Teams pick higher when they suck. Pretty sure if nerds did their thing on drafts of non sucky teams, the historical high value would be mid first through mid second
lol, listen...its easy. Pick the fucking dudes that rock. Nothing else matters.
Quote: @Bullazin said:
Teams pick higher when they suck. Pretty sure if nerds did their thing on drafts of non sucky teams, the historical high value would be mid first through mid second
It's not even that uniform. Just look at any redraft. You'll see the replacement picks in the first round are a hodgepodge of picks from all over the draft. Now, obviously the higher picks tend to do better (no, this shouldn't need to be said), but not as much as one might think. The 2012 draft is a good example.
1. Luck - bust
2. Griffin - bust
3. Richardson - bust
4. Kalil - bust
5. Blackmon - bust
6. Claiborne - bust
7. Barron - bust
NFL.com's redraft 10 years later
1. Wilson - Picked 75th
2. Luck - Picked 1st
3. Cousins - Picked 102nd
4. Wagner - Picked 47th
5. Jeffrey - PIcked 45th
6. Gilmore - Picked 10th
7. Kuechly - Picked 9th
2015 is a very similar draft and redraft with Winston, Mariota, Fowler, White, Beasley and Flowers taken in the top 10. All busts. Interestingly, one redraft I saw has three Vikings in the top 5 in Hunter (3rd round), Diggs (5th round) and Kendricks (2nd round).
Quote: @StickyBun said:
lol, listen...its easy. Pick the fucking dudes that rock. Nothing else matters.
Honestly, it really shouldn't be as hard as it seems to be.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ StickyBun said:
lol, listen...its easy. Pick the fucking dudes that rock. Nothing else matters.
Honestly, it really shouldn't be as hard as it seems to be.
Its hard. But fans think its easy.
Everyone knows that a higher draft pick gives you a better
chance at getting players with more potential at being better, but that’s not
really what’s at question. The question
is “what should we do?” What is
the strategy for getting the most good players on your team at the same
time? Some things are pretty clear. A handful of players coming out of college are
so good, that it doesn’t really matter they go.
Peyton Manning, Randy Moss, Adrian Peterson, Aaron Donald. These guys would probably have succeeded
anywhere, even with the worst coaches.
We can also clearly see that a lot of guys bust. A lot.
A lot of guys bust. The NFL draft
is not a science. The best people in the
world don’t have this figured out. The
NFL is without a doubt, some amount of crapshoot.
Every good NFL roster is comprised of a handful of superstars,
some quality players, and a bunch of cheap filler guys. I think winning teams are much less about
picking good players and much more about getting the most out of each and every
player on their roster. If a coach can
get 2% more out of each player than a different team, their team is going to be
markedly better than the other team, even if that team gets lucky on 1 or 2
players, with maybe the exception of the QB position, which is so important.
I think the most important factor in the draft is that
shitty teams draft near the top. Shitty
teams ruin players. Good players leave
shitty teams. I don’t think very many
well coached teams will end up near the top of the draft, unless there were
catastrophic injury problems the year before.
I don’t understand tanking, because I think in order to draft high in
the draft, fundamental things you need for your team to be good need to be
broken, and you’re probably bad enough to ruin that QB you’re looking for
unless they are actually that generational talent that will be good no matter
how bad you are.
Quote: @medaille said:
Everyone knows that a higher draft pick gives you a better
chance at getting players with more potential at being better, but that’s not
really what’s at question. The question
is “what should we do?” What is
the strategy for getting the most good players on your team at the same
time? Some things are pretty clear. A handful of players coming out of college are
so good, that it doesn’t really matter they go.
Peyton Manning, Randy Moss, Adrian Peterson, Aaron Donald. These guys would probably have succeeded
anywhere, even with the worst coaches.
We can also clearly see that a lot of guys bust. A lot.
A lot of guys bust. The NFL draft
is not a science. The best people in the
world don’t have this figured out. The
NFL is without a doubt, some amount of crapshoot.
Every good NFL roster is comprised of a handful of superstars,
some quality players, and a bunch of cheap filler guys. I think winning teams are much less about
picking good players and much more about getting the most out of each and every
player on their roster. If a coach can
get 2% more out of each player than a different team, their team is going to be
markedly better than the other team, even if that team gets lucky on 1 or 2
players, with maybe the exception of the QB position, which is so important.
I think the most important factor in the draft is that
shitty teams draft near the top. Shitty
teams ruin players. Good players leave
shitty teams. I don’t think very many
well coached teams will end up near the top of the draft, unless there were
catastrophic injury problems the year before.
I don’t understand tanking, because I think in order to draft high in
the draft, fundamental things you need for your team to be good need to be
broken, and you’re probably bad enough to ruin that QB you’re looking for
unless they are actually that generational talent that will be good no matter
how bad you are.
While there are exceptions, I don't agree that shitty teams ruin good players. I think for the most part, good players are good players and shitty players are shitty players wherever they are.
For example, if a majority of highly drafted players who failed with their original team moved on and did much better with their new team, you would have a good point. But it's not a majority. In fact, it's extremely rare. Just look at the busts above. Winston, Mariota, Richardson, Kalil, Claiborne, Beasley, Flowers, etc....all of them went on to other teams and weren't successful there either. Look at the ones we're familiar with: Kalil, Treadwell, Hughes, Dantzler, Elflein, Alexander, Ponder, Williamson...all played with other teams. All failed. I mean I don't think you could find even a handful of examples of players who moved on and then played up to their draft slot. I can't even think of one.
I suppose you might be saying that the 4 years spent with the shitty team ruined that player beyond repair? Possible I guess, but I don't buy that either.
