Rick Gosselin explains how he quantifies the draft

[LiveShot]

Interesting article, he states he's a writer not a talent evaluator but talks to people who are. He usually gets the highest grades of any of the draft evaluators.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcon.../stories/050608dnspoinsidenfl.1537e7f.html?nl

 

[unoriginal]

The draft is over, we no longer care about that now.

Besides the draft stuff, I found this interesting:

The NFL adopted a suggestion by Michael Irvin and is requiring all 32 of its teams to send their rookies to Canton for a day this summer to visit the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

The purpose is to educate the newcomers on the NFL's glorious past and impress upon them the opportunity they have to contribute in a positive way to the game's legacy. A few of the teams plan to send one of its Hall of Famers along as an escort and tour guide for the rookies

Michael Irvin, steward of the game

 

[jbb9s]

So how does smoking crack with prostitutes contribute to the game's legacy exactly?

 

[thechris]

"Goose" Gosselin is so full of himself that it's borderline hilarious. Some people have WAY too much time on their hands.

 

[Fencer]

Michael Irvin, steward of the game

If anybody knows what kind of guidance players need, he does.

 

[Clonamery]

So how does smoking crack with prostitutes contribute to the game's legacy exactly?

Methinks Irvin just wants EVERYONE to know he's in the HOF. Ego...........

 

[patchick]

I have a ton of respect for Gosselin, but the system he describes here makes no sense to me whatsoever. He assigns a point value to each draft-eligible player. Fine. Then:

"After a draft, I add up the point values of the players selected by each team and then divide by the number of its draft picks."

Huh? The number of its draft picks, not which picks they are? So a team like Kansas City with 2 high firsts and 2 extra 3rds gets evaluated as equivalent to a team, say, picking 30th with no first rounder but a bunch of comp picks at the end of the draft?

And it's not that he's chosen to judge the overall quality of the draft class regardless of "opportunity" -- because in that case, you wouldn't divide by the number of picks at all!

If you're going to do a formula like this, you have to assign point values to draft slots as well as players and see how well the team spent its currency.

 

[unoriginal]

I have a ton of respect for Gosselin, but the system he describes here makes no sense to me whatsoever. He assigns a point value to each draft-eligible player. Fine. Then:

"After a draft, I add up the point values of the players selected by each team and then divide by the number of its draft picks."

Huh? The number of its draft picks, not which picks they are? So a team like Kansas City with 2 high firsts and 2 extra 3rds gets evaluated as equivalent to a team, say, picking 30th with no first rounder but a bunch of comp picks at the end of the draft?

And it's not that he's chosen to judge the overall quality of the draft class regardless of "opportunity" -- because in that case, you wouldn't divide by the number of picks at all!

If you're going to do a formula like this, you have to assign point values to draft slots as well as players and see how well the team spent its currency.

You and most here are evaluating the draft as a part of the larger football season. Gosselin's method seems to be targeted at hardcore draftniks who evaluate the draft as its own event.

For them a successful draft starts with stockpiling as many high picks as you can so you are in good position to WIN THE DRAFT.

 

[patchick]

For them a successful draft starts with stockpiling as many high picks as you can so you are in good position to WIN THE DRAFT.

But if that were the case, why divide by the number of picks at all? Why not just give a grade for total talent acquired, rather than downgrading a team that stocked up on blue-chippers because they happened to have 3 extra comp picks at the end of the draft?

 

[BradyManny]

The whole draft grading system is screwy for some of the aforementioned reasons. But what gets me is when people complain that the Pats took Wheatley or O'Connell or anybody too early. This isn't a mock draft, people, this is the real thing, and if the Patriots like player X, and they are not 100% sure that player X will be available the next time they pick, they will select player X whether Mel Kiper said he should be selected there or not.

It's particularly relevant to the Patriots who are often selecting at the end of each round - essentially, they have to select a player one round earlier than the "experts" said they'd go. IE, with O'Connell, if he was projected as round 4, is it really good strategy for the Patriots to wait and see if he's available at the END of round 4?