ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
Re: Interesting Analytical view of the draft from ESPN
What a nice find. Good job.
Here is a quick summary pertaining to our interests: In the 1st round of recent drafts, of all positions, safeties have been picked by far the fewest times, yet have had by far the lowest likelihood of being busts (11%), and have the greatest chance of making at least one Pro Bowl (53%).
So yeah, I'd say Meriweather is going to likely be a GOOD ONE.
Last edited by maverick4; 05-01-2007 at 02:25 PM..
Re: Interesting Analytical view of the draft from ESPN
Quote:
Originally Posted by maverick4
Here is a quick summary pertaining to our interests: In the 1st round of recent drafts, of all positions, safeties have been picked by far the fewest times, yet have had by far the lowest likelihood of being busts (11%), and have the greatest chance of making at least one Pro Bowl (53%).
No surprise, really...they're presumably safest for the same reason that they're the least chosen. Similarly, if they had broken down the OL by position, guards and centers would have proven far safer than left tackles.
There's an element of self-fulfilling prophesy here. S, G & C are traditionally the lower-paid positions populated by good, smart football players who are not elite athletes. For a player at a traditionally low-rent position to crack the 1st round he's probably an exceptional prospect with polished skills, while teams will roll the dice on a guy with measurables like JaMarcus Russell Ted Ginn at the glamour positions.
Re: Interesting Analytical view of the draft from ESPN
Quote:
Originally Posted by patchick
No surprise, really...they're presumably safest for the same reason that they're the least chosen. Similarly, if they had broken down the OL by position, guards and centers would have proven far safer than left tackles.
There's an element of self-fulfilling prophesy here. S, G & C are traditionally the lower-paid positions populated by good, smart football players who are not elite athletes. For a player at a traditionally low-rent position to crack the 1st round he's probably an exceptional prospect with polished skills, while teams will roll the dice on a guy with measurables like JaMarcus Russell Ted Ginn at the glamour positions.
I saw a pre-draft USA Today article on Safeties being the new glamour position.
Re: Interesting Analytical view of the draft from ESPN
Safeties are really undervalued, in my opinion. They often have one of the highest tackle totals on the team, and have to be hybrid defenders on any given play against the pass and run.
No great defense has a mediocre safety, and no championship team in recent times has not had a great safety.
Re: Interesting Analytical view of the draft from ESPN
Defense up the middle is key. If you have a solid set of DTs (or NT), a stud MLB (or ILBs) and hard-hitting safeties that have some range to cover, that's a damn good foundation to build around. Rodney isn't going to be around forever. Now, let's see how the ILB situations shakes out.
Re: Interesting Analytical view of the draft from ESPN
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragda
I saw a pre-draft USA Today article on Safeties being the new glamour position.
That is because of the emergence of the pass catching tight end. You need good safeties to stop players like Gates, Gonzalez, Crumpler, Witten, Heap, and Clark.
__________________
"What Tom Brady just did gives me goose bumps."-John Madden after final drive in SB 36
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Re: Interesting Analytical view of the draft from ESPN
This is not very analytical; more of poorly interpreted data. Patchick sees thru the fallacies (Post #3) : Only 19 S vs 52 CBs in Rd 1. But the same no of safeties are going to the probowl as CBs each year. The only people worse with data than statisticians are journalists, esp sports variety.
Re: Interesting Analytical view of the draft from ESPN
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragda
I saw a pre-draft USA Today article on Safeties being the new glamour position.
Yep, that's why I kept saying "traditionally"! As the game evolves, positions rise and fall (bye bye, fullbacks.) The new breed of tight ends are running up the demand for rare athletes at safety, which raises salaries and will eventually attract better prospects to the position. Then more will be taken in the first round...and more will be busts.
Re: Interesting Analytical view of the draft from ESPN
Quote:
Originally Posted by braveht
This is not very analytical; more of poorly interpreted data. Patchick sees thru the fallacies
It's not very analytical, I agree, and I also thought the same things that patchick wrote, but the fact is, it does give some evidence that Meriweather has a very good chance of being a good safety for us. Since safeties are not picked often, when they are picked, they tend to be very good.