We are not schizophenic lol

[Lanky Livingston]

The best value picks in the draft are in Rounds 2 and 3.

Teams often are able to find players that at one time had a first round grade but dropped due to rumors, a poor combine, etc.

So you are able to wrap up a talented football player on a 3 year deal for a small signing bonus and enjoy cheap production.

The Redskins trade all their #2 and #3 picks, so the club is left with #1's and then #5's and #7s.

You can't build a football team on just a #1 pick and a series of #7's.

I touched on this before - its a lack of picks for the Skins. Although, we had 3 2s in 2008, and look where that got us....

 

[Bulldog]

well, yes you do need someone with an IQ greater than 70 pulling the trigger

Vinny Cerrato is the ONLY person I can think of that can say with a straight face in an interview that he drafted THREE receivers in the same round because they were simply the best players on the board at the time

I suppose if the 'best' players on the board were punters, he would have taken 3 with the successive picks?

 

[Ax]

there was nothing that should have led you to that conclusion, your statement was clear, its rather funny that you expect us to debate on assumption. I said from the get go we need to lose out for the best possible outcome, not that I was in any way happy about it.

Everything about the subject leads to that conclusion. Everything. You know it, and so does everybody else. The whole argument has been about draft position within a round. Man up and admit your mistake, "coach".

Ax-3-4
Ryman-0

 

[FuriousD]

the Redskins have one of the smallest scouting departments in the NFL and the scouts don't have much independence from the coaching staff and head coach in re recommenations for players.QUOTE]

Why do you think that is? More micromanagement run amok?

I've never heard that said before, although I'm willing to take your word for it. More frustration! It's par for the course that the Skins would ignore some basic essentials for success - indoor practice facility, heated outdoor fields, adequate scouting dept, etc in favor of wasting money on deadbeats!

:kick_can:

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

Everything about the subject leads to that conclusion. Everything. You know it, and so does everybody else. The whole argument has been about draft position within a round. Man up and admit your mistake, "coach".

Ax-3-4
Ryman-0

only in your world ax, I just said why your assumption is wrong, thank god you arent running the show here. even if it was "within a round" which was not even remotely your argument, you would still be wrong. I just showed beyond a shadow of a doubt that the major factor in drafting is figuring out who the best players are, AND THAT THE GOOD TEAMS WHO HAPPEN TO DRAFT LATER ARE GOOD AT THAT notice when a good team, gets an early pick through trade, they rarely bust?.

ax- abject fail

BT- we have a poor scouting staff (yes I agree its because its tiny and understaffed) and we have a martinet who doesnt know personnel from a hole in the ground, Shanny needs an astute personnel guy for his own success but he wants to do it all himself.

Thats one thing I have never understood about synder, the guy drops a hundred mil on a turd because that turd is a great football player but he doesnt invest in us being able to find our own 30 million dollar turd.

someone has got to get snyders ear and teach him how to build a team, ffs spend the money, just spend it right.

 

[Ax]

only in your world ax, I just said why your assumption is wrong,

Everybody in the thread started out talking about draft positioning. Only the dead might think it wasn't about position within a round. Well, the dead, and maybe a handful of sore loser Canadians.

even if it was "within a round" which was not even remotely your argument, you would still be wrong.

It's impossible for anyone with a marginally functioning brain to think I was talking about anything but "within the round". The only other possibles are folks like you, who are too little to admit you made a mistake. You're like Shanny with his move to the 3-4.

I just showed beyond a shadow of a doubt that the major factor in drafting is figuring out who the best players are,

Duh! I hope you didn't strain a muscle coming up with that. Problem is, nobody can do it. If they could, the Tom Brady's of the world wouldn't slip to the 6th round, and the London Fletcher's wouldn't go undrafted.

AND THAT THE GOOD TEAMS WHO HAPPEN TO DRAFT LATER ARE GOOD AT THAT notice when a good team, gets an early pick through trade, they rarely bust?

You mean like when the Great and Powerful OZzzzzzie Newsome drafted Travis Taylor?

Ax-21
Ryman-0

I own you now. If we were in prison, I could sell you for cigarettes.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

Ax, I know you arent very bright but stay with us here, we dont argue on assumptions, we argue what you wrote, and even someone who is obviously as dim as you are being has to recognise that what you wrote and what you may have meant, were not the same. so before impugning someone elses intelligence, especially that of someone who is orders of magnitude more intelligent than you, you may want to go reread what you wrote. I cant argue with whats in your head, hell you probably dont even have a grasp on that. I argue what you wrote and what you wrote was that draft position doesnt matter PERIOD. wHICH IS WRONG PERIOD and which you didnt clarify until someone else noticed it.