Quote: @medaille said:
Everyone knows that a higher draft pick gives you a better
chance at getting players with more potential at being better, but that’s not
really what’s at question. The question
is “what should we do?” What is
the strategy for getting the most good players on your team at the same
time? Some things are pretty clear. A handful of players coming out of college are
so good, that it doesn’t really matter they go.
Peyton Manning, Randy Moss, Adrian Peterson, Aaron Donald. These guys would probably have succeeded
anywhere, even with the worst coaches.
We can also clearly see that a lot of guys bust. A lot.
A lot of guys bust. The NFL draft
is not a science. The best people in the
world don’t have this figured out. The
NFL is without a doubt, some amount of crapshoot.
Every good NFL roster is comprised of a handful of superstars,
some quality players, and a bunch of cheap filler guys. I think winning teams are much less about
picking good players and much more about getting the most out of each and every
player on their roster. If a coach can
get 2% more out of each player than a different team, their team is going to be
markedly better than the other team, even if that team gets lucky on 1 or 2
players, with maybe the exception of the QB position, which is so important.
I think the most important factor in the draft is that
shitty teams draft near the top. Shitty
teams ruin players. Good players leave
shitty teams. I don’t think very many
well coached teams will end up near the top of the draft, unless there were
catastrophic injury problems the year before.
I don’t understand tanking, because I think in order to draft high in
the draft, fundamental things you need for your team to be good need to be
broken, and you’re probably bad enough to ruin that QB you’re looking for
unless they are actually that generational talent that will be good no matter
how bad you are.
The cream rises, my man. Simple as that. No excuses. Getting into the weeds doesn't change that fact.
Quote: @medaille said:
Everyone knows that a higher draft pick gives you a better
chance at getting players with more potential at being better, but that’s not
really what’s at question. The question
is “what should we do?” What is
the strategy for getting the most good players on your team at the same
time? Some things are pretty clear. A handful of players coming out of college are
so good, that it doesn’t really matter they go.
Peyton Manning, Randy Moss, Adrian Peterson, Aaron Donald. These guys would probably have succeeded
anywhere, even with the worst coaches.
We can also clearly see that a lot of guys bust. A lot.
A lot of guys bust. The NFL draft
is not a science. The best people in the
world don’t have this figured out. The
NFL is without a doubt, some amount of crapshoot.
Every good NFL roster is comprised of a handful of superstars,
some quality players, and a bunch of cheap filler guys. I think winning teams are much less about
picking good players and much more about getting the most out of each and every
player on their roster. If a coach can
get 2% more out of each player than a different team, their team is going to be
markedly better than the other team, even if that team gets lucky on 1 or 2
players, with maybe the exception of the QB position, which is so important.
I think the most important factor in the draft is that
shitty teams draft near the top. Shitty
teams ruin players. Good players leave
shitty teams. I don’t think very many
well coached teams will end up near the top of the draft, unless there were
catastrophic injury problems the year before.
I don’t understand tanking, because I think in order to draft high in
the draft, fundamental things you need for your team to be good need to be
broken, and you’re probably bad enough to ruin that QB you’re looking for
unless they are actually that generational talent that will be good no matter
how bad you are.
please dont bring up Aaron Donald, its still to soon.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ medaille said:
Everyone knows that a higher draft pick gives you a better
chance at getting players with more potential at being better, but that’s not
really what’s at question. The question
is “what should we do?” What is
the strategy for getting the most good players on your team at the same
time? Some things are pretty clear. A handful of players coming out of college are
so good, that it doesn’t really matter they go.
Peyton Manning, Randy Moss, Adrian Peterson, Aaron Donald. These guys would probably have succeeded
anywhere, even with the worst coaches.
We can also clearly see that a lot of guys bust. A lot.
A lot of guys bust. The NFL draft
is not a science. The best people in the
world don’t have this figured out. The
NFL is without a doubt, some amount of crapshoot.
Every good NFL roster is comprised of a handful of superstars,
some quality players, and a bunch of cheap filler guys. I think winning teams are much less about
picking good players and much more about getting the most out of each and every
player on their roster. If a coach can
get 2% more out of each player than a different team, their team is going to be
markedly better than the other team, even if that team gets lucky on 1 or 2
players, with maybe the exception of the QB position, which is so important.
I think the most important factor in the draft is that
shitty teams draft near the top. Shitty
teams ruin players. Good players leave
shitty teams. I don’t think very many
well coached teams will end up near the top of the draft, unless there were
catastrophic injury problems the year before.
I don’t understand tanking, because I think in order to draft high in
the draft, fundamental things you need for your team to be good need to be
broken, and you’re probably bad enough to ruin that QB you’re looking for
unless they are actually that generational talent that will be good no matter
how bad you are.
While there are exceptions, I don't agree that shitty teams ruin good players. I think for the most part, good players are good players and shitty players are shitty players wherever they are.
For example, if a majority of highly drafted players who failed with their original team moved on and did much better with their new team, you would have a good point. But it's not a majority. In fact, it's extremely rare. Just look at the busts above. Winston, Mariota, Richardson, Kalil, Claiborne, Beasley, Flowers, etc....all of them went on to other teams and weren't successful there either. Look at the ones we're familiar with: Kalil, Treadwell, Hughes, Dantzler, Elflein, Alexander, Ponder, Williamson...all played with other teams. All failed. I mean I don't think you could find even a handful of examples of players who moved on and then played up to their draft slot. I can't even think of one.
I suppose you might be saying that the 4 years spent with the shitty team ruined that player beyond repair? Possible I guess, but I don't buy that either.
It gets murky here though.
Kalil had a stellar first year. As did Elfein. After each players first year, we thought we had solid players for the next decade. Did something occur with our coaching for them to regress and never recover? I am sure there are many more examples from other teams. But those two players stand out as going from very good to waste of a roster spot in a short amount of time.
|
