Number Crunchers - Evaluating Talent Acquisitions via NFL Draft

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from mia76. Show mia76's posts

    Re: Number Crunchers - Evaluating Talent Acquisitions via NFL Draft

    Nothing to do with Billy Ball or anything like it. This is not evaluating players, it is evaluating the result of all teams talent evaluation/drafting based on a look at history.

    Everybody knows you should get a stud with a top ten pick and if you don't you blew it.

    Everybody knows that a later first round pick should be a very good player, and it hurts when you miss.

    But when you get into the second round and third round and later rounds, everybody can name the brilliant selection where you got what in 20/20 hindsight should have been a 1st rounder. Those guys are easy to remember because every commentator mentions it when they talk about those guys - heck they now call pick 199 in the draft 'The Brady Pick'. BUT what no one keeps track of in the media or in the fan community is all those other players that excited or depressed you when they were selected in round x because they were such great value or such a ridiculous stretch by the GM. You remember them for a year, maybe two, but they fade from memory, maybe not for the picks made by your team, but for the other 31 picks made in each round by other teams.

    So looking at the metrics compiled by number crunchers is a way to evaluate how your team actually did compared to other teams. And to maybe temper your anger or elation over some pick in the next draft.

    Why get ompletely bent out of shape when your team 'flushes' away a mid fourth rounder on a no-namer they could have picked up as a free agent when the reality is the player you wanted them to pick was odds on to fail anyway.

    Think of this - If the Pats had used pick #91 on Da'rick Rogers all the fans and the pundits would be saying what good value they got at that point in the draft. BUT the reality is if they had done that, they would have been the only team of 32 that had a value greater than #255 assigned to him.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Number Crunchers - Evaluating Talent Acquisitions via NFL Draft

    In response to mia76's comment:

    Nothing to do with Billy Ball or anything like it. This is not evaluating players, it is evaluating the result of all teams talent evaluation/drafting based on a look at history.

    Everybody knows you should get a stud with a top ten pick and if you don't you blew it.

    Everybody knows that a later first round pick should be a very good player, and it hurts when you miss.

    But when you get into the second round and third round and later rounds, everybody can name the brilliant selection where you got what in 20/20 hindsight should have been a 1st rounder. Those guys are easy to remember because every commentator mentions it when they talk about those guys - heck they now call pick 199 in the draft 'The Brady Pick'. BUT what no one keeps track of in the media or in the fan community is all those other players that excited or depressed you when they were selected in round x because they were such great value or such a ridiculous stretch by the GM. You remember them for a year, maybe two, but they fade from memory, maybe not for the picks made by your team, but for the other 31 picks made in each round by other teams.

    So looking at the metrics compiled by number crunchers is a way to evaluate how your team actually did compared to other teams. And to maybe temper your anger or elation over some pick in the next draft.

    Why get ompletely bent out of shape when your team 'flushes' away a mid fourth rounder on a no-namer they could have picked up as a free agent when the reality is the player you wanted them to pick was odds on to fail anyway.

    Think of this - If the Pats had used pick #91 on Da'rick Rogers all the fans and the pundits would be saying what good value they got at that point in the draft. BUT the reality is if they had done that, they would have been the only team of 32 that had a value greater than #255 assigned to him.




    as I said I get this and I am sure Bellichick and others do a fine job with what the article is pointing to

    my whole point (yes I admitted it was a bit of a pet peeve rant) is that this is just yet another piece of tech overload that is so pervasive in the sports world today-it's just making football into rocket science and reducing human endeavor to formulas and data

    that is what I wa saying it was a point parallel to your OP not specifically about it

    we have waaay to many stats

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Number Crunchers - Evaluating Talent Acquisitions via NFL Draft

    In response to patsbandwagonsince76's comment:

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    The only statistic that means anything relative to the draft is Lombardi Trophys won.

