Commanders News thread

[deanpet21]

again 4th rounders are usually BU's just look at the stats

I agree, but they could be starters. RR had a good draft his first year here

 

[skinsdad62]

I agree, but they could be starters. RR had a good draft his first year here

i think if they moved AGG to TE as a rookie he would still be here

 

[deanpet21]

i think if they moved AGG to TE as a rookie he would still be here

He got hurt early which is bad for any young player.

 

[skinsdad62]

He got hurt early which is bad for any young player.

that hurt harmon as well

 

[chillerdab]

No, the mid rounds picks are usually players that build your team. Backups or not. We got nothing out of this guy. Its just another example how the draft is a crap shoot and even if you have alot of draft picks it doesn't mean you will hit on all of them. Just looking at the 2020 draft, Young, Gibson, Curl and JSW are the hits. Misses are both 4th round picks. Well Charles has a shot to make the team,. Ismael and Hudson are on the bubble right now.

Tracking NFL Draft Efficiency: How Contingent Is Success To Draft Position?

On Monday morning during a discussion which appeared on CNBC's "Squawk Box", I addressed some of Richard Thaler's findings in his examination of whether NFL teams overvalue first-round draft picks while undervaluing later-round picks. Despite all the advanced metrics being developed to assess...

www.forbes.com

From the article:

Nearly 30% of all starters were 1st round draft picks when drafted into the league;

- Roughly 30% were taken in either the 2nd or 3rd round;

- Roughly 26% were taken in either rounds 4 through 7;

- Undrafted players (14%) were the 3rd most likely group to comprise 2014’s starters…only behind 1st round (30%) and 2nd round (18%) picks.


I did ten seconds of research which was enough to say more correctly that at least in the year quoted in the article, the fourth round produces almost as many starters as the first three rounds

Like all pieces of data, its important to consider context: Teams with a lot of holes in their starting lineup will naturally produce more starters via the draft than teams with less holes in their starting lineup.

Also: while its true that teams sign free agents to be starter, it’s cheaper to work theough the draft.

Clarifying misconceptions.

 

[skinsdad62]

Tracking NFL Draft Efficiency: How Contingent Is Success To Draft Position?

On Monday morning during a discussion which appeared on CNBC's "Squawk Box", I addressed some of Richard Thaler's findings in his examination of whether NFL teams overvalue first-round draft picks while undervaluing later-round picks. Despite all the advanced metrics being developed to assess...

www.forbes.com

From the article:

Nearly 30% of all starters were 1st round draft picks when drafted into the league;

- Roughly 30% were taken in either the 2nd or 3rd round;

- Roughly 26% were taken in either rounds 4 through 7;

- Undrafted players (14%) were the 3rd most likely group to comprise 2014’s starters…only behind 1st round (30%) and 2nd round (18%) picks.


I did ten seconds of research which was enough to say more correctly that at least in the year quoted in the article, the fourth round produces almost as many starters as the first three rounds

Like all pieces of data, its important to consider context: Teams with a lot of holes in their starting lineup will naturally produce more starters via the draft than teams with less holes in their starting lineup.

Also: while its true that teams sign free agents to be starter, it’s cheaper to work theough the draft.

Clarifying misconceptions.

Maybe you should reread that ? Because what I am seeing is rounds 4-7 and not just 4th round which was being discussed .

Now that would also mean 74 % of 4-7 rounds do not start which would mean they are mostly back ups . Again not knowing what solely the 4th round stat is

 

[skinsdad62]

 

[chillerdab]

Maybe you should reread that ? Because what I am seeing is rounds 4-7 and not just 4th round which was being discussed .

Now that would also mean 74 % of 4-7 rounds do not start which would mean they are mostly back ups . Again not knowing what solely the 4th round stat is

Your interpretation would also suggest that 70% of first rounders are non starters, Einstein.

Smart people would provide a context to better interpret the data. You have not proven that you can contextualize data whatsoever in this or any other context, so I provided you and dean with context.

Your implication is simplistic and incorrect and mine is not.

