless if he throws (or used to throw) a pretty ball or is able to run without pads on when nobody is chasing him. There is no way to build a game plan around his skill set when you worry if he will be available on gameday.

One of the guys on NFL channel, Willie McGinest I think....sorry was drinking coffee in a haze this morning, was openly talking about what Bradford was like once he experienced a bit of pressure from the defense. Bradford gets "wide-eyed", implying panicked when there is pressure or even perceived pressure, and everyone knows it. Couple that mindset of a less than confident guy when the bullets are flying, with a body that is demonstrably brittle and you have a high quality camp arm who might be there for a couple of games to fill in, but more than likely won't be there when you need him. This is just another instance of Chip Kelley's hubris on display.

 

[jurb26]

With all these threads and debate about Foles vs. Bradford recently, I can't help but wonder what the perception of their talent would be if you removed their draft position. Bradford 1 overall, Foles 88 overall.

 

[DocHolliday]

Bradford has more talent but it is tough to avoid thinking about his medical history doing this comparison.

 

[Insein]

In college, hands down Bradford. 5 years later after taking an NFL beating and with Foles being 2 years younger, I don't think its as big a difference as people think it is.

 

[Bob Magaw]

I don't think you can leave the medical issues out of this because playing the QB position does not happen in a bubble. Being a better "pure" passer means very little in the NFL if you are not available to play on Sundays and Bradford is rarely available to play when it counts, regardless if he throws (or used to throw) a pretty ball or is able to run without pads on when nobody is chasing him. There is no way to build a game plan around his skill set when you worry if he will be available on gameday.

One of the guys on NFL channel, Willie McGinest I think....sorry was drinking coffee in a haze this morning, was openly talking about what Bradford was like once he experienced a bit of pressure from the defense. Bradford gets "wide-eyed", implying panicked when there is pressure or even perceived pressure, and everyone knows it. Couple that mindset of a less than confident guy when the bullets are flying, with a body that is demonstrably brittle and you have a high quality camp arm who might be there for a couple of games to fill in, but more than likely won't be there when you need him. This is just another instance of Chip Kelley's hubris on display.

That is a fair question.

I'd answer it by saying that, unlike the question, is it bad that Bradford has blown his ACL out two years in a row, which is a trivial one, and one in which the answer falls into the category of information that everybody already possesses, a more interesting one (to me, anyways) is the relative talent one. I really had no idea what the poll results would be, and was curious. I actually thought it might be a lot closer than it has been so far, because Bradford hasn't enjoyed much success even when healthy, and as recently as 2013 Foles had the monster 27/2 season. How can we estimate how much medical risk Bradford's upside is worth tolerating (for instance, in forming an opinion of the trade, and questioning Kelly's judgement), without first answering the question of WHAT THAT UPSIDE IS?

I do know for a fact I've encountered people who were convinced Bradford isn't that talented apart from the medical question, so again, just wanted to get a better sense of what the distribution was. Because if Foles is straight up more talented, than Kelly's engineering of the trade is completely baffling. If, as the consensus in the early going has it, Bradford is, than Kelly's move begins to make more sense. Obviously there is variance among people in their level of risk aversion and tolerance. I can completely understand not being comfortable with the medical risk. For myself as a Rams fan, I was nervous LAST YEAR going into the 2014 season, so it was a relief in many ways to offload that risk. That said, Foles has missed time also with at least three separate injuries (concussion, broken hand, collarbone), and presents some medical risk of his own - but I digress, as we were leaving that out. I was just answering your question and explaining my thought process in putting the poll question how I did. If Bradford is more talented, than maybe some people can see why Kelly was willing to take on the medical risk for the upside. Because if he can excel in that system by making good decisions and getting the ball out of his hands in a hurry (think of the uptempo offense he thrived in at Oklahoma), in other words, tailoring his system to those things Bradford was once demonstrably good at, leading to being the #1 overall pick, difference makers at the QB position are hard to find. If he turns out to be that, the extra second tossed in will seem like a paltry sum in the future, imo.

