| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Grachuus
Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 25109
Location: Thanks for the Sig Deadpulse!
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 3:58 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| Donut wrote: |
Know 1st round talent isn't supposed to do w/ the class. Some classes can have more than 32 guys that are first round talent and some can have less. I remember seeing a scout say that 07 draft had 20 guys w/ 1st round talent. |
I agree wholeheartedly. That's how BB drafts actually. His movements forward or backwards are related to his grading and the draft position. For instance the "crap value" he got with the trade back in the third didn't matter to him because he didn't feel like there was a dropoff in grades and thus moving backward would be a net gain regardless.
_________________
| Mark Twain wrote: | | Sanity and happiness are an impossible combination. |
QBvsDefensiveQuality |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
24isthelaw
Joined: 15 Nov 2010
Posts: 5184
Location: Where the Patriots are
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 5:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Grachuus wrote: | | Donut wrote: |
Know 1st round talent isn't supposed to do w/ the class. Some classes can have more than 32 guys that are first round talent and some can have less. I remember seeing a scout say that 07 draft had 20 guys w/ 1st round talent. |
I agree wholeheartedly. That's how BB drafts actually. His movements forward or backwards are related to his grading and the draft position. For instance the "crap value" he got with the trade back in the third didn't matter to him because he didn't feel like there was a dropoff in grades and thus moving backward would be a net gain regardless. |
The problem with that analysis is that it implies that rounds delineate talent. For example, guys picked at 10 and guys picked at 25 are both 1st rounders, but there's generally far better talent available at 10.
I'm sure that BB organizes the players into tiers of talent, that are constant across drafts (so one draft might have more players in the top tier than another), but I don't think he would consider being a "first rounder" to mean anything other than going in the first round.
Personally, I want to see someone do some research into the frequency of finding good players in the draft. I did a quick look at the past decade of drafts once to see how many pro-bowlers have come from each selection in the draft, and it looked like there are three distinct talent regions in the draft. Picks 1-15, picks 15-45, and the picks from 45 on.
Problem is, pro-bowls are a horrendous way to measure a player because...
1) Pro bowl sucks.
2) it values everything between street guys and solid players equally.
3) Voters have a bias towards players with lofty draft status.
I wish someone could redo this analysis in a meaningful way. It would be interesting to see what parts of the draft are more statistically valuable.
_________________
Adopt-a-Patriot: Marcus Forston - Practice squad (0 tackles, 0 sacks) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dhunt2402
Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Posts: 16677
Location: The District
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 5:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
What in all likelihood happened is Belichick is sitting at 62, sees 20-30 players at the top of his big board at the same level/rating, and says, fcuk it, we have no more picks, trading back and getting a late rounder to flip for more picks in return is going to be the best value for us, throw the trade value chart out the window and lets make a deal with someone
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Grachuus
Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 25109
Location: Thanks for the Sig Deadpulse!
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| 24isthelaw wrote: | | Grachuus wrote: | | Donut wrote: |
Know 1st round talent isn't supposed to do w/ the class. Some classes can have more than 32 guys that are first round talent and some can have less. I remember seeing a scout say that 07 draft had 20 guys w/ 1st round talent. |
I agree wholeheartedly. That's how BB drafts actually. His movements forward or backwards are related to his grading and the draft position. For instance the "crap value" he got with the trade back in the third didn't matter to him because he didn't feel like there was a dropoff in grades and thus moving backward would be a net gain regardless. |
The problem with that analysis is that it implies that rounds delineate talent. For example, guys picked at 10 and guys picked at 25 are both 1st rounders, but there's generally far better talent available at 10.
I'm sure that BB organizes the players into tiers of talent, that are constant across drafts (so one draft might have more players in the top tier than another), but I don't think he would consider being a "first rounder" to mean anything other than going in the first round.
Personally, I want to see someone do some research into the frequency of finding good players in the draft. I did a quick look at the past decade of drafts once to see how many pro-bowlers have come from each selection in the draft, and it looked like there are three distinct talent regions in the draft. Picks 1-15, picks 15-45, and the picks from 45 on.
