Maston vs McMaster: the Round 1 Vol QBs

[Aston]

History was made this season - when defending NFC champs Chicago selected Stephen McMaster at 1.31, it made him the lowest "first QB selected" in the OSFL's lifetime.

The next closest was Albert Garner by Yuma in 2022, at 1.29. Aside from that, every draft had at least one QB coming off the board within the first 20 picks.

It's rare for quality QBs to slip so low in the first round, and this year we had two. Both these QBs were very solid-looking prospects, but for one reason or another had enough warning signs to scare off thirty other teams.

McMaster
— probably looked too much like Cary Money, despite the nice masking signs.

Maston
— had bars that were too high, despite a great SR.

But what's more interesting than even that is that we'll perhaps never quite know what these QBs were destined to be. It seems that both were hit by a stick of volatility.

Thoughts? Maston's -2/-14 is pretty damning. Apart from your odd RB or P/K or other player who comes out with really high current, I don't think you see negative current in training camp outside of volatility. Especially lightly-developed quarterbacks.

McMaster is the more interesting one. He was clearly masked, but how much? The +11 seemed way too good to be true. And I think that it was.



That's far too dramatic of a change in his static bar to not have a measure of volatility involved. So, how crazy is that? Two intriguing-looking first round QBs, selected in the final picks of the round, good picks both, and both getting the volatility treatment.

For now, though, the expectations for McMaster are sky-high, while Maston is going to try and just hold onto a roster spot in St. Paul. With their QB situation, though, he may just start sooner or later.

Another interesting parallel...
Maston 18/57->16/43
McMaster 10/31->16/43

[Matt]

I've been trying to get a QB for years. I guess this one won't pan out either.

It hurts even more when Dakota get's one I would have paid a 1st for on the cheap.

[Guest]

I had the exact same thoughts as you examining this situation. It does make things interesting, but I would've liked to just see clear cut camp changes so I could learn more about QB drafting!

I liked Mastin (who was my #1 QB in this draft) and I had a huge case of Money-Fear with his cohort -McLovin' McMaster. I've still yet to draft a QB higher than round 3, but they've all been clear misses who were quickly purged from my roster, with the exception of a 3rd string QB I keep in FOFL because of affinities.

Also, sense rush wouldn't have changed without a VSOL or VSOD, right? 100% certainty!

[Guest]

I've been trying to get a QB for years. I guess this one won't pan out either.

It hurts even more when Dakota get's one I would have paid a 1st for on the cheap.

I suspect McBriar has a bad avoid int rating, but I'll test that this season. His visible bars seem far too high for someone with his rating. You definitely would've outbid me with a 1st, though!

[Aston]

Also, sense rush wouldn't have changed without a VSOL or VSOD, right? 100% certainty!

I don't know. I think they can slightly move over the years. I had a creeper QB slowly climb in the SR bar over various TCs and/or unmasking stages. But it was a matter of say, four or six points over a number of seasons. Not 13 at once.

If these were not cases of vol, it should dramatically change our understanding of how a lot of stuff works. I think it's interesting that the guy who looked like he might drop, was VSOD's, and the creeper got the VSOL. Still would say pure coincidence, though.

Also, Dakota got a QB? No way! :-P

McBriar's 62-75 TD-INT ratio is actually pretty concerning. I don't think you missed out too much there. Maston was worth the shot.

[Guest]

I don't know. I think they can slightly move over the years. I had a creeper QB slowly climb in the SR bar over various TCs and/or unmasking stages. But it was a matter of say, four or six points over a number of seasons. Not 13 at once.

If these were not cases of vol, it should dramatically change our understanding of how a lot of stuff works. I think it's interesting that the guy who looked like he might drop, was VSOD's, and the creeper got the VSOL. Still would say pure coincidence, though.

Also, Dakota got a QB? No way! :-P

McBriar's 62-75 TD-INT ratio is actually pretty concerning. I don't think you missed out too much there. Maston was worth the shot.

Ahh, that is a good point about creepers. Still, that big of a jump in SR is almost certainly volatility, as you noted.

I wish I could say I was set at QB but I'm taking a flyer on McBriar because I don't have anything else going on at QB. Maston could still be a decent QB despite the VSOD. I was seriously considering trading up to grab him when he fell.

[Guest]

Is it 'known' that the VSOD is separate from the actual numbers? i.e., do they move up/down AND have the VSOD applied?

Case in point, Maston. When I see a number like that, I'm thinking it's his usual camp, say +8/-4, then VSOD applied (-10/-10). Trouble is, it could be +10/-2 (-12/-12) or +5/-7 (-7/-7), etc. My hunch is that the VSOD is equal on both current and future.

If that's true, and I tend to think it is, you could still get some sense of a player. Because I have seen some come back from a VSOD to be useful - not at the QB position, necessarily.

[Aston]

That's a pretty good hunch Jug. I always thought of it that way although the VSOD being equal on current and future is an interesting idea.

So the trouble is now you don't know if Maston was a +2, a 0, a -2, a -4, or so on, with the VSOD obscuring that. Although I tend to think cut tests and offseason movement will reveal it.

As an example, my WLB O'Donnell was a creeper per his rookie camp and offseason stages, but suffered a VSOD at some point in his career. It hasn't stopped him from continuing his creeping trend.

[Guest]

Check this guy out, he's the one I had in mind.

http://108.59.255.76/~benelou/ihof/b...playerid=22949

Huge VSOD, but still creeped, and ended up 55/55. Went -11/-15 in camp, so again... maybe he was +4/0, with a -15/-15 VSOD? +9/+5, -20/-20?

Guess the point is, VSOD isn't truly death all the time. Just like VSOL isn't always fantastic.

[Guest]

For further elaboration/clarification, I don't think McMaster or Maston will amount to anything. Sorry, fellers.

[Edirash]

History was made this season - when defending NFC champs Chicago selected Stephen McMaster at 1.31, it made him the lowest "first QB selected" in the OSFL's lifetime.

Oh, people already forgot Luke Sinclair. Or maybe he's so bad, that he isn't considered a QB. I still have faith on him, he's great in chemistry, and I like his bars, cause seems more balanced, though his avoid int bar is probably almost 0. I'm sure he will perform better than his rating says.

[Aston]

Oops, I completely forgot Luke Sinclair. My bad, Edirash! I guess history was not made after all; Garner still holds the record.

[Guest]

Oh, people already forgot Luke Sinclair. Or maybe he's so bad, that he isn't considered a QB. I still have faith on him, he's great in chemistry, and I like his bars, cause seems more balanced, though his avoid int bar is probably almost 0. I'm sure he will perform better than his rating says.

If you aren't planning on starting Sinclair this year (and I wouldn't), I'd suggest getting a new leader for your offensive line because your current starting QB is a conflict with him. That's not what you want. At all.

[Guest]

Oh, people already forgot Luke Sinclair. Or maybe he's so bad, that he isn't considered a QB. I still have faith on him, he's great in chemistry, and I like his bars, cause seems more balanced, though his avoid int bar is probably almost 0. I'm sure he will perform better than his rating says.

Sinclair was the #2 QB on my board after Maston.

[Guest]

Mason was the only QB I was truly interested in because of his supposed high avoid interceptions bar. McMaster I liked because of his obvious masking, but I didn't love any of the Qbs combines enough to bite.