Youve been owned consistently here, the problem is that you are too dense to notice that where you think " I own you" is a relevant argument I have already shown you in your words that you were in fact wrong.

so lets get back to the argument that you already lost. away with you.

 

[fansince62]

Ry...how did the better teams at the bottom of a round get to be "better teams"? they picked higher in the draft when down, kept their picks instead of trading them away, and intelligently worked FA.

you have introduced some considerations that make sense.

- it's more than just random luck. the better teams...as you and others note...have an environment more conducive to success - they have better players to start with. that's the context later round picks start off in - i.e., the probability for success is greater.

- hits and misses in a round trace to multiple influences that are not independent (i.e., covariance is in play with the stats). evaluation skill, team context, scheme/skills match, weather(!), motivation, money, coaching style, injuries....and on. player evaluation is only one component of predicting (and actual) success.

- the best teams have a strategy they hew to over time. the strategy is adjusted based on a "feedback loop" from previous seasons. perform well and a team is drafting toward the bottom of a round - these teams generally search for depth, gap fillers, role players. perform badly and a team is drafting toward the top of a round...the high cost end...looking for impact players at any of a number of positions. in short, teams at opposite ends of the first round aren't even evaluating the same pool of players. they have different objectives.

it boils down to a team's strategy...if you're drafting lower in the round you shoot for role players - and yes, sometimes, BPA. if drafting higher you opt for immediate impact at any of numerous "holes". teams are not even looking for the same thing in these respective draft positions. a team like the Skins is clearly in the impact/multiple holes scenario.

- yes..."gems" can be found in later draft positions....but they BECOME gems for a whole slew of reasons. the gems might not succeed at all if drafted in much higher positions (as you and others noted at one point in one of these threads). knowing this...how does some statistic about "probability" of success become an actionable metric? I submit that it doesn't. accepting the notion that later picks in a round have an equal probability of success to earlier picks isn't a strategy. that "metric" only correlates to one among many variables that constitute the roster management strategy and the draft strategy.

- a draft strategy is shaped by more than just internal variables. it is also shaped by expectations of what other teams are going to do. it is shaped by the talent pool in any given draft. the point is that a team has to make a rational decision executed through some sort of methodology/process. that process is based on more than just a statistic about early versus late round success rates.

so..the question I ask is this: if a team is a bad one with glaring talent deficiencies and multiple gaps....is the correct strategy to opt for lower picks in a round for role players or potential "gems" (that become gems by virtue of multiple factors many of which (by definition) losing teams don't offer).....or higher picks where raw impact talent is greater? a reasonable response is that that strategy could emphasize quantity over quality. I can buy into that. but if the strategy is to find core players who are athletically gifted and marked as high probability successes (the "foundation") as many teams have done in the past as the route to success...then drafting higher makes sense. you stay put or move up to draft the Bradford's of the world. the issue isn't that high draft picks can fail...the issue is that the return is huge if you hit with one of the high talent players. so, another variable, is a team's risk acceptance propensity.

I'll adjust somewhat my view on this. relative draft position in a round isn't the end all be all. the draft strategy, however, IS the end all be all. what should the Skins' draft strategy be 2011? I vote huge return at QB. I believe that the higher the draft position the greater the opportunity to control the probability of securing that type of player. El may be right that 6-9 does not matter. others can legitimately respond that here have been major late in the round QB successes. I respond that is all a matter of teams' relative needs in any given draft. if there are multiple teams coveting the best QBs and few to pick from...higher...everything else being equal...is better. I also believe this is one of those years. unless Shanny pulls a white rabbit out of the FA black hat.....the draft will be the path to a QB. reasonable people can differ on where to select that QB. in my mind, with this year's crop of QBs and other teams looking at QBs....earlier is better. guarantee you get the player you want. you may fail...but you got the player your system determined was the best. if..the team instead decides to opt for d-line..then the abundance of quality talent at that position in this year's draft affords more wiggle room.

immediate impact or development?
quantity?
control?
talent level?
other team's probable strategies?
talent pool?
need?

what should be weighted most in the Skins' upcoming draft strategy? in what order? and why?

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

thats a great post Ill get to it on my break for sure when i have some time.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Ryman, no response to my post?

Also, you may want to tone down the insults. Just a suggestion.

