Re: Locked on Sports: Hype outstrips hunches in NFL draft
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.
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
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.
The Betic Always Gets His Shot!