Problem is, pro-bowls are a horrendous way to measure a player because...
1) Pro bowl sucks.
2) it values everything between street guys and solid players equally.
3) Voters have a bias towards players with lofty draft status.
I wish someone could redo this analysis in a meaningful way. It would be interesting to see what parts of the draft are more statistically valuable. |
Not what I'm saying. Say that all potential draftees are graded 1-100. If you have the next pick up and the grade differential for the next 30 players is 3 points you're going to be inclined to move back. Know why? Any of the next 30 players that falls to you are incredibly close in skill according to your chart and thus moving back is good.
It's not ROUND value per say it's that the position you're in compared to the talent level denotes a certain expected return in a subsequent pick. Depending on how deep you want to think about it there's also issues with projecting successive years and seeing what type of grade you get by trading to a future year.
I think the biggest issue with most people and drafting (and I'm not picking on anyone in particular here) is that they get caught up in the hype of players either specifically or generally and think that trading back is bad based on X. Where really what folks need to do when looking at a draft of what we know is a smart guy (BB) is the move has a meaning about their grades and expectations.
_________________
| Mark Twain wrote: | | Sanity and happiness are an impossible combination. |
QBvsDefensiveQuality |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Grachuus
Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 25109
Location: Thanks for the Sig Deadpulse!
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| dhunt2402 wrote: | | What in all likelihood happened is Belichick is sitting at 62, sees 20-30 players at the top of his big board at the same level/rating, and says, fcuk it, we have no more picks, trading back and getting a late rounder to flip for more picks in return is going to be the best value for us, throw the trade value chart out the window and lets make a deal with someone |
Exactly.
_________________
| Mark Twain wrote: | | Sanity and happiness are an impossible combination. |
QBvsDefensiveQuality |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
24isthelaw
Joined: 15 Nov 2010
Posts: 5184
Location: Where the Patriots are
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Grachuus wrote: | | 24isthelaw wrote: | | Grachuus wrote: | | Donut wrote: |
Know 1st round talent isn't supposed to do w/ the class. Some classes can have more than 32 guys that are first round talent and some can have less. I remember seeing a scout say that 07 draft had 20 guys w/ 1st round talent. |
I agree wholeheartedly. That's how BB drafts actually. His movements forward or backwards are related to his grading and the draft position. For instance the "crap value" he got with the trade back in the third didn't matter to him because he didn't feel like there was a dropoff in grades and thus moving backward would be a net gain regardless. |
The problem with that analysis is that it implies that rounds delineate talent. For example, guys picked at 10 and guys picked at 25 are both 1st rounders, but there's generally far better talent available at 10.
I'm sure that BB organizes the players into tiers of talent, that are constant across drafts (so one draft might have more players in the top tier than another), but I don't think he would consider being a "first rounder" to mean anything other than going in the first round.
Personally, I want to see someone do some research into the frequency of finding good players in the draft. I did a quick look at the past decade of drafts once to see how many pro-bowlers have come from each selection in the draft, and it looked like there are three distinct talent regions in the draft. Picks 1-15, picks 15-45, and the picks from 45 on.
Problem is, pro-bowls are a horrendous way to measure a player because...
1) Pro bowl sucks.
2) it values everything between street guys and solid players equally.
3) Voters have a bias towards players with lofty draft status.
I wish someone could redo this analysis in a meaningful way. It would be interesting to see what parts of the draft are more statistically valuable. |
Not what I'm saying. Say that all potential draftees are graded 1-100. If you have the next pick up and the grade differential for the next 30 players is 3 points you're going to be inclined to move back. Know why? Any of the next 30 players that falls to you are incredibly close in skill according to your chart and thus moving back is good.
It's not ROUND value per say it's that the position you're in compared to the talent level denotes a certain expected return in a subsequent pick. Depending on how deep you want to think about it there's also issues with projecting successive years and seeing what type of grade you get by trading to a future year.
