This team can't even lose right

Boone said:
During my overseas travels, I noticed that citizens of most other countries have an entirely different definition of 'personal space'. I mean, they'd get right up in your face while speaking to you. I never said anything to any of them, but I wanted to.

This thread reminds me of it :)
Click to expand...

Like this ?

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGVSIkEi3mM[/media]
 
I think '62 would probably be fine with whatever as long as they get Rex the hell out of there lol...

I don't have a problem with guys who say, oh well we lost at least we get a higher pick. It just really rubs me wrong to openly cheer for the skins to lose just so they do get a higher pick, and I just don't think it makes any sense.

if the team is being coached and managed the right way, then they should continue to improve, and they should be able to get their QB no matter where they wind up picking. Winning is always better than losing for the team imo.
 
I think some guys are thinking with their hearts and not with their heads.

Like I said, I concede Henry's point that without us actually doing a solid job with the picks we have its all a moot point anyway, but heres the part where I am a friggin pollyanna out of self preservation, I Have to believe HAVE TO BELIEVE, that there is light at the end of the tunnel. and in that perspective Boone is absolutely correct that every single draft space counts especially when you are as talent deficient as we are. if draft position didnt matter, every smart team would trade its first rounder for seconds simply to have lower cap numbers. you dont see teams do that. because the chance at a HOF player is better if you pick higher because if you do your job, you should pick talented players.

learning to win is BS, WHO exactly needs to learn to win? the 8 guys from the defence who will be back? of the 7 guys on offence who should be back? because if we dont have that sort of turnover again, then we simply will not improve enough to be a contender. Thats why I laughed when people used that excuse for the defence " the guys need to learn the system" hahaha you mean the majority of the guys who didnt fit and went elsewhere after the debacle season?

I will tell you guys something and not one of you can question my fandom because ive bled burgundy and Gold for damn near 30 years now.... I will not cheer against my team but I will not be as sad when we lose because I want a light at the end of this goddamn 18 year tunnel. I dont cheer for us to fluke off a few more wins that mean nothing but bad things for us. I dont care if grossman has one of his rare fluke games and wins us a game because right NOW that isnt what is best for this team.

mediocrity begets mediocrity, constant middle of the round picks mean you never get a shot at the truly superlative guys. yeah they might bust but the boom is worth the chance.
 
Rymanofthenorth said:
and in that perspective Boone is absolutely correct that every single draft space counts especially when you are as talent deficient as we are.
Click to expand...

No, every draft space does NOT count, because as we all know, drafting is NOT an exact science.

How many times have we seen for example, a player picked at #11 become a bust, while player picked much further down at #28, become a franchise player ?

Draft picks only count for a talent deficient team like us, ONLY when it comes to quantity of picks, and on the contrary, has little to do with placement of the picks.

Bottom line - Draft pick slots are OVER-RATED
 
Last edited:
Al, I totally agree with you. I don't think we're winning more than one more game. And if that's the case we'll get our QB relatively easily. I was just saying if we did start winning games it might not be all that terrible. Doesn't mean I think it's going to happen.

Ryman, fluke wins are going to happen. Every team has a bizarrely good game once or twice a season. Because of this, I doubt our fluke wins are going to be any more significant than anyone else's. Expect the Seahawks (with a much easier schedule than us from here on out) to have another flukey win or two. Miami will. Cleveland will. KC probably will too. Maybe even the Colts (though I'm not so sure with them :) )

I seriously doubt our little win here will mean much on draft day. We'll be where we should be.

Boone, ok ok ... I'll back up. :)
 
Last edited:
Fear The Spear said:
No, every draft space does NOT count, because as we all know, drafting is NOT an exact science.

How many times have we seen for example, a player picked at #11 become a bust, while player picked much further down at #28, become a franchise player ?

Draft picks only count for a talent deficient team like us, ONLY when it comes to quantity of picks, and on the contrary, has little to do with placement of the picks.

Bottom line - Draft pick slots are OVER-RATED
Click to expand...


exact science, probabilities and maximizing opportunity are all different things Fear!
 
fansince62 said:
exact science, probabilities and maximizing opportunity are all different things Fear!
Click to expand...

It would be interesting to see what percentage of first round picks (from top third, middle third, and end third) become stars, solid players, or busts. I would bet that the percentage of busts & solid picks are much higher than the percentage of stars that are found. If you look at it this way, picking later is actually an advantage - teams in front of you actually have a better chance of missing on a star. As the herd thins, it only makes the probability of hitting on a star that much better.

A couple examples, from 2003:
Lions take Charles Rogers 2nd, Texans take Andre Johnson 3rd. Maybe the Texans had their eyes on Rogers the entire time? But they were sitting at 3rd overall, and the Lions took him. The Texans then had to "settle" for AJ80.

Jets took Dewayne Robertson 4th, the Saints took Jonathan Sullivan 6th, and the Vikings took Kevin Williams 9th overall. Big Kev was clearly the best of the 3; the Vikings got the best player simply by picking later.

