Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

If You're Upset that we Don't Have 1st Rd. Picks -Don't be !
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Washington Redskins
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
RSkinGM


Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 3460
Location: Richmond, Va
PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 2:18 pm    Post subject: If You're Upset that we Don't Have 1st Rd. Picks -Don't be ! Reply with quote

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2012-04-22/nfl-draft-2012-first-round-disappointments

Interesting article backs my feelings re. First Round Picks.. Many, many more misses than hits. This doesn't even factor in the wasted cost against the salary cap for the dud picks.
I think it is important to have as many draft picks as possible but not necessarily those hit and miss COSTLY first rounders. Oh I'll give you the fisrt 5 to 10 are hard to miss on,,but still, it happens every year.
My theory is ,,anytime you can trade down ,,say 10 spots and get an extra pick in the next round or maybe even the next -- It's a great deal.!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 60759
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 3:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Definitely true. Good article. Great post buddy
_________________
RIP SSFmike23md
Quote:
óDays until: NFL Draft 22; Training camp 98
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
DCRED


Joined: 07 Jun 2010
Posts: 3198
Location: USA
PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 12:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well I tried to explain how I feel about the importance of a Franchise QB but I'm not good at that.
But I mentioned that usually with one of these guys (Like Manning, Brady Luck will be) that if you had a choice the first two or 3 years of their career: each year you can either keep your Franchise QB and give away your 1st rounder OR use the first-rounder the wise move would be to keep the Franchise QB, not the first-rounder.

They really are worth Multiple first-round picks for what they do for the team. That's why Indy has a nice advantage by only using One pick to get theirs, but we still received decent value for RG3. No other 3 first round picks were going to have the Impact RG3 does for our team.
(Just 38% made one Pro Bowl-- only %17 made multiple)
_________________

Awesome sigs by mike23md
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FosterTheSkins


Joined: 19 Oct 2012
Posts: 482
PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 11:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Shoot half way through the season I thought it was a deal Wash only gave up two first rounders.
_________________
All the other Ds with the pumped up scheme
Better run better run outrun my QB
All the other Ds with the pumped up scheme
Better run better run faster than RG3.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Woz


Moderator
Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 19195
Location: in a land where the furniture folds to a much smaller size
PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 9:50 pm    Post subject: Re: If You're Upset that we Don't Have 1st Rd. Picks -Don't Reply with quote

RSkinGM wrote:
http://aol.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2012-04-22/nfl-draft-2012-first-round-disappointments

Interesting article backs my feelings re. First Round Picks.. Many, many more misses than hits.


In professional terms, we call this "bullpucky" analysis. It's focusing on one simple award (Pro Bowl selection) and then extrapolating that if you aren't a Pro Bowl selection, you must be a blown first round draft pick.

Why is this flawed?

First, Pro Bowl selections are based on reputation. So, if for instance, there is a guy having yet another spectacular year in his career (say ... I don't know ... London Fletcher?) but he's overshadowed by bigger names (Patrick Willis) or players on dynamite teams (NaVorro Bowman), then well ... he must suck, right?

Second, let's consider:

Number of Pro Bowl Selections from Non-first round players drafted from 2002-2011 (the same ten year span this article was considering):
Quarterbacks - 1 out of 102, or 0.98%. By the way, that one? That was Andy Dalton last year. So, the multi-year winner list is 0%

Runningbacks - 12 out of 156, or 7.7%. Multi-year winners = 8 out of 156 or 5.1% [those who have won one but not multiple: Marion Barber III, Michael Robinson, Matt Forte, and LeSean McCoy]

NOTE: The 156 only includes those players that were drafted as a running back (or at least Wikipedia records them as such). This does not include fullbacks or someone who converted from WR to RB, which could add to the percentage. At the same time, I also didn't include any compensatory picks or UDFAs, which would lower the percentages.

I could continue but it's time consuming and I think I've made my point.

Quote:
This doesn't even factor in the wasted cost against the salary cap for the dud picks.


