Jump to content

Does where you pick in the draft matter?


Burnett42

Recommended Posts

Just now, JBURGE25 said:

I still don't agree too much with that. Someone being drafted in the 5th usually has a 4th-UDFA grade. At that point, you take the guy who slid with flags, or you take a player you like. IMO.

or, the guy that goes 5.1 has a 3rd round grade and the guy that goes 5.25 has a 6th round grade...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

It doesn't matter at all.  Explain Richard Sherman, okay?  Explain Tom Brady, how about it?  Explain why Alex Smith was the first and Aaron Rodgers was 24th or something, you know?  If where you picked in the draft matters, how do you explain Tom Brady?  Antonio Brown?  Rob Gronkowski.  Ted Thompson sucks because he's only found ONE greatest player at his position of all time, and it took 23 teams passing on him for that to happen. 

This is all sarcasm, I assume, right?

 

http://www.profootballhof.com/heroes-of-the-game/hall-of-famers-by-draft-round/

I know All-Pros and Pro Bowls every year look pretty close to the same: the early rounds yield significantly more impact players; doesn't mean gems can't be found later on. There isn't an exact science.

 

As to the OP, no, I don't think there's a huge difference between 12 and 15. But there is a difference between 12 and 20, or 12 and say 28ish (where we've been picking most lately.) The early guys are blue chips for a reason, usually because they're most polished, need less development, and are able to play multiple schemes. After those, you're generally picking scheme dependant players who need work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, incognito_man said:
3 minutes ago, JBURGE25 said:

I still don't agree too much with that. Someone being drafted in the 5th usually has a 4th-UDFA grade. At that point, you take the guy who slid with flags, or you take a player you like. IMO.

or, the guy that goes 5.1 has a 3rd round grade and the guy that goes 5.25 has a 6th round grade...

Or the other way around?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

i'm intrigued by the apparent bump at the top of the 2nd vs bottom of the 1st.

Wouldn't that largely be factored by the state of the teams drafting? NE at 32 is more than likely taking a depth piece. Cleveland at 33 is taking a starter. Production factors into the graph, or am I missing something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like to think of the draft as playing poker.

Some people say the draft is a total crapshoot and while there is some truth to that (there's no telling when a 5th round pick is going to become a star or when a 1st round pick will flop), over time these things tend to average out if you know what you're doing.

Like I said in another post, you have to grade the players based on their positives (ability, measurables, tape, etc.) and negatives (lack of moves, competition, character concerns, whatever). You assign a value to all of that and then you play your cards knowing the percentages you are gambling on. Sure, sometimes that 95% sure prospect you picked in the first may flop and your 15% prospect in the 7th can hit, but that will average over time if you're doing well.

It's the same poker players do - they know the probabilities for any given hand and they will play it if they are favorable. It doesn't mean they will win that specific hand they had graded 85%, but play it enough times and the result will approach that 85% success rate.

To reply to the OP, yes draft position matters because you will have more players with higher probabilities available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, smetana34 said:

Wouldn't that largely be factored by the state of the teams drafting? NE at 32 is more than likely taking a depth piece. Cleveland at 33 is taking a starter. Production factors into the graph, or am I missing something?

probably has something to do with it. Or maybe some impact of good teams trading down into top of 2nd for bad teams reaching back into round 1 (manziel, teddy b, weeden, etc).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, incognito_man said:

probably has something to do with it. Or maybe some impact of good teams trading down into top of 2nd for bad teams reaching back into round 1 (manziel, teddy b, weeden, etc).

Makes sense. I wonder how much that 5th year option plays into it as well. Because if you're talking value, having an impact player making relative peanuts for an extra year has to effect it somehow. Of course, those last few picks of the 1st are lower than the first few of the 2nd, so what I just said contradicts what the data shows. Which seems backwards 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, smetana34 said:

Makes sense. I wonder how much that 5th year option plays into it as well. Because if you're talking value, having an impact player making relative peanuts for an extra year has to effect it somehow. Of course, those last few picks of the 1st are lower than the first few of the 2nd, so what I just said contradicts what the data shows. Which seems backwards 

could just be noise in the data as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Burnett42 said:

And if this is accurate how can their even be an argument that where a player is drafted doesnt matter? 

There isn't.  It's a select few people who want to look at the exception and paint it was common occurrences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...