 

[duke1861]

Today didn't help. Do we have any idea what Dan said to Congress?

I am guessing he said the following:

"I don't recall"

"Unfortunately, I have signed a non-disclosure agreement and cannot speak to that situation"

" I fired any and all guilty parties ONCE I was advised"

Those were the only answers he gave.

 

[skinsdad62]

Your interpretation would also suggest that 70% of first rounders are non starters, Einstein.

Smart people would provide a context to better interpret the data. You have not proven that you can contextualize data whatsoever in this or any other context, so I provided you and dean with context.

Your implication is simplistic and incorrect and mine is not.

Simplistic? You use 4 rounds instead of one that was talked about to make a point with faulty confirmation ? How about using the right data ?

 

[skinsdad62]

 

[Sportster 72]

It makes no sense to trade for Jimmy G now. San Fran showed their hand.

 

[countryroads316]

Seattle is the best place for Jimmy G if he gets cut or traded for a late pick

 

[deanpet21]

Tracking NFL Draft Efficiency: How Contingent Is Success To Draft Position?

On Monday morning during a discussion which appeared on CNBC's "Squawk Box", I addressed some of Richard Thaler's findings in his examination of whether NFL teams overvalue first-round draft picks while undervaluing later-round picks. Despite all the advanced metrics being developed to assess...

www.forbes.com

From the article:

Nearly 30% of all starters were 1st round draft picks when drafted into the league;

- Roughly 30% were taken in either the 2nd or 3rd round;

- Roughly 26% were taken in either rounds 4 through 7;

- Undrafted players (14%) were the 3rd most likely group to comprise 2014’s starters…only behind 1st round (30%) and 2nd round (18%) picks.


I did ten seconds of research which was enough to say more correctly that at least in the year quoted in the article, the fourth round produces almost as many starters as the first three rounds

Like all pieces of data, its important to consider context: Teams with a lot of holes in their starting lineup will naturally produce more starters via the draft than teams with less holes in their starting lineup.

Also: while its true that teams sign free agents to be starter, it’s cheaper to work theough the draft.

Clarifying misconceptions.

I agree with you. Skinsdad said 4th rounder were all backups.

 

[chillerdab]

Simplistic? You use 4 rounds instead of one that was talked about to make a point with faulty confirmation ? How about using the right data ?

Just pointing out that “making a point with faulty confirmation” doesnt make any sense at all, and that i did infact use the correct data.

Read it again. Slowly.

 

[chillerdab]

I agree with you. Skinsdad said 4th rounder were all backups.

He did say that. Then, when caught, he changed the narrative.

 

[skinsdad62]

Just pointing out that “making a point with faulty confirmation” doesnt make any sense at all, and that i did infact use the correct data.

Read it again. Slowly.

we were talking about 1 damn round , the data you presented was for 4 rounds total , that makes it incorrect

He did say that. Then, when caught, he changed the narrative

4th round picks are typically BU's so i wont say bust as a player . they should have moved him to TE as a rookie

the 1st time i said" typically " , the 2nd time i sais" usually ". now using the queens english chiller and dean typically and usually do not mean absolute . it leaves breathing room for exceptions so i didnt get caught at anything but you guys got caught on not reading things correctly

so lets recap for you chiller , dean and i were talking about 1 round ,( round 4 to be specific ) your data gave a percentage for 4 rounds ( rounds 4 , 5 , 6 and 7 ) not just 1 round (round 4 ) that makes the numbers skewed for the original guideline which was round 4 making the data you were using incorrect because it used data for rounds 5.6 and 7 which were not in play for purposes of that limited conversation

now if you say 26 out 100 are starters , then 74 cannot be starters , its simple math .

 

[chillerdab]

Laughably horrible anaylsis.

Specatucular.

 

[skinsdad62]

Laughably horrible anaylsis.

Specatucular.

Well interpreting data , knowing what the conversation was about , actually reading and knowing what words actually mean as well as basic math are hard for you , maybe a coloring book and crayons will help ?

 

[DJ]

Ryan Kerrigan retired after 11 seasons with the team.