A Little Breakdown on Rick Smith

[Texan_Bill]

Originally Posted by Playoffs

(And speaking of Alex Gibbs, I'd sure like to pull him out of retirement for any type of consultant role he's willing to do.)

Certainly QFT!!!

[Texan_Bill]

Originally Posted by 76Texan

Heck, Brady by himself (and he doesn't count extra) as a sixth is better than ... I don't know how many fifths.

Or 4ths, or 3rds, or 2nds, hell even firsts!! Hell, a sixth rounder, not even really a starter at Michigan (who was it that started at Michigan in front of him? )

***************

Meh........ Drafting players is a crap shoot at best. Just like QB's, GM's are judged too harshly when there's a miss and congratulated too much when they draft, say a JJ Watt. It's just the nature of the beast.

[EllisUnit]

Originally Posted by 76Texan

Normally, the rule of thumb is that you expect a second rounder to become a starter (keeping in mind that there's no guarantee; even a high first round draft pick had become a bust many times before); a guy like Okoye, was also a starter for another team. He doesn't qualify as a bust.

The rate of going for a third rounder goes down to a maybe starter, but likely a solid rotational player or contributor.

A fourth rounder is a contributor if you draft decently and so on.

Jacoby, Slaton, and Adibi qualified to be a little better than average, at least enough to compensate for Molden.

In the meantime, before we go on, we also need to take into account the signing of UDFA, Brisiel and Butler. These guys may very well replace some of your own draft picks, and they did.

Zach diles was also starting this season, IMO we should not of let him go, i loved his play

[76Texan]

A similar article can be found here.

http://www.thefootballeducator.com/m...ation-process/

According to it (by their definition), the success rate of a fifth is 3.8%, while the success rate of a sixth is 2.5%.

3 sixths will accumulate to 7.5%
2 fifths will accumulate to 7.6%

3 sixths would definitely give you a higher success rate (7.5%) as compared to one fifth (3.8%).

[76Texan]

And if you want quality, read this and weep.

This one listed the best 40 picks in the last 10 years.
Seven sixth rounders are on it as opposed to just a lone uno fifth.

http://www.mynfldraft.com/best-nfl-draft-picks/150

[EllisUnit]

Originally Posted by 76Texan

And if you want quality, read this and weep.

This one listed the best 40 picks in the last 10 years.
Seven sixth rounders are on it as opposed to just a lone uno fifth.

http://www.mynfldraft.com/best-nfl-draft-picks/150

When i dont see Andre Johnson on that list it makes me question its credibility.

[tru80texan]

Originally Posted by EllisUnit

When i dont see Andre Johnson on that list it makes me question its credibility.

Thank you. Whatever criteria, which doesn't seem to be much, was used to compile that list was worthless. Hardly makes a good arguement for anything when you consider the names such Rudi Johnson & McGahee are on it while omitting many others, such as Andre, who deserve to be on it. It's obvious this list was based on nothing of substance & based on a persons opinion...which in the end means nothing. No Aaron Rodgers...really? I rest my case.

[76Texan]

But what about the other article?

Here is another article, by CFN (a more credible source out there), that studied all draft picks between 2000 and 2010.

It was distributed in April 2012 (I think, the date is on there).

17.5% of fifth rounders became starter while 11.67% made it.

Here, 2 sixths are already better than 1 fifth.

http://cfn.scout.com/2/1180349.html

Also, from the same article, an additional 16% (equal percentage for both rounds) went on and do something (ie., becoming a contributor).

This adds even more value to the sixth rounders.

[infantrycak]

Originally Posted by tru80texan

Thank you. Whatever criteria, which doesn't seem to be much, was used to compile that list was worthless. Hardly makes a good arguement for anything when you consider the names such Rudi Johnson & McGahee are on it while omitting many others, such as Andre, who deserve to be on it. It's obvious this list was based on nothing of substance & based on a persons opinion...which in the end means nothing. No Aaron Rodgers...really? I rest my case.

It was written in 2007-8 given that it goes back to the 1997 draft which explains Aaron Rodgers but still doesn't explain Andre, Ed Reed, Julius Peppers, Brees, LaDanian Tomlinson, etc.

[tru80texan]

Originally Posted by 76Texan

But what about the other article?

Here is another article, by CFN (a more credible source out there), that studied all draft picks between 2000 and 2010.

It was distributed in April 2012 (I think, the date is on there).

17.5% of fifth rounders became starter while 11.67% made it.

