Tanner McKee, QB Stanford

AgentDib

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
5,471
Reaction score
1,240
Location
Bothell
McKee wasn't particularly interesting when some were mocking him as a late 1st/early 2nd prospect. However, over the last month his stock has fallen to #73 and this is the range where he suddenly becomes much more intriguing. If he's a guy who could be there with our fifth selection at #83 overall then he's definitely worth a further look.

1676313979268

McKee's pros are easy to identify; 6'6" height with very good footwork and one of the most accurate pocket passers in the draft class. Stanford's team was bad last year and his OL and the scheme did him no favors, so like Levis it's reasonable to expect him to improve if given a better situation. McKee also does a good job of avoiding turnovers, with just 1.5% of his plays being deemed turnover worthy. He was particularly good in the Washington game when we failed to generate consistent pressure, completing 17-26 passes for 3 TDs. Overall, McKee was really good last season when not pressured, picking apart defenses with highly accurate passes.

His main limitations are that his arm strength is only average, he was much worse when pressured, and he had almost no "big time throws" as charted by PFF last season. He's also not particularly mobile and needs to improve his processing speed if he's going to succeed in the NFL.

McKee looks to me like a guy who could quickly be a solid backup QB with the ability to come in and play well off the bench. The main gamble is whether he can improve his football IQ and ability to get the ball out fast against pressure, and that seems a decent gamble if he's still there in the third round or later.
 

IndyHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2013
Messages
8,009
Reaction score
1,647
McKee wasn't particularly interesting when some were mocking him as a late 1st/early 2nd prospect. However, over the last month his stock has fallen to #73 and this is the range where he suddenly becomes much more intriguing. If he's a guy who could be there with our fifth selection at #83 overall then he's definitely worth a further look.

View attachment 57334

McKee's pros are easy to identify; 6'6" height with very good footwork and one of the most accurate pocket passers in the draft class. Stanford's team was bad last year and his OL and the scheme did him no favors, so like Levis it's reasonable to expect him to improve if given a better situation. McKee also does a good job of avoiding turnovers, with just 1.5% of his plays being deemed turnover worthy. He was particularly good in the Washington game when we failed to generate consistent pressure, completing 17-26 passes for 3 TDs. Overall, McKee was really good last season when not pressured, picking apart defenses with highly accurate passes.

His main limitations are that his arm strength is only average, he was much worse when pressured, and he had almost no "big time throws" as charted by PFF last season. He's also not particularly mobile and needs to improve his processing speed if he's going to succeed in the NFL.

McKee looks to me like a guy who could quickly be a solid backup QB with the ability to come in and play well off the bench. The main gamble is whether he can improve his football IQ and ability to get the ball out fast against pressure, and that seems a decent gamble if he's still there in the third round or later.
Not mobile with a bad processor is a disaster-Pass
 

toffee

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 9, 2016
Messages
10,633
Reaction score
6,786
Location
SoCal Desert
McKee wasn't particularly interesting when some were mocking him as a late 1st/early 2nd prospect. However, over the last month his stock has fallen to #73 and this is the range where he suddenly becomes much more intriguing. If he's a guy who could be there with our fifth selection at #83 overall then he's definitely worth a further look.

View attachment 57334

McKee's pros are easy to identify; 6'6" height with very good footwork and one of the most accurate pocket passers in the draft class. Stanford's team was bad last year and his OL and the scheme did him no favors, so like Levis it's reasonable to expect him to improve if given a better situation. McKee also does a good job of avoiding turnovers, with just 1.5% of his plays being deemed turnover worthy. He was particularly good in the Washington game when we failed to generate consistent pressure, completing 17-26 passes for 3 TDs. Overall, McKee was really good last season when not pressured, picking apart defenses with highly accurate passes.

His main limitations are that his arm strength is only average, he was much worse when pressured, and he had almost no "big time throws" as charted by PFF last season. He's also not particularly mobile and needs to improve his processing speed if he's going to succeed in the NFL.

McKee looks to me like a guy who could quickly be a solid backup QB with the ability to come in and play well off the bench. The main gamble is whether he can improve his football IQ and ability to get the ball out fast against pressure, and that seems a decent gamble if he's still there in the third round or later.
A poor men's Brady without the arm strength? Brady throws clocked one of the faster mph when tested, don't think Tanner has that kind of arm.
 

NoGain

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2022
Messages
2,217
Reaction score
2,305
I watched him play last year and he scared me in how easy he was to get to and get down. You've got to be a real special processor with a strong arm if you're going to be that vulnerable to a pass rush, IMO.
 
OP
OP
AgentDib

AgentDib

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
5,471
Reaction score
1,240
Location
Bothell
A poor men's Brady without the arm strength? Brady throws clocked one of the faster mph when tested, don't think Tanner has that kind of arm.
McKee's arm is probably good enough for playing in the pocket. It just means that if he's going to launch it he needs to have his feet under him, unlike those circus throws you see from Mahomes where he is falling sideways and not using his legs at all. He's an interesting developmental gamble because he's one of the best QBs in the class when not pressured. The trick is whether you can A) protect him and build on him getting the ball out fast, and B) teach him to deal with pressure a bit better. Reminds me of Stroud with less arm talent and without the Georgia game on his resume. The upside is that he'll be available late on day 2.

Tune is the day 3 gamble I prefer but as a very different type of developmental prospect. Good leadership and intangibles like both Stroud and McKee, with an arm similar to McKee's. He has much better mobility and can use it to occasionally extend plays, but he played in Houston's air raid system and there's not much to say what kind of football IQ he will have in an NFL offense. He'll need extended development time to play under center, diagnose NFL defense and make multiple reads.
 

Rat

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
8,821
Reaction score
2,699
Location
Grand Rapids, MI
If we dont get one of the top 5 (the big 4 plus Hooker), I wouldn't even bother with QBs in this draft. Maybe a UDFA or two.
 

therealjohncarlson

Well-known member
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
4,473
Reaction score
318
If we dont get one of the top 5 (the big 4 plus Hooker), I wouldn't even bother with QBs in this draft. Maybe a UDFA or two.
there's nothing good about noodle armed hooker imo. I'm not sure what people see in him
 

Latest posts

Top