     




    agreed babe...it's amazing in this era of techno overload that every nerd with a pc puts together some convoluted mathematical "formula" and thinks that is the way athletics and athletes should be quantified and judged...I bet a lot of these nerds aren't even fans of sports just geeks feeding hard "data" into a pc according to some algorithm/program

     

    worse yet is how fans-especially older fans-use this as more than it is or as the basis for what takes place on the field, much less in the heart of an athlete or the mind of a coach at crunch time...I mean how the great teams and players and gms and coaches of yore ever did anything without this I will never know...imagine how great Lombardi or Noll could have been if only they had these nerds and their know-it-all technology!

    ok rant over thank you all for your time

    PS: Billy Beane's teams will NEVER win anything

     


    The stats presented above are not meant to choose the best players they simply are a way of showing how far off they are from the idealized case of drafting perfectly from most sucessful to least sucessfull.

    It shows they still have a ways to go which means great opportunity for the team out there that can evaluate talent..theoretically there is a star availible in every round.

    The statistical approach might work in baseball but for football I think a face to face meeting and 10 minutes of film will always be better than  the most sophisticated  number crunching in the world.

    i couldn't agree more and i think it doesn't even work in baseball that well

     

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from anonymis. Show anonymis's posts

    Re: Number Crunchers - Evaluating Talent Acquisitions via NFL Draft

    In response to jri37's comment:



    I am going to make this simple for even you to understand.

    This was a research report done to evaluate how teams drafted not a tool that team used for drafting.



    this....

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from mia76. Show mia76's posts

    Re: Number Crunchers - Evaluating Talent Acquisitions via NFL Draft

    In response to jri37's comment:

     

    I am going to make this simple for even you to understand.

     

    This was a research report done to evaluate how teams drafted not a tool that team used for drafting.



    Thanks - hard to get through a simple point.

    (But I will disagree just a little in that I do believe these kinds of studies do affect not the player evaluation, but the way a team treats its draft capital (picks.) A team may be more willing to draft a 3rd rounder based on a specific limited role they see for him, rather than try to hit a homerun on a player that MIGHT be a pro-bowler but is probably going to be a bust, if they realise the statistical probablity is the same or just a little worse. Again - not the talent evaluation, but the use of the picks themselves.)

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Number Crunchers - Evaluating Talent Acquisitions via NFL Draft

    In response to jri37's comment:

     

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

    In response to patsbandwagonsince76's comment:

     

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    The only statistic that means anything relative to the draft is Lombardi Trophys won.

     




    agreed babe...it's amazing in this era of techno overload that every nerd with a pc puts together some convoluted mathematical "formula" and thinks that is the way athletics and athletes should be quantified and judged...I bet a lot of these nerds aren't even fans of sports just geeks feeding hard "data" into a pc according to some algorithm/program

     

    worse yet is how fans-especially older fans-use this as more than it is or as the basis for what takes place on the field, much less in the heart of an athlete or the mind of a coach at crunch time...I mean how the great teams and players and gms and coaches of yore ever did anything without this I will never know...imagine how great Lombardi or Noll could have been if only they had these nerds and their know-it-all technology!

    ok rant over thank you all for your time

    PS: Billy Beane's teams will NEVER win anything

     


    The stats presented above are not meant to choose the best players they simply are a way of showing how far off they are from the idealized case of drafting perfectly from most sucessful to least sucessfull.

    It shows they still have a ways to go which means great opportunity for the team out there that can evaluate talent..theoretically there is a star availible in every round.

    The statistical approach might work in baseball but for football I think a face to face meeting and 10 minutes of film will always be better than  the most sophisticated  number crunching in the world.

     

     

    i couldn't agree more and i think it doesn't even work in baseball that well

     

     



    I am going to make this simple for even you to understand.

     

    This was a research report done to evaluate how teams drafted not a tool that team used for drafting.

     




    now for the THIRD time I will say that the point I was making was not about this specific report nor it's contents- I was using it as an EXAMPLE of how technology and techno geeks are inundating modern day sports with facts and data and formulas to the point of silliness and becoming overwhelming

     

    can you three understand the use of one thing as an example of a larger context or do you need that explained too?

    or do I have to clarify for the FOURTH time?

     

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from anonymis. Show anonymis's posts

    Re: Number Crunchers - Evaluating Talent Acquisitions via NFL Draft

    In response to 42AND46's comment:


    now for the THIRD time I will say that the point I was making was not about this specific report nor it's contents- I was using it as an EXAMPLE of how technology and techno geeks are inundating modern day sports with facts and data and formulas to the point of silliness and becoming overwhelming

     

    can you three understand the use of one thing as an example of a larger context or do you need that explained too?

    or do I have to clarify for the FOURTH time?

