cage

I'm struggling with this one... I'll address each of the four lines. Remember, you're already getting base points for each level PRO=5 STR=3 BUP=1 WS=0 With the table I want to make adjustments based on how good the draft team was against "expectations" (in quotes). My expectation is that: Round 1 pick should be a pro-bowler so why give bonus points Round 2/3/4, several players have already been picked so it takes increasing skill to select a PRO, so I'm giving bonus pts Round 5/6/7, by now you're "expectation" is that you're drafting for depth/special teams, so getting a PRO here is really unexpected and so I'm taking away the bonus points, they still get the base points. You got luckier than you were skillful. I'll go back to the Tom Brady example. I have trouble calling the Brady pick a selection of supreme skill. Which is what you're system would classify it as. I'm happy to say the Pats knew what they were doing when they picked Seymour, Mayo, Wilfork, Warren, Gronosky,... but it seems that if they really knew that Brady would be so good, they would have grabbed him earlier with the fear that someone else would pick him. You can't really leave a starting QB sitting around till the 6th round and expect he'll be there My main issue with your math is that teams are getting double-rewarded for getting hits in the late rounds. They get the points for the postion and the bonus. Again I'm trying to evaluate against expectations at that point in the draft. Paragraph 1... I think I'm accounting for differences in rounds through the bonus/demerit system. You make a good point that it doesn't account for role players. A great example of that is Kevin Faulk, who's been invaluable to the Pats for a decade, but might not be rated high enough on this Paragraph 2... I don't know how this would look yet, I'm trying to refine the method and then see how it applies. Ultimately my thought is to measure 10 years worth of drafts and then see how it moves over time, can do moving averages to show trends and even measure it by GM/Coach regimes. How good was Donahoe compared to Marv compared eventually to Buddy Nix I've made some additional modifications to the method to account for Trading UP/DOWN... for example the Bills should be penalized extra for having traded up for John McCargo and JP Losman. Those busts are more expensive because they gave up additional choices to get them. I've also added a category called HOF (potential Hall of Famer... Brady, Manning, Ray Lewis) who there should be higher points for overall. Thx,.. I'll look at this more thoroughly, but my first impression is that you need more explicitly quantitative measure of the categories. Here's where I am now: HOF = 8pt = Potential Hall of Famer PRO = 5pt = Selected to a minimum of 3 Pro Bowls STR = 3pt = At least 32 career starts (2 full years) BUP = 1pt = On NFL roster for at least 64 games (4 full years) WSH = 0pt = Less than 64 games on NFL roster INJ = 0pt = Less than 48 games on NFL roster due to injury Had to add the potential Hall of Famer category. There's a difference between Manning, Brady, Ray Lewis, Troy Palamalu and someone like Matt Hasselbeck or Carson Palmer who may also be 3 time pro bowlers Expanded BUP and WSH to 4 years as guys like John McCargo,... could be rated too high at 3 years. Most first round picks will last 3 years unless they're the most colossal of busts. Ryan Leaf may even have passed the 3 year level Created INJ category which basically removes the penalties in the per round table if a player washes out due to injury. For example, the Ravens selected Sergio Kindle last year, who may never be able to play because of a fall the left him w/ a cracked skull. I don't want to over-penalize the Ravens for that, because it is beyond their control.

No, by then you're not expecting to draft Pro Bowlers. You pretty much got lucky. Tom Brady is the classic example. Pro Bowler w/ a 6th round pick. If the Patriots had any idea that he could even be a legitimate starting quality QB in this league (much less what he's become) they would have grabbed him by the 3rd or 4th round. I don't want to reward them extra (beyond the 5pts for a Pro Bowler) because a Pro Bowler in the late rounds is luck, not skill So explaining PRO... in the first round that's what's expected so no bonus... rd 2-4, there's increasing skill in being able to nail a pro-bowler in the top half of the draft. After that you're starting to get more lucky than skillful, so I don't want to reward for that. I'm trying to match up results with reasonable expectations for a given round

