Five teams are likely to draft a quarterback in the first round of the 2021 NFL draft, and several more have had to ask themselves whether they should be one of those five.
For some, it's obvious. The Jacksonville Jaguars have a glaring need and own the No. 1 pick, meaning they get to take their first choice. The New York Jets, who have the No. 2 pick, have already traded away their only alternative to a rookie. It's more complicated for other teams.
Let's dig in to which teams should draft a quarterback and answer this question: What are the chances a Round 1 rookie is better than the quarterback the team currently has, this year and beyond? There are other important considerations, too -- rookie QBs are cheap, for example, and some teams are on different timelines than others -- but most important is whether a team is really upgrading.
To help us answer the question, we're using our new quarterback projections, which output predictions for college and pro QBs on the same scale. You can read the full methodology at the bottom, but in short: predictions for 2021 rookies are based on their statistical performance in college, Scouts Inc. grade and age. After quarterbacks enter the pros, their projections are updated based on past NFL performance and age.
While every quarterback has his own trajectory, we will note that our model gives Clemson's Trevor Lawrence, BYU's Zach Wilson and Ohio State's Justin Fields extremely similar forecasts, while Alabama's Mac Jones and North Dakota State's Trey Lance are a tier below.
There are no certainties in football, and there are none in these projections either. Our projections won't say one quarterback will definitively be better than another next season, but they will give the chances that one is superior to the other in terms of expected points added per play. And those are the odds teams are betting on. We'll run through 10 teams other than the Jaguars and Jets that could be considering drafting a quarterback next week.
San Francisco 49ers: Pick No. 3
The 49ers made a huge trade to jump nine spots and have clearly come to the decision that they'd be best off drafting a rookie quarterback. That's not an unreasonable conclusion. Though someone such as Fields is likely to be worse than Jimmy Garoppolo in the short term, the former Ohio State quarterback represents more upside and would come at a significantly lower cost than Garoppolo's current contract. These projections also don't account for Garoppolo being injury-prone, a knock against him.
That all suggests drafting Fields is logical had he been available at San Francisco's original selection at No. 12. But the choice to spend so much -- two future first-round picks and a third-rounder -- in order to move up to the No. 3 overall pick is a totally different calculation, and one that raises questions about timeline.
A rookie quarterback, on average, hurts San Francisco in the short term but helps in the long term -- but the significant draft capital discarded to move up also will hinder the franchise down the road. Theoretically, the 49ers could keep Garoppolo and play him in 2021, but that doesn't make much sense. The roughly $25 million they would save is exactly the kind of money they'd need to spend in 2022 or 2023 to make up for a lack of a first-round pick. And did the Niners really spend three first-round picks (the two futures plus the No. 3 overall) on a player it doesn't intent to play?
No matter who San Francisco selects, it has a chance to improve the team. But the 49ers paid an awfully high price for the right to take that chance.
Atlanta Falcons: Pick No. 4
Matt Ryan might be entering his age-36 season, but our projection model believes he remains a solid bet for the Falcons in the short-to-medium term. He has been remarkably consistent; his QBR has fallen between 64 and 71 in 11 of his 13 seasons, including last season at a 67, though in an offensively charged league that put him middle of the pack among starting quarterback. Still, that came behind a porous offensive line that ranked 29th in ESPN's pass block win rate (powered by NFL Next Gen Stats).
No doubt, the rookie quarterbacks have upside and are surely tempting. But none of them expected to be available at No. 4 individually are likely to surpass Ryan in terms of performance over the next three years (collectively, there's a decent shot, but they can't draft all three).
It might be scary to pass on a quarterback in 2021 given Ryan's age, but there is an ideal solution here. Atlanta could trade down with an eye to acquire extra picks in 2022 or 2023. That way it gets to bolster its roster around Ryan now, while earning extra ammo in future seasons when a quarterback in the draft might be more necessary.
Miami Dolphins: Picks Nos. 6 and 18
The model is unconvinced by Tua Tagovailoa after his shaky rookie season in which he ranked 26th in the league in QBR. The former Alabama quarterback might still pan out, but there's a decent chance that one of the quarterbacks who would have been available at pick No. 3 will end up better than him. There would have been an argument that Miami should have drafted a QB at No. 3 and developed him and Tagovailoa simultaneously -- especially since it also has the 18th overall pick it can use to upgrade elsewhere.
There's a reasonable counter-argument to that strategy too though: it might not be possible to develop two quarterbacks at the same time given practice limitations. Once Miami (apparently) decided not to draft a quarterback, the best course of action was to trade down, extracting a quarterback's worth of value out of the pick without needing to select a quarterback, which is exactly what general manager Chris Grier did.
Detroit Lions: Pick No. 7
Our model ... kind of loves Jared Goff? That's relative to perception anyway, given that he was dumped by the Rams in the swap for Matthew Stafford. The trade was most likely a downgrade for the Lions -- especially if you believe that Goff's numbers were inflated by Sean McVay -- but maybe not drastically so.
Given the numbers above and given that the Lions seem to be rebuilding with an eye toward 2022 and that they have to pay Goff now anyway, it seems perfectly reasonable for Detroit to draft a non-quarterback in the first-round this year (ideally by trading down) and see if Goff performs better in 2021. If he doesn't, the Lions are set up to start anew with a rookie signal-caller next season, when they have an extra first-round pick from the trade with the Rams.
It would be hard to fault them for selecting Fields if he fell into their lap, but a trade up is probably not worth it given the projections and Detroit's roster.
Carolina Panthers: Pick No. 8
If these numbers don't make the Panthers regret their recent trade for Sam Darnold, they should. Sure, they wanted to move on from Teddy Bridgewater and didn't control their destiny in the draft. There was no guarantee that any of the prospects listed above would have made it to No. 8, or that Carolina could have traded up to a spot that did guarantee one of them.