     




    I understood your point the first time, dude. There are indeed lots of stats/data out there that people use for some reason or another. Unfortunately, some posters didn't understand the report. You were basically making a broad generalization that sort of didn't really have to do with the report per se.


    I've never had a problem with you before, but for some reason, ur being a real tool.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Paul_K. Show Paul_K's posts

    Re: Number Crunchers - Evaluating Talent Acquisitions via NFL Draft

    "Rather the table overvalues first-round picks relative to all other rounds with the average success of second - and third - round players much higher than predicted by the table." -- from the paper.

    You have all noticed how BB tends to trade down in the first round, and how he tends to accumulate second and third round picks?  For example, this draft he ended up with zero first round picks, two second rounders and two third rounders. 

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from anonymis. Show anonymis's posts

    Re: Number Crunchers - Evaluating Talent Acquisitions via NFL Draft

    In response to Paul_K's comment:

     

    "Rather the table overvalues first-round picks relative to all other rounds with the average success of second - and third - round players much higher than predicted by the table." -- from the paper.

    You have all noticed how BB tends to trade down in the first round, and how he tends to accumulate second and third round picks?  For example, this draft he ended up with zero first round picks, two second rounders and two third rounders. 

     

    Sort of reflects his strategy in one of the graphs.

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Number Crunchers - Evaluating Talent Acquisitions via NFL Draft

    In response to jri37's comment:

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

    In response to jri37's comment:

     

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

    In response to patsbandwagonsince76's comment:

     

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    The only statistic that means anything relative to the draft is Lombardi Trophys won.

     




    agreed babe...it's amazing in this era of techno overload that every nerd with a pc puts together some convoluted mathematical "formula" and thinks that is the way athletics and athletes should be quantified and judged...I bet a lot of these nerds aren't even fans of sports just geeks feeding hard "data" into a pc according to some algorithm/program

     

    worse yet is how fans-especially older fans-use this as more than it is or as the basis for what takes place on the field, much less in the heart of an athlete or the mind of a coach at crunch time...I mean how the great teams and players and gms and coaches of yore ever did anything without this I will never know...imagine how great Lombardi or Noll could have been if only they had these nerds and their know-it-all technology!

    ok rant over thank you all for your time

    PS: Billy Beane's teams will NEVER win anything

     


    The stats presented above are not meant to choose the best players they simply are a way of showing how far off they are from the idealized case of drafting perfectly from most sucessful to least sucessfull.

    It shows they still have a ways to go which means great opportunity for the team out there that can evaluate talent..theoretically there is a star availible in every round.

    The statistical approach might work in baseball but for football I think a face to face meeting and 10 minutes of film will always be better than  the most sophisticated  number crunching in the world.

     

     

    i couldn't agree more and i think it doesn't even work in baseball that well

     

     



    I am going to make this simple for even you to understand.

     

    This was a research report done to evaluate how teams drafted not a tool that team used for drafting.

     




    now for the THIRD time I will say that the point I was making was not about this specific report nor it's contents- I was using it as an EXAMPLE of how technology and techno geeks are inundating modern day sports with facts and data and formulas to the point of silliness and becoming overwhelming

     

    can you three understand the use of one thing as an example of a larger context or do you need that explained too?

    or do I have to clarify for the FOURTH time?

     

     



    Your words not mine... The is and this you are refering to below is the report the trhread is about... no? 

     

    "my whole point (yes I admitted it was a bit of a pet peeve rant) is that this is just yet another piece of tech overload that is so pervasive in the sports world today-it's just making football into rocket science and reducing human endeavor to formulas and data"

     



    forget it drop it u missed the point yet again since u cant see that what u hi-lghited here and my third explanation above it are saying the same thing...move on it aint that important

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: Number Crunchers - Evaluating Talent Acquisitions via NFL Draft

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

    In response to jri37's comment:

     

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

    In response to jri37's comment:

     

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

    In response to patsbandwagonsince76's comment:

     

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    The only statistic that means anything relative to the draft is Lombardi Trophys won.