Yes, this is not perfect, but then again neither is picking high! Its all a crap shoot; the team should focus on winning and getting that 'Mo!
 
The Buffalo Bills drafted Aaron Maybin 11th and we got Orakpo 13. If you want a QB scenario Cutler was drafted after Vince Young and Matt Leinart.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device
 
Don't be offended Henry. Part of my request has to do with the consistent urge to plant a big juicy one right on your lips.
 
Boone said:
Don't be offended Henry. Part of my request has to do with the consistent urge to plant a big juicy one right on your lips.
Click to expand...

Dude, TMI!
Posted via BGO Mobile Device
 
I don't think it's nearly as bad as in the NBA, but I think high up in the NFL draft some GM's really get confused by the ole production versus potential thing. They shoot for the guy with the really high ceiling while ignoring the fact that despite their combine numbers they never managed to get that raw talent to materialize on the field and thus wind up getting someone who's great on paper, but not so much on grass.
 
Boone said:
Don't be offended Henry. Part of my request has to do with the consistent urge to plant a big juicy one right on your lips.
Click to expand...

Er ... Yeah.

Like I said ... Backing up. :)
Posted via BGO Mobile Device
 
Lanky Livingston said:
It would be interesting to see what percentage of first round picks (from top third, middle third, and end third) become stars, solid players, or busts...

...Yes, this is not perfect, but then again neither is picking high! Its all a crap shoot; the team should focus on winning and getting that 'Mo!
Click to expand...
Good post Lanky.

Another example, 1983.

1st Round
#1 John Elway HOF
#2 Eric Dickerson HOF
#9 Bruce Matthews HOF
#14 Jim Kelly HOF (Todd Blackledge was selected ahead of Jim at #7)
#27 Dan Marino HOF (Tony Eason#15 & Ken O'Brien#24 selected ahead of Dan)
#28 Darrell Green HOF (5 DB's selected ahead of Darrell)

3 from the top half, 3 from the bottom half.
Ironically, QB, G, & CB are all positions of need for us. And, if he turns out to play for us for 10+years and makes it to the HOF, I don't care which position we draft, in what slot, of any rd.
 
I 'believe' the *bust* factor is far less likely now than maybe it used to be. I'd be curious to see what more modern stats look like vs. previous decades. The scrutiny at all levels that a highly touted QB gets (from physical, to mental, and every other way) today is extreme compared to their predescessors. That doesn't mean they always pan out. But I think teams 'get it right' drafting QBs far more often now than they used to. I don't know if the stats would bear that out or not, but it seems to be the case.
 
Boone said:
I 'believe' the *bust* factor is far less likely now than maybe it used to be. I'd be curious to see what more modern stats look like vs. previous decades. The scrutiny at all levels that a highly touted QB gets (from physical, to mental, and every other way) today is extreme compared to their predescessors. That doesn't mean they always pan out. But I think teams 'get it right' drafting QBs far more often now than they used to. I don't know if the stats would bear that out or not, but it seems to be the case.
Click to expand...
Maybe, maybe not. The only fair way to judge will be 10-15 years down the road.

If teams appear to be doing a better job now, I'd think it has more to do with rules making it much, much easier for offenses, i.e. quarterbacks, to succeed. And not because picking players is any less of a crap shoot than it has been to date.

There have been colossal Boones and busts, pun intended, since the draft began. That's a long history of evidence. It will take a while to see if your theory of them doing better now, is correct.

Just like the draft, you have a 50/50 shot. ;)
 
This weekend I think I am going to delve a little deeper into the question of "Boones" vs. busts...not quite sure how I'm going to tackle it yet though.
 
Well I took a quick look and I have to admit, the QBs drafted high after 2007 have pretty much all panned out ... so far. However, it is a little early to pronounce judgement on all of them (Gabbert, Locker, and a few others) and we aren't THAT far removed from Jemarcus Russell. But the last four #1 picks were all QBs (Ryan, Stafford, Bradford and Newton), and so far they all look pretty darn good.

Hopefully Boone is right. It bodes well for us and whomever we pick. Then again, it might mean the Law of Averages is about to catch up with the league ...
 
Just saw something depressing: if D. Hall had stopped Dez Bryant on two key plays, we'd be leading the NFC East right now. Amazing.


EDIT: Conversely, if Haslett had not called cover zero blitz on one of them.
 
Here are a couple articles from Yale that analyze the NFL Draft, and both come to the same conclusion: higher picks are overvalued and lower picks are undervalued. The first article does say that "the upside of picking a superstar diminishes rapidly as the draft unfolds, making earlier picks extremely valuable." However, it also says that is for another study.

http://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/how-to-value-nfl-draft-picks/

http://mba.yale.edu/faculty/pdf/massey_thaler_overconfidence_nfl_draft.pdf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top