Search results

Because none of the other criteria that anyone uses for asserting whether a 4th round pick was "good" or "bad" are arbitrary? :rofl:

To paraphrase myself, after the first 100 or so picks, the rest are all virtual UDFAs. As is typical, there were probably a half dozen prospects widely binkified by posters here with discussions about whether BB would need to take them by the 6th, 5th or even the 4th round in order to get them...

Hmmmmm. Seems to me that PC's original premise was that folks seem to be condemning Ohrnberger NOT on his own merits but because he has yet to meet their comparative expectations for a high-falutin' 4th round pick. Her "perspective" appears to be that very few (five, by your count) of the...

Just to be clear, I've also had serious doubts about Ohrnberger so far. However, citing the players above and their starts (mostly gained through injury opportunities) seems like a false comparison, differences in blocking schemes aside. GB, CHI and PIT have been three of the shakiest...

Re: For those who wanted Pats to select Muhammad Wilkerson rather than trade # 28.... I was under the impression that the big issue between Shanhan and Haynesworth - wait, ONE of the NUMEROUS big issues - was that Albert didn't want to play NT in 30-fronts. OTOH, he should certainly be a...

In 2009, the Pats spent about 2260 SVC on 12 prospects. At #123, Ohrnberger accounted for 49 SVC, roughly 2% of total draft pick expenditures (Butler "cost" 10 times as much). My guess is that they were interested in him as a long term developmental prospect and had good information that...

Well, it's entirely possible that YOU "dont better the worst defense in the league on 3rd down by drafting a single defensive player before #194....and another CB at that." Something tells me that BB will. Of course, that will be totally due to his coaching skill, not his evaluation that the...

I you're saying that the "Tuck Rule Game" coincided with the beginning of the Raiders' downfall, I agree. If you're implying that the call somehow "tipped the scales" and caused the downfall, I'd dispute that. WRT the effect on the Pats, that call certainly DID seem to lift the team at the...

That depends. Have you ever played QB? - Sincerely, ----- The Miami Dolphins Coaching Staff and Front Office

Thanks. I guess. In fact, I had read the entire thread - even re-read a couple comments to make certain I understood them - BEFORE your first comment which "suspects" that BB "realizes that the chart is useless and does not use it." The subsequent discussion (which I did read and...

The info at the link is nice to have. I've always wondered what an approximate "ROI" (performance value compared to "Draft Chart Value spent) might be broken down by position. I've also often wondered how various teams have done in each draft in terms of approximate total "ROI". These...

This is where that damned "inaccurate" and "unreliable" Draft Value Chart sorta comes in handy.

Commonly made, but this is a HUGE assumption. Really it's TWO assumptions: 1) That Brady will still be playing at all in 2014. 2) That Brady will still be playing for the Pats in 2014.

Okay. Perhaps I am lost. "Reliability" with regard to what?

OTOH, if you turn to page 117, paragraph 2, section 5 of "MaineMan's Excruciatingly Tedious and Detailed Overanalysis", you'll see that . . . . Wait a sec. Nope. You're correct. Major boo-boo from the get-go.

See, this is where this doesn't work for me. A draft pick number merely represents a place in line. Teams trade up to a higher pick (closer to the front of the line) not based on some abstract notion that players who may be available at that point will have a higher AV, but for a specific...

I really like Hankerson and think he'll turn out to be very special. HOWEVER, if the Pats can win the next couple Superbowls with Ridley contributing only 4-5 carries/game for 300-350 yds and 4-5 TDs a season with no fumbles, I won't really care if Hankerson becomes the next Randy Moss.

And doesn't one usually pay the interest up front when mortgaging something?

Now THERE is a horse of a completely different color! First of all, there's nothing "OFFICIAL" about the Standard Value Chart. There are no "rules" enforcing it on anyone, it's merely a standardized reference GUIDELINE. Second of all, it has nothing to do whatsoever with how individual...

If by "higher picks" you mean #1-#5, yes, those are dominated by large variations from SVC. However, after that and until about pick #25, variations aren't nearly so large and those that are beyond -7% to +7% comprise significantly less than a majority of the trades. After another "bump" in...