Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

28 Aug 2011

Matt Stafford

Is there anybody out there who *isn't* adjusted Stafford's numbers up? I don't want to go into technical details on the numbers, but does everyone feel his numbers seem pretty low?

I understand there's an injury risk (though I think his injuries are more of a fluke that a reoccurring condition), but his numbers seem pretty low in KUBIAK.

He is someone I really like as a QB2 this year with high upside. Thoughts?

Posted by: nkowal on 28 Aug 2011

10 replies , Last at 21 Sep 2011, 9:13am by nkowal

1
Re: Matt Stafford
by swyck :: Fri, 09/02/2011 - 4:06pm

I liked him based on what he did when he played last year, however Kubiak doesn't seem to like him at all.

He was someone I was going to target if I didn't get a top QB, but now I don't know about that. Not sure I agree with his QB ranking, but I don't know if I'm just being stubborn. Based on Kubiak I shouldn't go after him at all. Hmmm...not sure what I'm going to do.

Yahoo has him going in the 10th, so maybe I'll take a chance on him as my #2 there, but I'd be surprised he's available there.

2
Re: Matt Stafford
by DRohan :: Sat, 09/03/2011 - 8:52pm

Agreed. I'm targeting him as my #2 as well.

3
Re: Matt Stafford
by Sifter :: Sat, 09/03/2011 - 10:26pm

I think quite a few people are. That means you'll get better value elsewhere, IMO. If you have a good #1QB then your #2 isn't too important anyway.

4
Re: Matt Stafford
by DRohan :: Sun, 09/04/2011 - 1:54am

You're right. I am hoping to get him, but I won't reach to soon.

5
Re: Matt Stafford
by nkowal :: Mon, 09/05/2011 - 2:38pm

He seems to be going pretty high - too high for me grabbing a #2 so I've missed out on him so far in all my drafts.

Seems to be a similar opinion that Stafford is right around the #13.

6
Re: Matt Stafford
by jabrch :: Tue, 09/06/2011 - 3:07pm

I'd be much happier using that pick to get a RB or a WR and drafting my backup QB later....and getting Colt McCoy. No rush to take Flacco or Stafford to hopefully only play 1 game. Unless you missed out on one of the top 8 QBs, and are playing QB Roulette on a weekly basis - Second QB is a much lesser worry to me that third RB, third WR and TE.

7
Re: Matt Stafford
by Robben (not verified) :: Wed, 09/07/2011 - 12:00pm

Having followed Stafford's career from Highland Park High School to Georgia and all the way to the Detroit Lions, I will be absolutely shocked to see him finish as a top 12 QB this year. I'm rooting for the kid as I always have. But I would strongly suggest exercising caution. The only aspect of Stafford's game larger than his upside is the inverse - his downside. If you mitigate the risk of that downside by deploying him as a QB2, you should be fine. But drafting and using him as a QB1 is foolishly risk-seeking. And I'm not referring just to injury risk. The bigger risk for me is his judgment and decision-making and lack of maturity in his game. Quarterbacks get better by playing games. Based on time in-game, Stafford might as well still be a rookie.

I think Kubiak is (accurately) projecting rather low numbers for Stafford because of the historical volatility in his performances. Read Stafford's QB bio in the FOA this year, which states that Stafford has never put together two good games in a row, and that he "aces the eyeball test" when he's playing, but that his career "lacks traction." That's outstanding analysis, particularly the part about "acing the eyeball test," a bias towards Stafford's upside and talent that so many analysts are tripping over. I wouldn't fall for it. FOA always nails the QB's.

8
Re: Matt Stafford
by nkowal :: Tue, 09/20/2011 - 11:59am

By all means, 2 games isn't a season, but curious if anything you've seen from Stafford so far changes your mind?

I live in Metro Detroit and root for Detroit and Kansas City. I was against the Stafford pick because I felt that Stafford had all the essential physical skills but didn't have the mentality and the decision-making to become an elite QB.

Over the course of the past year, he's almost completely changed my mind after watching him in games and practice. I still think there's a long way to go here, but he seems to be "getting it" more and more.

9
Re: Matt Stafford
by Arjen.Robben :: Tue, 09/20/2011 - 5:34pm

The kid looks good. He's been great to watch so far. I have yet to see him make a total bonehead play this season. He's keeping his picks to a minimum. He's still going to make some major/costly errors, and the Lions are going to lose games as a result. He's not just relying on his raw talent anymore, although it's obvious his laser-rocket arm is perfectly suited for throwing high fastballs to Calvin Johnson (6-5), Tony Scheffler (6-5), and Maurice Stovall (6-5) in the red-zone. But I get the sense that we're watching a more poised, mature, and intelligent Matt Stafford... which is a direct remedy for the downside that's plagued him thus far.

Like you said, there's still see a lot of room for improvement. Whether or not this is the year he turns the corner, I think we'll have a better indication after he sees some adversity (in the form of a badass pass rush or an intelligent secondary). Until then, I would keep high-flying expectations in check. By week 5 (after MIN, DAL, and CHI) we should know what's for real.

10
Re: Matt Stafford
by nkowal :: Wed, 09/21/2011 - 9:13am

I think that's a fair assessment. I want to see him against some better competition too. He's definitely looked good so far.

Login or register to post comments