That is a complete non-factor under the new CBA. Even the first overall pick is DIRT cheap compared to free agents. They cannot renegotiate their contracts until after their third year and the salaries are slotted (and for top picks, completely guaranteed).

Quote:
I think it is important to have as many draft picks as possible but not necessarily those hit and miss COSTLY first rounders. Oh I'll give you the fisrt 5 to 10 are hard to miss on,,but still, it happens every year.
My theory is ,,anytime you can trade down ,,say 10 spots and get an extra pick in the next round or maybe even the next -- It's a great deal.!


I think its more important to get talent. Consider this: in 2008, we had 10 draft picks, our most in six years (previous five drafts = 3, 4, 6, 6, 5 or an average of 4.8 picks per year). We traded down that year and got most of those picks.

Devin Thomas = cut four games into the 2010 season (2.25 years); out of football
Fred Davis = still on team
Malcolm Kelly = released prior to 2011 season
Chad Rinehart = cut after two years; with Buffalo for last three year
Justin Tryon = traded before 2010 season, spent two years each with Indy and Giants (still with Giants)
Durant Brooks = cut in week 6 of 2008; out of football
Kareem Moore = placed on PUP in 2011 was later released instead of being activated; out of football
Colt Brennan = cut before 2010 season; out of football
Rob Jackson = still on team
Christopher Horton = released before 2011 season; out of football

Of our ten picks, nine survived the first year, eight survived two years, five survived three years, and only two lasted their entire rookie contract.

Mo' picks does not mean mo' betta.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Woz


Moderator
Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 19195
Location: in a land where the furniture folds to a much smaller size
PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 10:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

One other thing, sportingnews.com is offering this up for you to buy as a Cover Reprint (you cannot make this up):

http://sportingnews.printstown.com/ProdDetail.aspx?prodId=33910



Cheapest price is $39.99 for a 11x14 picture (unframed). Shocked d'oh!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RSkinGM


Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 3460
Location: Richmond, Va
PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 12:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As you well know, the 2008 Draft was Vinnie ( throw the dart at the chart ) Cerrato .. Razz
I trust Bruce Allen and Shanahan to do just fine without those Number 1 picks. Bobby Beathard always did .. We had great teams and hardly ever a Number 1 pick cause he traded it ..
I'll agree that a team needs a top 10, preferably top 5 pick to find a franchise QB.. Other than QB, the rest of the roster can be filled with lower draft choices and FA's..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 60759
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 2:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The better picks you have the better chances you have to draft the best players. That's basically how I think about it. Top picks matter. More often than not 1st round picks work out better than 2nd or later round picks, right?

I mean that much is obvious. But certainly we don't need a 1st round pick to be successful but a 1st round pick would give us a better chance of hitting on that player in the draft.
_________________
RIP SSFmike23md
Quote:
óDays until: NFL Draft 22; Training camp 98
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
RSkinGM


Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 3460
Location: Richmond, Va
PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 5:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

turtle28 wrote:
The better picks you have the better chances you have to draft the best players. That's basically how I think about it. Top picks matter. More often than not 1st round picks work out better than 2nd or later round picks, right?

I mean that much is obvious. But certainly we don't need a 1st round pick to be successful but a 1st round pick would give us a better chance of hitting on that player in the draft.


Yes, It would be foolish to argue against your logic and especially now that they are so much cheaper ! A miss doesn't hurt nearly as much under the new CBA..
What about this though-- just for discussion. Would you rather a mid round Number One pick ( no Second Round ) or Two mid Round 2 picks ..?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 60759
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 5:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RSkinGM wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
The better picks you have the better chances you have to draft the best players. That's basically how I think about it. Top picks matter. More often than not 1st round picks work out better than 2nd or later round picks, right?

I mean that much is obvious. But certainly we don't need a 1st round pick to be successful but a 1st round pick would give us a better chance of hitting on that player in the draft.


