Thread: Locked on Sports: Hype outstrips hunches in NFL draft

"damien927" wrote:

Breaking draft pick results into four categories -- Hall of Famer, Pro Bowler, solid NFL player, and bust or failed to meet expectations

I have a problem with this break-down..

Shouldn't it be more like:

Pro-bowler-- Starter-- Back-up-- Bust

You notice that he didn't mention ANYONE falling into his "hall of famer" category. You can't break-down statistics and include something that you will just use to change the overall numbers. I think he just did that so he could count any non-starting players as busts. THere are situations where a player is a back-up on his team, but he could start for many other teams... I don't think it is fair to label those guys a bust. IMO

The other problem I have with his "analysis" is the fact that "fails to meet expectations" is such an ambiguous idea. If someone becomes a solid player who is drafted beyond the second round they've exceeded expectations but if a first rounder doesn't become a pro-bowler then they have failed?? So according to this guy though a first round reciever may ultimately be more productive than a fourth round receiver the fourth rounder should be applauded because he produced anything at all. It's not even rational.

Furthermore, though the draft process still isn't a science, it has become more and more precise as the years have gone on. They employ new psychological and physical tests now then they did back in 1990.

That doesn't mean; however, that every draft is the same. This years draft seems to be quite a bit better than last year's class. In fact, I remember the talk around last year was that the class was kind of sparse. There were people taken in the first round that would've been second and third rounders in previous years. But you can't stop the draft because of a bad crop of talent and you can't equate one year's first rounder to another year's first rounder.

I'm not saying there isn't spin or hype, but this guy is just a dolt with no real significant analysis.

-DD

"Del Rio" wrote:

"AWZeus" wrote:

"singersp" wrote:

Wednesday, April 26, 2006

[size=18px]Locked on Sports: Hype outstrips hunches in NFL draft[/size]

Something for everyone to keep in mind this weekend. Being a #1 pick does not guarantee stardom (see: Troy Williamson, Erasmus James, Kenichi Udeze and Demetrius Underwood) and being a 6th-round pick does not make you a stiff (see: Tom Brady).

=Z=

That's pretty harsh to include Williamson, Erasmus, and Udeae with Underwood.....either that or pretty nice of you to include underwood.

I think the author has just as unrealistic expectations as the draft analysts.....a guy didn't blow your socks off the first year he played NFL football so he is a bust? I don't think so.

Exactly!!! I don't think Erasmus James or Kenechi Udeze were busts at all!!! They both played well their first year!!! You have too look at as like a 3rd grader being thrown in to learn Calculus in a matter of weeks!!! All the rookies (most) have to come in to a new team, get into a rythem, and learn a whole new system before week 1 and if they don't they get labelled as a rookie bust!!! Give these guys time, i know we want superstar players right off the bat, but, don't call me old fashion, Rome wasn't built in a day!!! And how could anyone predict Underwoods problem!!! It's sometimes harder for different positions to come in and learn a new system!!! Look at all the rookie QB from last season!! They are not bad players, they are just being thrown into the pits of fire and expected not to get burned!!! It just aint going to happen!!! I think the only problem with the draft is, is that fans look at a guys stats in college and expect them to do that in their first season!!! GIVE THEM TIME!!!

Yeah I found the connection a bit comical myself.

If the draft is such a crap shoot then maybe this guy shouldn't spend the time doing research to write an article about it. According to him it isn't worth the time.