As to what McGinest said, I'm not sure that is a universal perception. But if people think that, it is a football related question that should definitely be incorporated into the poll. It would seem by the results so far, others see it differently. And some scouting critiques of Foles have observed that he can sometimes seem to panic and/or make dumb decisions when pressured, so even if that isn't lack of physical toughness or courage, which by all accounts I've come across he doesn't lack, it still leads to a bad result. Frankly, there were MANY instances in his miraculous 2013 season in which it was only by blind luck that he didn't have multiple INTs, sometimes in the same game, because of DB drops or penalties, etc. Bradford has always been careful with the ball (arguably to a fault, some wish he would take more chances and cut it loose downfield more often, OTOH, he never had a DeSean Jackson, and his absence seemed to impact on Foles on his 2014 regression year), and Kelly may highly value that attribute, among the other things he cited, such as quick decision making and accuracy. Kelly said he did his due dilligence, talked to his college coach and OC, his own OC (who was Bradford's in his Rookie of the Year season with STL). I don't know the game, pretty sure it was in the first seven games of the 2013 season, but he was kind of out of the pocket, to the left side, about to be drilled, waited until the last second for Jared Cook to come open, and delivered a laser that went for a long gainer right before getting blasted by the defender. I've seen him stare down the gun barrell. There have been times when nobody was open down field, no separation, and he threw the ball short, which can fuel the perception he is a check down artist. There have been times when the DESIGNED ROUTE was to throw the ball 1-2 yards past the LOS, which speaks more to the OC than the QB, imo. But I think if "everybody knew", as McGinest has it, that Bradford had hinky toughness, was in some way flinchy or twitchy, Kelly would have uncovered that in his evaluation and not made the move (not to say coaches don't make evaluation errors at times, it happens all the time, and QB is probably the hardest position of all to evaluate, because so much of it involves mental, psychological, intangible factors which can't be seen directly like a 40 yard dash, VJ or BP, and by their nature have to be inferred).

 

[massraider]

Bradford's going to a team with a better supporting cast? We sure about that?

 

[jumper]

I'd say Bradford is the better talent but it's not a huge gap because Foles is better able to make good decisions quickly. Very rarely do QBs possess both physical greatness and smarts and guys like that (e.g. Elway) don't come along often. Most other QBs are good relying mostly on either physical talents *or* smarts. The first category includes guys like Bradford and Cam Newton; the second would be guys like Foles and Brady. Obviously neither guy may ever be as good as Cam or Brady, but that's how I can see their careers playing out.

 

[Bob Magaw]

Bradford's going to a team with a better supporting cast? We sure about that?

I realize it looks like Kelly gutted the roster of skill position talent, but Bradford's former roomate at Oklahoma Murray might be joining the team (or Mathews, if not both). Second year WR Matthews had a better rookie season than the likes of Austin or Bailey. Ertz is talented at TE. Sproles one of the best receiving backs of his generation. They only parted with a fourth round pick in this draft (and may have had two to start with, I think?), so they could get help in what appears to be a WR-rich draft.

A big difference is the OL, which I think isn't close. Robinson is a very raw LT that struggled badly in pass pro at times as a rookie (a function of the Auburn scheme, he got virtually no reps in college). Jason Peters might be the best at his position in the league. But I think the biggest difference is in the respective schemes. Ask any Rams fan who follows the team even casually, who is more likely to put Bradford in a better position to succeed as a passer, his former OC Schottenheimer or Kelly, and listen to what they say, it might be enlightening. After a long interval where they come up for oxygen after fits of convulsive laughter.

 

[cstu]

I don't think you can leave the medical issues out of this because playing the QB position does not happen in a bubble. Being a better "pure" passer means very little in the NFL if you are not available to play on Sundays and Bradford is rarely available to play when it counts, regardless if he throws (or used to throw) a pretty ball or is able to run without pads on when nobody is chasing him. There is no way to build a game plan around his skill set when you worry if he will be available on gameday.

One of the guys on NFL channel, Willie McGinest I think....sorry was drinking coffee in a haze this morning, was openly talking about what Bradford was like once he experienced a bit of pressure from the defense. Bradford gets "wide-eyed", implying panicked when there is pressure or even perceived pressure, and everyone knows it. Couple that mindset of a less than confident guy when the bullets are flying, with a body that is demonstrably brittle and you have a high quality camp arm who might be there for a couple of games to fill in, but more than likely won't be there when you need him. This is just another instance of Chip Kelley's hubris on display.

Reminds me of a guy McGinest played with and who was one of the best pure passers I've ever seen - Drew Bledsoe. Like Bradford, I always expected him to develop but he never did.

 

[shader]

If Bradford stays healthy, he could be a top 5 fantasy QB this year.