I think the biggest issue with most people and drafting (and I'm not picking on anyone in particular here) is that they get caught up in the hype of players either specifically or generally and think that trading back is bad based on X. Where really what folks need to do when looking at a draft of what we know is a smart guy (BB) is the move has a meaning about their grades and expectations. |
Ok. I misinterpreted your post, sorry. I agree with everything you're saying.
_________________
Adopt-a-Patriot: Marcus Forston - Practice squad (0 tackles, 0 sacks) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Canadian_Patriot
Joined: 26 Jan 2005
Posts: 8701
Location: Halifax
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Grachuus wrote: |
Basically you're saying that someone near the first round is first round and someone near near the first round is near the first round. Not going to lie that sounds pretty lame. Because clearly by the below quote you don't actually think he has talent or you wouldn't be crying about how much of a reach this is, right?
| Canadian_Patriot wrote: | No one can rationalize this. Doesn't matter what he may or may not do well, fact of the matter is no team was taking this guy in the next 15 picks to justify not even waiting to take him at 63. This isn't a player who you just can't leave on the board in fear of someone "stealing" him from you.
Biggest reach by Bill, ever.
Unbelievable. I'm mad at you right now Bill! For someone who is all about value you must have been doing tequila shots last night after your great picks yesterday and totally showed up blitz today.
There's no value in this player at 48th overall.
Peter Konz, seriously, a plug him in for a decade interior offensive lineman wasn't worth 48th? But Tavon Wilson is?
Make it up to me at 63, otherwise we're not talking for a while.
CP |
|
Of course I don't think he's a fringe first round talent, but Bill Belichick did, and it's not unreasonable to expect a decent level of production out of him, which corresponds to where he was selected. Don't see how that's unreasonable, or arguable, at all.
_________________
Deadpulse on the sig! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Grachuus
Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 25109
Location: Thanks for the Sig Deadpulse!
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Canadian_Patriot wrote: | | Grachuus wrote: |
Basically you're saying that someone near the first round is first round and someone near near the first round is near the first round. Not going to lie that sounds pretty lame. Because clearly by the below quote you don't actually think he has talent or you wouldn't be crying about how much of a reach this is, right?
| Canadian_Patriot wrote: | No one can rationalize this. Doesn't matter what he may or may not do well, fact of the matter is no team was taking this guy in the next 15 picks to justify not even waiting to take him at 63. This isn't a player who you just can't leave on the board in fear of someone "stealing" him from you.
Biggest reach by Bill, ever.
Unbelievable. I'm mad at you right now Bill! For someone who is all about value you must have been doing tequila shots last night after your great picks yesterday and totally showed up blitz today.
There's no value in this player at 48th overall.
Peter Konz, seriously, a plug him in for a decade interior offensive lineman wasn't worth 48th? But Tavon Wilson is?
Make it up to me at 63, otherwise we're not talking for a while.
CP |
|
Of course I don't think he's a fringe first round talent, but Bill Belichick did, and it's not unreasonable to expect a decent level of production out of him, which corresponds to where he was selected. Don't see how that's unreasonable, or arguable, at all. |
Based on uncountable number of posts we've had over this issue I understand that you choose not to see how it's arguable.
All we know if BB thought he was worth picking at 48 which in no way says he's fringe first round talent.
_________________
| Mark Twain wrote: | | Sanity and happiness are an impossible combination. |
QBvsDefensiveQuality |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Canadian_Patriot
Joined: 26 Jan 2005
Posts: 8701
Location: Halifax
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Grachuus wrote: | | Canadian_Patriot wrote: | | Grachuus wrote: |
Basically you're saying that someone near the first round is first round and someone near near the first round is near the first round. Not going to lie that sounds pretty lame. Because clearly by the below quote you don't actually think he has talent or you wouldn't be crying about how much of a reach this is, right?
| Canadian_Patriot wrote: | No one can rationalize this. Doesn't matter what he may or may not do well, fact of the matter is no team was taking this guy in the next 15 picks to justify not even waiting to take him at 63. This isn't a player who you just can't leave on the board in fear of someone "stealing" him from you.