In this day of measuring everything about every sport, I'm kind of surprised that there isn't a definitive benchmark of team by team data analysis? When we talk about how well the Steelers, Ravens, or Patriots drafts it all seems subjective. There doesn't seem to be a way to scale what the difference is between the best teams and the worst teams... is it 10% or 200%?? So here's a method I came up with. Please feel free to suggest modifications/refinements/critiques. Once we innovate this a bit, I'll look back at several drafts and see if we can grade everyone by this methodology Methodology starts in year #3 and each year can be modified based on ongoing results of the players drafted. Players are divided into 4 categories with Base points for each type of player -- PRO/Pro Bowler 5pts (selected for at least 3 Pro Bowls) -- STR/Starter 3pts (at least 32 starts, 2 full years) -- BUP/Back-up 1pt (on NFL roster for at least 48 games, 3 full years) -- WSH/Washout 0pts (out of the NFL by 3rd season) In addition each round of the draft is scaled per expectations -- Rd #1, Starters and Pro Bowlers expected, otherwise negative penalty, including -3 for a washout -- Rd #2, Starters still expected but scaling back penalty for misses -- Rd #3, Starters requiring greater skill and scaling back penalty for misses -- Rd #4, Solid players expected, with extra points for starters/pro bowlers -- Rd #5, Solid players rewarded -- Rd #6, Solid players expected, no extra points for Pro Bowlers (ie Tom Brady type picks) -- Rd #7, No penalties, just solid players get a 1 pt bonus Round Drafted 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 PRO 0 1 2 3 1 0 0 STR 0 1 2 3 2 1 0 BUP -1 -1 -1 0 1 1 1 WSH -3 -2 -1 0 0 0 0 Have at it...

In this day of measuring everything about every sport, I'm kind of surprised that there isn't a definitive benchmark of team by team data analysis? At a basic level, I'd like to see a ranking of every pick over the last 10 years, scaled by round and ultimate result. Each pick could be rated into a set of buckets Multi-year Pro-Bowler, Multi-year starter, Back-up (3+ seasons), Washout. These rankings could be scaled somehow to the round that they were drafted in. There's probably ways to get sophisticated with the their position as well. When we talk about how well the Steelers, Ravens, or Patriots drafts it all seems subjective. There doesn't seem to be a way to scale what the difference is between the best teams and the worst teams... is it 10% or 200%?? If anyone knows of anything, please tell...

Classic!!

Thank you... Thank you!! That helped. I've had a cold sweat since I read that article.

http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/bills-nfl/article319796.ece WOW, that just hit home... does that bother anyone??? Someone help me feel better about this...

I think that the issue for us in trading down is that we're drafting too high. There haven't been too many trade-downs in the top half of the first round, compared to the bottom half of the first round. When we're drafting 8-11, nobody wants to give too much because those drafting 11-15 still see too many people they like on the board and one of them will fall to their slot. So we don't get enough value. I would expect the same thing with our #3 pick this year. The Bills would want a bunch of picks to move back and nobody will want to oblige. By contrast the Patriots are consistently drafting somewhere in the "20s". By then there's typically some player that fell from a top 15 pick that some team wants to trade up to get. They either pick up additional 2nd round picks or next year's 1st for doing this and they're always stocked with picks to play with.

I have a hard time buying this story. What rational GM would not go for the better trade, particularly given that the Saints are also in the NFC? We may not like some of the FO moves, but nobody is that inept. My guess is he doesn't have his facts quite right...

I like this reasoning!! Our best draft move this decade was in 2001, moving back 3 spots, drafting Nate Clements and then turning the "free" 2nd round pick into Travis Henry

Ask Brian Brohm about that... if we came out a year earlier, he was projected to be a top 10 pick. Seems like $40M+ guaranteed is worth putting off the completion of formal degree a bit. Pros: all talk about trading the whole team for Luck to move up to #1 will stop on this board Cons: less likely to have Fairly available at #3 hmmm...

