Jump to content

2021 GB Roster & Free Agents


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

You're assuming everyone drafts the best player on the board when they are on the clock, that's the only way what you're trying to say is true. That's a massive assumption. One we can confidently say is not true.

Otherwise all your numbers state is Rodgers was pick 24 and Love was pick 26.

You're attitude on this is hilarious. "Hogwash" lol. This is definitely one of your smartest guy in the room arguments you love having.

yes, i'm assuming all teams operate by drafting who they perceive as the best prospect value (or, more generally, the best value return for the pick in case of trades)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, incognito_man said:

yes, i'm assuming all teams operate by drafting who they perceive as the best prospect value (or, more generally, the best value return for the pick in case of trades)

Well that's not an assumption you can make. Teams draft for need. Especially at a position where no more than 1 player can see the field at a time.

Even if your assumption is true, you're ignoring these players are graded. I'm sure it's not a simple 1-10 scale, but let's say it is. If in the 2005 draft, the average first round pick had a grade of 7.95 and in the 2020 draft the average first round pick had a grade of 6.70, is the 24th best player in the 2005 draft a similar graded player as the 26th best player in 2020?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, skibrett15 said:

perceived prospect value is completely dependent on the factors I listed.  Draft slot is artificially lowered/raised based on those factors.  And if you draw the conclusion that the NFL draft market reached an efficient equilibrium based on those factors, well, you're wrong in most cases.

you're still missing the point

this was all in response to someone arguing the prospects had very different values.

This is a simple argument because people are essentially arguing the NFL draft results are representative of the respective big boards - which is nonsensical.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

yes, i'm assuming all teams operate by drafting who they perceive as the best prospect value (or, more generally, the best value return for the pick in case of trades)

By your logic Gary was the 12th best prospect - simply because he was drafted 12th.

When thats clearly not the case.

It's not that pure. There are a host of variables that play into a teams selection and their decision doesnt cement that propects standing against his piers for all time. Thats simply not the case and its proven year after year after year.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Packerraymond said:

Well that's not an assumption you can make. Teams draft for need. Especially at a position where no more than 1 player can see the field at a time.

Even if your assumption is true, you're ignoring these players are graded. I'm sure it's not a simple 1-10 scale, but let's say it is. If in the 2005 draft, the average first round pick had a grade of 7.95 and in the 2020 draft the average first round pick had a grade of 6.70, is the 24th best player in the 2005 draft a similar graded player as the 26th best player in 2020?

regression to the mean

Aaron Rodgers the prospect and Jordan Love the prospect are of effective equal value

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

regression to the mean

Aaron Rodgers the prospect and Jordan Love the prospect are of effective equal value

but what's the point of highlighting this except to distract from the core idea that you want to trade aaron rodgers the 38 year old qb for Jordan Love the prospect and some picks?

 

You're trying to make love sound better by associating him with Rodgers.  Rodgers was just the 1 in a million qb who was drafted in the 20s and become one of the greatest to ever play.

Edited by skibrett15
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, incognito_man said:

This is where you're very very wrong. It clearly is the case.

That Gary was the 12th best prospect in his draft? LOL

We drafted Gary 12th because he was rated #1 on our board (at the time the selection was made). That doesnt mean GB felt he was the top prospect in the draft - just the best choice at 12 given the teams positional needs. Similar valuation decisions are made throughout the draft as selections, trades etc affect the available talent. 

A team might not have a 2nd round selection and they consider that when making their 1st round selection - perhaps they reach - knowing that player wont be around in the 3rd. Hence - that players "prospect value" (using your theory) was elevated because of that one teams draft situation.

That happens up and down the list of teams.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, skibrett15 said:

You're trying to make love sound better by associating him with Rodgers.

No i'm not.

I'm calling out the irrational argument that Rodgers was some sort of superior prospect than Love was.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

No i'm not.

I'm calling out the irrational argument that Rodgers was some sort of superior prospect than Love was.

Well he actually was.  It was between him or Smith to go #1 overall.  It was a strange confluence of events that led to his drop.  Teams in that year didn't have a need for a QB and yes there was the Tedford stigma.  Rodgers drop was one of the biggest in NFL history.  The Packers really didn't want to draft him but when he fell they had no choice but to take him.  Love was rated as an late 1st early 2nd rounder.  So you could say based on where they were projected to be drafted Rodgers was the superior prospect.  Get your side of it to incognito 24 and 26.  Predraft they were rated quite differently.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

No i'm not.

I'm calling out the irrational argument that Rodgers was some sort of superior prospect than Love was.

I do think people misremember just how much Aaron Rodgers had to kind of rebuild his mechanics/game to go from “first round draft prospect” to HoF guy. I hadn’t watched enough of either in college to say with any certainty, but it’s not difficult for me to imagine that Love is somewhere in draft-era Rodgers’ ballpark. Also I agree with your logic, incog, but I’m just some dumbass 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Isherwood said:

Love’s last year at college really colors this poorly. His sophomore year was better than any of Rodgers’ Cal years. 

Maybe by a slight margin.  The numbers are actually similar, but Love did have more TD passes his Soph year.  In a weaker conference against lower level talent. 

Using that logic- Rodgers never had a college year as poor as Love's senior year.

I understand wanting to be optimistic about Love,   We have no clue yet on what he is.   IMO he was not as strong a prospect entering the draft as Rodgers.  Probably more likeable though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Scoremore said:

Predraft they were rated quite differently

By people who aren't experts. Who cares what the draft magazines said. The reality reveals itself during the draft and properly assigns the ACTUAL value NFL teams places on the players.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...