     




    agreed babe...it's amazing in this era of techno overload that every nerd with a pc puts together some convoluted mathematical "formula" and thinks that is the way athletics and athletes should be quantified and judged...I bet a lot of these nerds aren't even fans of sports just geeks feeding hard "data" into a pc according to some algorithm/program

     

    worse yet is how fans-especially older fans-use this as more than it is or as the basis for what takes place on the field, much less in the heart of an athlete or the mind of a coach at crunch time...I mean how the great teams and players and gms and coaches of yore ever did anything without this I will never know...imagine how great Lombardi or Noll could have been if only they had these nerds and their know-it-all technology!

    ok rant over thank you all for your time

    PS: Billy Beane's teams will NEVER win anything

     


    The stats presented above are not meant to choose the best players they simply are a way of showing how far off they are from the idealized case of drafting perfectly from most sucessful to least sucessfull.

    It shows they still have a ways to go which means great opportunity for the team out there that can evaluate talent..theoretically there is a star availible in every round.

    The statistical approach might work in baseball but for football I think a face to face meeting and 10 minutes of film will always be better than  the most sophisticated  number crunching in the world.

     

     

    i couldn't agree more and i think it doesn't even work in baseball that well

     

     



    I am going to make this simple for even you to understand.

     

    This was a research report done to evaluate how teams drafted not a tool that team used for drafting.

     




    now for the THIRD time I will say that the point I was making was not about this specific report nor it's contents- I was using it as an EXAMPLE of how technology and techno geeks are inundating modern day sports with facts and data and formulas to the point of silliness and becoming overwhelming

     

    can you three understand the use of one thing as an example of a larger context or do you need that explained too?

    or do I have to clarify for the FOURTH time?

     

     



    Your words not mine... The is and this you are refering to below is the report the trhread is about... no? 

     

    "my whole point (yes I admitted it was a bit of a pet peeve rant) is that this is just yet another piece of tech overload that is so pervasive in the sports world today-it's just making football into rocket science and reducing human endeavor to formulas and data"

     



     

     

    forget it drop it u missed the point yet again since u cant see that what u hi-lghited here and my third explanation above it are saying the same thing...move on it aint that important



    Board cop has spoken.  Hi Al :)

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Number Crunchers - Evaluating Talent Acquisitions via NFL Draft

    In response to anonymis's comment:

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     


    now for the THIRD time I will say that the point I was making was not about this specific report nor it's contents- I was using it as an EXAMPLE of how technology and techno geeks are inundating modern day sports with facts and data and formulas to the point of silliness and becoming overwhelming

     

    can you three understand the use of one thing as an example of a larger context or do you need that explained too?

    or do I have to clarify for the FOURTH time?

     

     




     

    I understood your point the first time, dude. There are indeed lots of stats/data out there that people use for some reason or another. Unfortunately, some posters didn't understand the report. You were basically making a broad generalization that sort of didn't really have to do with the report per se.


    I've never had a problem with you before, but for some reason, ur being a real tool.




    nah its not you anonymis we are cool - its JRI37 i am really responding to

    glad u at least got what i meant: it was a broader point that didnt have to do with that report but reports and others like it ie: tech/data overload

    now back to actual football!

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from anonymis. Show anonymis's posts

    Re: Number Crunchers - Evaluating Talent Acquisitions via NFL Draft

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

    nah its not you anonymis we are cool - its JRI37 i am really responding to

    glad u at least got what i meant: it was a broader point that didnt have to do with that report but reports and others like it ie: tech/data overload

    now back to actual football!



    no worries....peace....lol

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Number Crunchers - Evaluating Talent Acquisitions via NFL Draft

    Interesting study.  Couple of takeaways for me:

    1) The assertion that the Pats under BB are mired in draft mediocrity is flawed;

    2) The indisputable element of luck notwithstanding, there is a scientific basis to effective (define the word yourself) drafting;

    3) A team cannot win without good players that are obtained through effective (see above) drafting;

    4) By all objective statistical measures of draft evaluation the Pats are among the best in the league.

    I would add the following: When you take into consideration all of the elements that go into making a Super Bowl winning football team, the team that gets the breaks (luck) at the right time wins.  However, in order for those breaks to matter a team has to be in the playoffs to get 'em. 

     

Share