The position on them isn't necessarily to dump them, but at what price should they be resigned. Whitner made #8 overall money. Is he a good Safety,... yes. Is he worth a raise over #7 money,... NO. Will he be back? Depends on whether some team will pony up, which I'm guessing is NO. If he has to take less will he come back to the Bills or take less elsewhere? Depends on his ego. Some players won't go back to their current teams if they have to play for less, their egos will only allow them to do that elsewhere...

I'd like the person who knew that Peyton Manning (1), Donovan McNabb, Chad Pennington, Michael Vick (1), Eli Manning (1), Philip Rivers, Ben Roethlisberger, Jay Cutler, Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, Josh Freeman, Sam Bradford (1), and would be hits... AND that Ryan Leaf, Tim Couch (1), Akili Smith, Duante Culpepper, Cade McNown, David Carr (1), Joey Harrington, Patrick Ramsey, Carson Palmer (1), Byron Leftwich, Kyle Boller, Rex Grossman, JP Losman, Alex Smith (1), Jason Campbell, Vince Young, Matt Leinert, JaMarcus Russell (1), Brady Quinn, would be first round busts Stand up, identify yourself, explain your methodology and why you're not being paid $10M/year as a consultant to NFL teams for their draft BTW, those are all the Round 1 QBs taken since 1998 in the first round when Peyton Manning was selected. excluded Matthew Stafford and Mark Sanchez as not sure where they'll fall yet Incidentally, that's 13 hits and 19 misses (40%). Among #1 picks overall its 4 hits and 5 misses (slightly better 44% rate) I'm not saying we shouldn't draft Luck if he falls to us somehow, but trading up is way too big a risk to even consider. Anybody who can pick QBs with such certainty would be a freelance consultant to NFL teams making very BIG dollars.

Exactly my thoughts... we cannot afford to trade-up. CB will become an instant problem position to add to the mess. Plus the pick that we give Carolina for next year on this proposed trade will be the 2012 #1 overall if we pull the trigger on this scenario. No trades that involve next year's #1 pick as we'll be lamenting how stupid we were same time next year!

All I can say to that is that the Bronco's have been going all out the last 3 weeks, Tebow's been driving them. Nobody was running for the bus or riding out the string or trying to get the number 1 pick overall. They won their last two. The pathetic Raiders, finished 8-8. They beat 2 division rivals and took the Colts to the wire in a must-win for them. The Lions improved to 6-10, winning their last 3 with a 3rd string QB including 10-6 Bucs and come from behind against Dolphins. Its as simple as this, the Bills needed to finish strong. People are absolutely playing for their jobs not only w/ the Bills, but with whatever future organization they may need to entice to sign them. Bruce Smith and Cornelius Bennett might have loafed through a game like this without raising questions, but nobody on the current team can afford that... I'm also not just talking about the last game, but the last 5 as a group!

Isn't this an overwhelming problem? We're getting owned by a division rival that treated the game like it was preseason. The Bills had no cause to do that. If we were any kind of improving team, we should have knocked them on their asses. The players on our team should have had everything to play for. Let them be the ones to explain that this wasn't a real game to their fans/media. Teams that demonstrated improvement and can go into the off-season feeling better about next season all went out fighting... Raider, Lions, Bucs, Broncos (since Tebow's been starting). None of them laid down in Week 17 against division rivals.

You hit the nail on the head!

I don't think we need to go that far, but the rising team persona that they built up through the Pittsburgh game has been stripped. I don't think we should deny that. For the optimists, how many cornerstone pieces do we have in place? Offense: Seems to be: Wood, Levitre, Bell, Johnson (2nd WR) Maybe/Too soon to tell: Spiller, Fitzpatrick, Nelson Defense: Seems to be: Williams, Byrd Maybe/Too soon to tell: McKelvin, Moats That's half the starters if all the maybes come in. Man that's really thin... who is missing from this list?