Here, 2 sixths are already better than 1 fifth.

http://cfn.scout.com/2/1180349.html

Also, from the same article, an additional 16% (equal percentage for both rounds) went on and do something (ie., becoming a contributor).

This adds even more value to the sixth rounders.

Lol! I see you are a member of the fuzzy math organization. Here are the facts given in your material. Paragraph 9- talent level drops as each as each round passes. That is also displayed in the percentages of the players rated 1 thru 5. 5th rounders had a little over 50% get rated 1-5 while 6th rounders had right at or a little below 50% who were rated at 1-5. The odds are better that 5th rounders have the potential to contribute more then 6th rounders. Plain & simple. You can keep accumulating all the 6th rounders you want until the % finally is greater that you could possibly get 1 player that becomes a worthy starter, but all you are doing is playing the odds in hopes that the numbers fall in your favor. When its all said & done 5th rounders simply have slightly more potential. It's a crap shoot w/out a doubt but 1 that you will have better talent to pick from in the 5th then the 6th. Simple concept. Thin the pool out & so goes the potential...just as your link suggested.

Can we please move on now. This is not on the subject & its a bit worn out & tiresome. You haven't proven much of a case by any means thus I will continue to maintain my stance. Thanks for the endless effort, but its a no go.

[tru80texan]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

It was written in 2007-8 given that it goes back to the 1997 draft which explains Aaron Rodgers but still doesn't explain Andre, Ed Reed, Julius Peppers, Brees, etc.

Omits Drew Brees as well, who was a 2nd rounder. Yeah, this doesn't hold much water imo.

[76Texan]

The fact that a 5th has more potential is a given, nobody ever claims otherwise.

[76Texan]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

It was written in 2007-8 given that it goes back to the 1997 draft which explains Aaron Rodgers but still doesn't explain Andre, Ed Reed, Julius Peppers, Brees, LaDanian Tomlinson, etc.

It doesn't matter as I've said that we can scratch that one; the sample size is just too small. Still, it is worth noting for some of the sixth rounder that are on the list, which is the central of discussion.

[76Texan]

Based on that study, when you draft a fifth rounder, there's a 17.5% chance that he becomes a starter and 16% chance that he becomes a contributor.

But now you have the opportunity to trade that 5th for 3 random 6th.
Each has a 11.67% chance to become a starter.
On top of that, you have a 48% chance that one becomes a comtributor.

You are almost guaranteed of one success.
Beat a single fifth rounder by a mile, don't you think?

[tru80texan]

Originally Posted by 76Texan

Based on that study, when you draft a fifth rounder, there's a 17.5% chance that he becomes a starter and 16% chance that he becomes a contributor.

But now you have the opportunity to trade that 5th for 3 random 6th.
Each has a 11.67% chance to become a starter.
On top of that, you have a 48% chance that one becomes a comtributor.

You are almost guaranteed of one success.
Beat a single fifth rounder by a mile, don't you think?

LOL!

[gafftop]

All i know is we have MS extended for more years before we even had too. No reason to extend early nobody was going to want him. No mobility, weak arm, poor history in crunch.
Get the big decisons right you are probably OK.
Screw up the big decisions all the little decisions may not matter.

[powda]

If we're drafting based on percentages we're screwed. I dont see how the base line in your thinking works. You want to draft based on the success of other teams? You want to call someone a contributor for team x when he has no shot of getting on the field for team y? Target talent and skip the math. The only math in the conversation is cap consideration.

[76Texan]

Originally Posted by powda

If we're drafting based on percentages we're screwed. I dont see how the base line in your thinking works. You want to draft based on the success of other teams? You want to call someone a contributor for team x when he has no shot of getting on the field for team y? Target talent and skip the math. The only math in the conversation is cap consideration.

But we're not talking about strategy here.
Obviously you still have to do your homework no matter where you draft.

But on average, I will trade my fifth for your three sixths because the talent levels are not that much difference there.

I've done some checkings myself.
You know I've been quite active on the draft forum for quite a few years now.

Here, I went back to 2000 through 2005 so far, and the data shows.
In 2005 for example the sixth rounders actually end up starting 100 more games than the fifth rounders in their combined careers.

[ATXtexanfan]

Originally Posted by ckhouston

Would have rather extend Barwin than Schaub ...

True true very true

[gafftop]

Originally Posted by ckhouston

Would have rather extend Barwin than Schaub ...

I hear you but why do we have to choose between dumb and dumber. I want moves that make sense and I say why didn't I think of that, not WTF.