 

[Ax]

Ax, I know you arent very bright but stay with us here, we dont argue on assumptions, we argue what you wrote, and even someone who is obviously as dim as you are being has to recognise that what you wrote and what you may have meant, were not the same. so before impugning someone elses intelligence, especially that of someone who is orders of magnitude more intelligent than you, you may want to go reread what you wrote. I cant argue with whats in your head, hell you probably dont even have a grasp on that. I argue what you wrote and what you wrote was that draft position doesnt matter PERIOD. wHICH IS WRONG PERIOD and which you didnt clarify until someone else noticed it.

Youve been owned consistently here, the problem is that you are too dense to notice that where you think " I own you" is a relevant argument I have already shown you in your words that you were in fact wrong.

so lets get back to the argument that you already lost. away with you.

Rain Man, you are the only tool who doesn't know that draft position means within the round. I tried to clarify it for you, and you alone. As even my neighbor's turtle was quick enough to pick that up.

I know you do too, but you'd rather act like a dick. And for that, you could win the Academy Award, because you're VERY good at it.

If you would like to try and talk civilly, I'd be glad to oblige. If not, I can certainly continue to thrash you in front of the class. It's your ass.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

Ryman, no response to my post?

Also, you may want to tone down the insults. Just a suggestion.

Im busy at work at the moment, and I speak to people how they speak to me, our little dunce friend has earned his new moniker.

 

[servumtuum]

fansince, I have a question. Given that QBs drafted very early in the draft, say positions 1-12 are drafted by teams with poorer than average season records and therefore likely to have serious team deficiencies other than at QB do you think that might be skewing the perception, and possibly the numbers indicating relative irrelevance of draft position as a predictor of future performance?

 

[fansince62]

actually Ax is not a dunce nor should he be spoken to like he is. can you please just try to stick to the topic and not get personal?

all around good point....FOR EVERYONE....said the pot!

 

[fansince62]

fansince, I have a question. Given that QBs drafted very early in the draft, say positions 1-12 are drafted by teams with poorer than average season records and therefore likely to have serious team deficiencies other than at QB do you think that might be skewing the perception, and possibly the numbers indicating relative irrelevance of draft position as a predictor of future performance?

absolutely!

to reiterate...I thought about what the position in a round matters less folks have argued and they have a point. I also came to the conclusion that what matters most is strategy. and strategy is based on more than hit/fail rates. Were I a GM/FO..one of my goals (not the only one) is to control outcomes as much as I can when there is value in doing so. it is my contention that that logic can support drafting high in a given year..especially with QBs. last year being a prime example.

there is no fixed rule for this. it depends on the strategy.

 

[Ax]

I thought about what the position in a round matters less folks have argued and they have a point. I also came to the conclusion that what matters most is strategy. and strategy is based on more than hit/fail rates.

It's been hard to get a consistent strategy around here with all the coaching and system changes. It SHOULD get easier over time, if we can stabilize these areas.

 

[Bulldog]

The Redskins have consistently made the wrong choices because there was NO strategy in place.

In 2004, 2005 and again in 2007 the Redskins drafted a DB with a top 10 selection when there were many holes on this team, including the lack of a franchise passer or premium talent on the outside. The defense also lacked the kind of elite pass rusher you need to compete.

In 2008 the club once again bunched picks, this time using three #2 picks on receivers when the OL and DL were aging and again there were question marks about the direction at QB and other key skill slots as well.

So, I agree it IS the strategy that should be determinative, not the circumstance.

If you have a club that is uber-talented and you can simply pick the best player available regardless of position even if he is a punter, kicker or long-snapper that's fine.

But for the majority of the 32 teams the strategy links where you want to go in the future with what you are currently missing.

 

[fansince62]

It's been hard to get a consistent strategy around here with all the coaching and system changes. It SHOULD get easier over time, if we can stabilize these areas.

bingo! and that is why I support Shanahan...massive ego and all...for 3-4 years. let's finally do this right. in all honesty...how can it not get better? it's so bad right now there is no other direction but up!

do your thing Shanny...just try not to destroy team morale along the way with public and unproductive player/coach melodramas...

 

[fansince62]

But for the majority of the 32 teams the strategy links where you want to go in the future with what you are currently missing.

yup. but they all have inflection points.

so...BT.....thoughtful analyst that you are....what should be the Skins' strategy?

 

[Bulldog]

If McNabb was actually not running the offense as it was drawn up and was passively resisting the coaching staff he should have been sat down earlier than he was.

McNabb has a victim complex going though and he is never going to come out and say anything publicly that puts him in the position of controversy. Unlike Haynesworth, he is going to let others do his talking for him and smile at the cameras and talk about a brighter tomorrow and make believe he is above it all.

All the while, he is really the one at the eye of the storm.

Some real personality types the Redskins have brought in here the past couple of years

The Redskins are a better soap opera than a football team.