I don't think I'm overreacting at all. Every team deals with injuries by year-end, plus the Jets were resting starters (Sanchez, Revis,...) A month ago this was thought to be a team on the rise. There were strong feelings that Fitz might be the answer at QB, that the run game had improved, that Stevie could be a upper-end receiver and that the defense had started playing much better in both shutting down the run and getting turnovers. An improving team has to show improvement to the end if we're to believe in that. They finished the last 5 games at 2-3, with all three losses (Vikings, Pats and Jets) looking horrible. The 2 wins against Cleveland and Miami, we generally unconvincing. The OT losses to the Ravens and Steelers made you feel better about the team's potential than the those two wins. We finished very poorly and a lot has to be looked at... we're farther away than we thought a month ago!

The truth is that both sides of the ball need a lot more help than we all thought a few weeks ago. Three weeks ago, there was a lot more conviction that Fitz could be a solution, the OL had played well, receivers were emerging. We just needed a real Tight End. I think the last 2 weeks have blown that up a bit. Defensive side of the ball, we need more help than we can list... My position would be that this organization cannot afford to trade up to get anybody. Trading up has contributed to our problems, in addition to the misses w/ first round picks that has been discussed, the trade-ups for Losman, McCargo and Ryan Denney all cost us additional second round picks, so they've been very costly. The best draft move we've made all decade was trading back 3 slots, selecting Nate Clements, gaining a 2nd round pick and using it on Travis Henry way back in 2001.

I'm absolutely NOT advocating trading up to get Luck. We cannot afford the price on any such idea.

The week before the Miami game, I started a topic stating that the next three games will be critical to either validating or dismissing the optimism about the team and about Fitzpatrick as our long term starter. Those games have now come and gone and I'll say that the optimism is gone. Leo Roth's 2nd comment on this piece says it all: http://www.democratandchronicle.com/article/20110104/SPORTS03/101040314/tbd This team still has an awful long way to go. We need to find a bonafide long-term starter somewhere or we'll continue to flounder and it will be impossible to build a contending team. We cannot afford to trade up to get Luck, it will cost too much for a team that can't afford to give anything and has too many needs. Our skill position big three Fitz, Fred and Stevie are closer to Frank Reich, Kenneth Davis and Don Beebe than they are to Jim Kelly, Thurman Thomas and Andre Reed. Hardly the players that an ascending future can be built around... ... massively depressed!

I agree with a lot of what you're saying but question and a point: Q: Is anyone aware of any comprehensive scorecarding/benchmarking of draft success that any site keeps? I would love to see stats on this. How much better are the Pats/Ravens/Steelers than the rest of the league? and so forth Point: My biggest problem with anyone saying that "we should have never picked xxx, it was obvious that he would be a bust" is that nobody really knows that. If the guy wasn't picked where he was picked, someone else would have selected him with the next 5-10 picks. That is true for just about anyone. If the Bills didn't pick Maybin at 11, he would have been picked before 20 by somebody. If the Bills didn't trade up to get JP Losman, the Packers would likely have picked him a couple slots later. If the Bills didn't pick Mike Williams at 4 and selected Bryant McKinnie, the Vikings probably would have taken Williams at #7. Nearly all of these players would be the same bust that they were with the Bills. Its not like if Maybin wasn't picked at #11, then he would have become a 5th round pick. These players are scouted, rated and evaluated to death by the entire league and the top 1-2 rounds land pretty close to where they were picked, its just a matter of who gets the bust. So we could have picked Clay Matthews or Brian Orakpo last year instead and he would be a hit. The Redskins or Packers pick them maybe would have sucked and we'd be saying they can't draft.

Sorry, I meant Talley...

The other thing that irritates me to no end about the Maybin situation, is why can't he isn't at least a Special Teams stud. While thats small consolation for an 11th overall pick... he could at least be Mark Pike or Josh Stamer?? For crying out loud, we have safeties and CBs covering on ST, he wouldn't be an upgrade over that??