At the same time, this drives home how the problems with their deal for Darnold. The former Jets quarterback has played three NFL seasons, and each has gone poorly, so his forecast is understandably weak. A frequent defense of the 23-year-old Darnold is that he is young, but that is already baked into these projections. If he were older, these would look even worse for him. The reason the projections shift closer to 50-50 for every quarterback in 2022 is because Darnold still has a chance to improve (and because the further out we look, the less certain the projections are).
By trading for Darnold instead of pursuing a quarterback in the draft, Carolina acquired a player who is likely to be both worse than a first-round rookie and three years closer to needing a new contract. The team probably should draft a quarterback if one from the group above falls to No. 8, though that would make the Darnold trade look silly, as Bridgewater would be the better option in the short term and the rookie the better option in the long term.
Wilson will be long gone by the time Carolina selects, but we included his percentage to demonstrate how correct the Jets were to start over at quarterback and trade away Darnold.
Denver Broncos: Pick No. 9
We were surprised at how high the projections remain on Drew Lock considering that he ranked an uninspiring 29th in QBR last season. But the way the model sees it is he has had only about a year and half of playing time, so there's still quite a bit of variance remaining in his forecast; his 2019 wasn't all that bad; and he's still young, so there's an expectation of improvement.
But that doesn't mean Denver should settle for only Lock. The Broncos would maximize their shot at finding a franchise quarterback if they select Fields, Jones or Lance and let one of them compete with Lock. The chance that one of those quarterbacks becomes a star is much greater than Lock alone.
Philadelphia Eagles: Pick No. 12
Jalen Hurts had a QBR of 41 last season, which was worse than every qualifying quarterback except Darnold, albeit in a small sample of 247 action plays. Partially due to the sample and partially due to a lower projection out of college, our forecast is low on Hurts. When the Eagles still had the No. 6 overall pick, it would have made sense for them to select Fields, Jones or Lance, perhaps developing alongside Hurts, as we suggested with Miami.
Philadelphia, however, made the responsible choice once it was (presumably) set on sticking with Hurts by trading down six spots. If one of the top quarterbacks happens to fall to No. 12, though, it shouldn't be a surprise if the Eagles add him.
New England Patriots: Pick No. 15
Like with Garoppolo, these numbers likely overrate Cam Newton because they don't take into account his injury history. (On the flip side, it's also not factoring in that Newton contracted COVID-19 last season and played worse after that).
New England is in less of a must-draft position than San Francisco because Newton's contract is much cheaper, but those numbers above are not insignificant. If a quarterback dropped -- and especially if it were Fields -- the Patriots should think hard about trading up to get him.
Washington Football Team: Pick No. 19
Let's start here: QBR loves Ryan Fitzpatrick (and Ryan Fitzpatrick loves QBR, too). The veteran journeyman ranked fifth in the metric last season and eighth in 2019, despite playing behind a weak Miami offensive line. It hasn't always been pretty -- he finished 29th while playing for the Jets in 2016 -- and age is a factor, as he turns 39 in November.
In Washington's immediate future, though? It's getting a quarterback with a chance to play well. And that means it doesn't have to trade up in Round 1 next week.
Instead, Washington could be a candidate to land one of the second- or third-round quarterbacks, and there's one our model really likes: Texas A&M's Kellen Mond. You'll notice that Mond's projections are stronger than Jones or Lance, which is a major surprise. Though Mond's Scouts Inc. grade is substantially lower than any of the expected first-round QBs, what he does have is four seasons of experience, with a QBR of at least 73.5 in each of the past three seasons. That's a higher QBR than Josh Allen, Josh Rosen or Sam Darnold recorded in their final collegiate seasons, and that consistently solid performance drives his projection. The model also believes Mond would more likely than not be better than Kyle Allen or Taylor Heinicke -- Washington's other quarterbacks -- in his rookie season.
Chicago Bears: Pick No. 20
One difference between Washington and Chicago is that Fitzpatrick legitimately gives Washington some hope in 2021. Chicago really doesn't have any with Andy Dalton. The Bears made the playoffs last season, but they ranked 18th in total efficiency and Dalton isn't a big upgrade on the quarterbacks they had in 2020. Their best path is probably a full rebuild, but that doesn't look like the route they're taking.
The first-round rookies have higher upside than Dalton and have a solid shot to be better immediately, but they aren't going to fall to Chicago. Despite coming off two drafts without a first-round pick as a result of their Khalil Mack trade, the Bears should be looking to make a jump if one of the quarterbacks starts to fall.
More realistically, Chicago could be in play for Mond (or Florida's Kyle Trask or Stanford's Davis Mills), just like Washington. There's a 94% chance Mond will still be available at the Bears' No. 52 pick and a 65% chance he'll be there at No. 83, too. Either spot would be a bargain for Mond, according to our model.
Methodology
ESPN Analytics' predictive quarterback model estimates a quarterback's true expected points added (EPA) per play above NFL average over time apart from year-to-year noise. Separate estimates are made for a QB's running and passing ability each season, which are then weighted specifically to each quarterback's reliance on the run. The forward-looking projections take a quarterback's current estimate of EPA play and projects increasing or decreasing skill based on historical NFL aging curves.
For college quarterbacks, our rookie projection model uses Scouts Inc. grades and age -- along with several statistical measures, including a player's best QBR, most recent QBR and production split out between running and passing -- into the model, therefore weighting each component by its predictive ability (and interaction with the other variables). It's the stats and the scouting, blended together. You can see the model's projections for Mac Jones here.