Yes, It would be foolish to argue against your logic and especially now that they are so much cheaper ! A miss doesn't hurt nearly as much under the new CBA..
What about this though-- just for discussion. Would you rather a mid round Number One pick ( no Second Round ) or Two mid Round 2 picks ..?
mid round 1st round pick. You have a better chance at hitting with a superstar then.

This is the us drafting Jj Watt in 2011 vs trading down and drafting Kerrigan and Jenkins.

I love Kerrigan and Jenkins but in that scenario I'd take JJ Watt every single time.
_________________
RIP SSFmike23md
Quote:
óDays until: NFL Draft 22; Training camp 98
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
MaddHatter


Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 42890
Location: ROH Class of 14
PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 6:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's a terrible interpretation of the article...

Over a 10 years period, 85% of 1st round picks are still playing in the NFL while only 65% of 2nd round picks are. The average 1st round pick plays 9 years which is 3 times the league average. 40% of team captains are first round picks and they're 140% more likely to make a pro-bowl than 2nd rounders, let alone other rounders.

Not to mention a first round pick is going to earn a team money in higher jersey sales, ticket revenue and other avenues of revenue.

Your thought process would suggest the right move is to trade down and down and down and down and just stock pile mid round and late round picks hoping you get 1 or 2 starters out of 10 or 12 picks because the salary cap won't hurt you while ignoring the new compensation cap on rookies has significantly cut the cost, especially at the top.

Just my opinion, but I think this was a sad attempt to make yourselves feel better about not having one when everyone knows you wouldn't take your trade for RGIII back but would love to still have a 1st to add talent around him.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Woz


Moderator
Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 19195
Location: in a land where the furniture folds to a much smaller size
PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 10:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MaddHatter wrote:
Just my opinion, but I think this was ... to make yourselves feel better about not having one when everyone knows you wouldn't take your trade for RGIII back but would love to still have a 1st to add talent around him.


See how taking out those three words doesn't make it as nearly condescending/rude?

With this altered version, I agree with both your analysis MH, as well as the mindset: I wouldn't take back the trade for RGIII, but how I'd love to have some draft firepower. To borrow (dangerously?) from another recurring thread that is going through the forum, this is why some are willing to deal Cousins right now if the price was right. It's risky, but it also maximizes the amount of talent around Griffin.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RSkinGM


Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 3460
Location: Richmond, Va
PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 10:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well,, I'll quit after this .. YES, I'd love to have the Number 1's ---sure,,but,,do I think it's a real big deal--NO..,,I really don't .. The same money can sign a proven 4 year vet .. or TWO.
MH-- I think you're just making a poor excuse to make yourself feel better about the Cowgirls have to face RGIII maybe 25 times over the next several years. Cool
I'm very happy with what we gave up for RGIII .
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thaiphoon


Moderator
Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 13856
Location: Northern Virginia
PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 11:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

FosterTheSkins wrote:
Shoot half way through the season I thought it was a deal Wash only gave up two first rounders.


Please lets not start this again. The deal was this:

Washington gives:

2012 = 1,2
2013 = 1
2014 = 1

Washington gets:

2012 = 1

We gave up 3 first and a second to get RG3. Spare me the whole "we swapped first rounders" justification. It doesn't wash. Now if you want to say we gave up 2 FUTURE firsts tgen that is correct.
_________________


Being Vague Is Almost As Much Fun As That Other Thing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thaiphoon


Moderator
Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 13856
Location: Northern Virginia
PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 11:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RSkinGM wrote:
Well,, I'll quit after this .. YES, I'd love to have the Number 1's ---sure,,but,,do I think it's a real big deal--NO..,,I really don't .. The same money can sign a proven 4 year vet .. or TWO.
MH-- I think you're just making a poor excuse to make yourself feel better about the Cowgirls have to face RGIII maybe 25 times over the next several years. Cool
I'm very happy with what we gave up for RGIII .


I'm ecstatic we have him. If we can overcome the loss of the picks and get a Lombardi then it was worth it. Looks promising so far though Smile
_________________


Being Vague Is Almost As Much Fun As That Other Thing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Washington Redskins All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
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