 

[Skoo]

I'd say Bradford is the better talent but it's not a huge gap because Foles is better able to make good decisions quickly. Very rarely do QBs possess both physical greatness and smarts and guys like that (e.g. Elway) don't come along often. Most other QBs are good relying mostly on either physical talents *or* smarts. The first category includes guys like Bradford and Cam Newton; the second would be guys like Foles and Brady. Obviously neither guy may ever be as good as Cam or Brady, but that's how I can see their careers playing out.

Well, Foles made good decisions quickly well in 2013. In 2014, it was his biggest regression. Held on to the ball too long and got happy feet when he felt the pressure.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

Who has more talent? Bradford. Hands down.

Who has had the worst opportunity to put their talent on display over their career? Bradford. Hands down.

He may be destined to be the Archie Manning of our generation.

 

[Pwingles]

If Bradford stays healthy, he could be a top 5 fantasy QB this year.

Ill take that bet..

 

[Freelove]

Bradford coming out of college was one of the most physically talented QB's I've seen. But the HUGE majority of that was his arm strength and accuracy...and as with all QB's with A+ arm strength and accuracy, the driving power of his lower body and use of the full kinetic chain was crucial.

After a second debilitating knee injury, nobody has a clue what kind of throwing talent he's even capable of any more. The smart money is on Foles in this question (even though I'm not all that high on him), just because it's hard to imagine Bradford ever coming back to a guy who could thread a needle at fifty yards now that he's got the knees of a 125 year old. But any answer anyone gives is just guesswork or the regurgitation of years-old, utterly irrelevant scouting reports.

We say QB's have a great arm, but what we really mean is they're great at throwing the ball, which is at least as much about the legs.

 

[Bob Magaw]

Great post Freelove, thanks for the input.

All I can say is last year, after rehabbing his FIRST ACL, by all accounts he was rifling the ball around the field in drills as well as he ever did in his prime. My guess is that this was part of Kelly's due diligence. He had his injury last August, so could be throwing already?

 

[jumper]

I'd say Bradford is the better talent but it's not a huge gap because Foles is better able to make good decisions quickly. Very rarely do QBs possess both physical greatness and smarts and guys like that (e.g. Elway) don't come along often. Most other QBs are good relying mostly on either physical talents *or* smarts. The first category includes guys like Bradford and Cam Newton; the second would be guys like Foles and Brady. Obviously neither guy may ever be as good as Cam or Brady, but that's how I can see their careers playing out.

Well, Foles made good decisions quickly well in 2013. In 2014, it was his biggest regression. Held on to the ball too long and got happy feet when he felt the pressure.

Bradford's only quick decisions over the years have been to check down to SJax. Bradford's career YPA is 6.3, which is well below even such luminaries as Andy Dalton and Geno Smith. It's like Tim Tebow bad. And at a full yard or so less than even Foles at his dimished 2014 level, I still think Foles gets the edge over Bradford here.

 

[Junior McSpiffy]

I'd say Bradford is the better talent but it's not a huge gap because Foles is better able to make good decisions quickly. Very rarely do QBs possess both physical greatness and smarts and guys like that (e.g. Elway) don't come along often. Most other QBs are good relying mostly on either physical talents *or* smarts. The first category includes guys like Bradford and Cam Newton; the second would be guys like Foles and Brady. Obviously neither guy may ever be as good as Cam or Brady, but that's how I can see their careers playing out.

Well, Foles made good decisions quickly well in 2013. In 2014, it was his biggest regression. Held on to the ball too long and got happy feet when he felt the pressure.

Bradford's only quick decisions over the years have been to check down to SJax. Bradford's career YPA is 6.3, which is well below even such luminaries as Andy Dalton and Geno Smith. It's like Tim Tebow bad. And at a full yard or so less than even Foles at his dimished 2014 level, I still think Foles gets the edge over Bradford here.

Name the O-line he had in the first three years of his career. Name the WR he had in his first three years who was capable of getting anything resembling consistent separation. To take it to an extreme, put Bradford on an NFL field with a college intramural flag football team and start #####ing about him not going deep. The 2011 Rams weren't THAT bad, but 40% of the 2011 Rams roster weren't even in the league in 2012. That's what he was working with.

But he checked down....

 

[ryno1980]

Sanchez ypa went up 1.3 in Eagles system, why wouldn't bradford?