Biggest reach by Bill, ever.
Unbelievable. I'm mad at you right now Bill! For someone who is all about value you must have been doing tequila shots last night after your great picks yesterday and totally showed up blitz today.
There's no value in this player at 48th overall.
Peter Konz, seriously, a plug him in for a decade interior offensive lineman wasn't worth 48th? But Tavon Wilson is?
Make it up to me at 63, otherwise we're not talking for a while.
CP |
|
Of course I don't think he's a fringe first round talent, but Bill Belichick did, and it's not unreasonable to expect a decent level of production out of him, which corresponds to where he was selected. Don't see how that's unreasonable, or arguable, at all. |
Based on uncountable number of posts we've had over this issue I understand that you choose not to see how it's arguable.
All we know if BB thought he was worth picking at 48 which in no way says he's fringe first round talent. |
Okay, well if your biggest point of contention here is the fact that I used "fringe 1st round talent" I'll retract it and just say he's a mid 2nd round talent, thus basically putting the same type of production expectation on him. We're not talking about a huge talent jump in the 16 picks from 32 to 48.
_________________
Deadpulse on the sig! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dhunt2402
Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Posts: 16677
Location: The District
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Grachuus wrote: | | All we know if BB thought he was worth picking at 48 which in no way says he's fringe first round talent. |
Exactly. The worth of pick 48 changes from year to year. One year it might be worth a solid late first rounder, the next a mid to late third. Can't deal in absolutes when it fluctuates every year based on the talent pool
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Grachuus
Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 25109
Location: Thanks for the Sig Deadpulse!
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 7:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| dhunt2402 wrote: | | Grachuus wrote: | | All we know if BB thought he was worth picking at 48 which in no way says he's fringe first round talent. |
Exactly. The worth of pick 48 changes from year to year. One year it might be worth a solid late first rounder, the next a mid to late third. Can't deal in absolutes when it fluctuates every year based on the talent pool |
Right. So say the realistic expectations of a player are different from season to season.
I could certainly say I'd have higher expectations in OUR safety pool for a slobbering idiot back there just because there's not much competition to get on the field.
_________________
| Mark Twain wrote: | | Sanity and happiness are an impossible combination. |
QBvsDefensiveQuality |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TomRalph
Joined: 03 Apr 2009
Posts: 5816
Location: Leeds, England
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 7:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
The fact that Gronk was picked with pick 42 I'm expecting similar sort of production from Tavon, I want to see FS records broken by the end of his Sophmore season.
_________________
| Jmacz008 (With the 32nd Pick of the 2014 NFL Draft) wrote: | | ...the New England Rutgers select, Rutgers Rutgers, Rutgers from Rutgers |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Canadian_Patriot
Joined: 26 Jan 2005
Posts: 8701
Location: Halifax
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 7:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| TomRalph wrote: | | The fact that Gronk was picked with pick 42 I'm expecting similar sort of production from Tavon, I want to see FS records broken by the end of his Sophmore season. |
hahaha, you're obviously trying to sensationalize this, and are taking it wayyyyyyy out of context.
Generally speaking, teams expect their 1st and 2nd round picks to make some form of impact. (Unless they're buried on a depth chart) But players selected in the top 64 of this draft are generally thought of as the cream of the crop. Belichick by taking Wilson at 48, is telling me he is in that crop, and especially for safeties. (3rd safety selected.)
So he's either going to be very productive and Bill will be proven correct, or he'll be off this team in 3 years and a wasted top tier selection.
We'll see.
_________________
Deadpulse on the sig! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NinjaZX6R
Joined: 05 Jun 2011
Posts: 6789
Location: Columbus, Ohio
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Canadian_Patriot
Joined: 26 Jan 2005
Posts: 8701
Location: Halifax
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 9:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Let me say this to, as much as I don't like where he was selected, I still, as a Patriots fan obviously want him to blow the doors off everyone's expectations of him!
I hope he's the future starting FS for this team! 
_________________
Deadpulse on the sig! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
