CSBill Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 My headline may be an overstatement, but not by much. Read this article . . . What Jeremy Lin Teaches us About Talent (Measurement/Evaluation) The article has much more to say about football than Jeremy Lin or basketball. Here is one of the more interesting points: " A few years, Cade Massey and Richard Thaler came out with a paper that looked at the “return on value” from these early draft picks. In essence, they constructed a model in which all the players at a given position – quarterback, running back, linebacker, etc. – were ranked according to the order in which they were picked in the draft. Then, they compared any two of these players in consecutive order, so that a tight-end taken early in the first round might be pitted against a tight-end taken late in the third. The comparisons were based on a number of performance metrics, such as number of games started and yards per catch. As Thaler notes, if teams knew nothing, the player that went higher in the draft would outperform the lower ranked player 50 percent of the time. In other words, drafting talent would be roughly equivalent to a coin flip; all the scouting would be perfectly useless. In contrast, if teams knew what they were doing – if they could effectively identify the best college players – then the higher draft picks should outperform their competition close to 100 percent of the time. So what did Thaler find? Flipping a coin is the apt metaphor, as the higher picks proved better only 52 percent of the time. The teams beat randomness, but barely." My conclusion, teams like the Bills need to put far more stock in production than combine scores. Draft people that play the best competition, and who have had the best results (winners) . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auburnbillsbacker Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 It is a balancing act. There are great college players who lack the overall athleticism or other measurables to become good nfl players. Corey Moore for example was one of the greatest pass rushers in college history, but due to his size and speed was never a factor in the nfl. Other players who had great college careers perform well in the nfl despite not doing well at the combine. Teams have to take both on the field performance and combine results into consideration. If it wasn't for the combine, the Giants would not have the stud pass rusher Jason Pierre-Paul right now. He was a first round player because of the combine, not his great stats in college. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 The combine is a marketing event. The flip side of this argument, is that you can find just as good talent in round 5 as you can in round 2 and the draft isn't just about the first 20 picks making an impact. Which btw shows why having additional draft picks is so important even if they are in the 4th round, You get to "flip the coin" a few more times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDD Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 The fact that the combine is televised is really ridiculous. Watching guys running around cones, jump vertically, bench pressing, and running the "gauntlet" drill has got to the biggest waste of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 My headline may be an overstatement, but not by much. Read this article . . . What Jeremy Lin Teaches us About Talent (Measurement/Evaluation) The article has much more to say about football than Jeremy Lin or basketball. Here is one of the more interesting points: "A few years, Cade Massey and Richard Thaler came out with a paper that looked at the “return on value” from these early draft picks. In essence, they constructed a model in which all the players at a given position – quarterback, running back, linebacker, etc. – were ranked according to the order in which they were picked in the draft. Then, they compared any two of these players in consecutive order, so that a tight-end taken early in the first round might be pitted against a tight-end taken late in the third. The comparisons were based on a number of performance metrics, such as number of games started and yards per catch. As Thaler notes, if teams knew nothing, the player that went higher in the draft would outperform the lower ranked player 50 percent of the time. In other words, drafting talent would be roughly equivalent to a coin flip; all the scouting would be perfectly useless. In contrast, if teams knew what they were doing – if they could effectively identify the best college players – then the higher draft picks should outperform their competition close to 100 percent of the time. So what did Thaler find? Flipping a coin is the apt metaphor, as the higher picks proved better only 52 percent of the time. The teams beat randomness, but barely." My conclusion, teams like the Bills need to put far more stock in production than combine scores. Draft people that play the best competition, and who have had the best results (winners) . . . So you're saying that a Japanese guy playing a good week of basketball means all the scouts in the NFL should be fired? What happens if a Hungarian left wing gets a hat trick? NFL teams should not watch film any more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cody Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 (edited) I like to look at the pre-combine projections. No player should improve in their rankings because of the combine. But players should be able to fall in rankings because of the combine. Part of the problem is the fact that bad teams pick before the good teams. This causes two problems. 1) The people who make the earlier decisions are not as successful as the people who make the later decisions. (In every round teams like the Bills pick before teams like the Patriots) 2) The players drafted later, enter a more successful system and are better positioned to experience success. If you just took the Colts and the Lions from 2000 to 2010 and did this equation you would likely find that the earlier pick was better than the later pick an alarmingly small percentage of the time. Edited February 15, 2012 by cody Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Every team should employ a Vice President of Common Sense to counterbalance the "football guys" who are obsessed with raw talent. The question, "...but can he play football?" doesn't seem to get asked enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KollegeStudnet Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 The scouting combine used to be THE main attraction for a player to showcase their skill set and abilities! But, with expansion of pro team scouting departments within the past 20 years--along with innovative advancments in technology--pro teams have all the tools needed to evaluate players before the combine even takes place! I remember reading a story about NFL scouts in the 1980's preparing for the combine, where they would sit and watch college games in person or evaluate film for upwards of 15 hours on an old projector in some hotel room. They talked about lugging the projector around, because most rooms did not have VHS or Betamax...and they would pull the sheets off the bed and tack them to the wall! Fast forward almost 20+ years and scouting a college player is almost limitless! Today, the combine is still key in the decision process of where a player will be placed on team draft boards! True, it is not what it used to be, but I still think it benefits teams in evaluation. One thing I'd like to point out is the advancement in the mental aspect of the game, I want to say teams utilize the combine more for intangibles than in the past! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 At one time every team would go out to schools and scout their own guys. Then some teams got together and put on the combine so that all teams could scout the guys in one place and time. Good idea, right? Fast forward to today. Now every college has a pro day and many players have their own pro day as well. And some of the top players choose no to be in the combine at all. So yeah, it's a waste of time. But it is a marketing bonanza which is what it's all about anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Bull! The combine has saved countless time and money since it's invention. Just ask any farmer that has one anywhere in the world. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Barbarian Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 My headline may be an overstatement, but not by much. Read this article . . . What Jeremy Lin Teaches us About Talent (Measurement/Evaluation) The article has much more to say about football than Jeremy Lin or basketball. Here is one of the more interesting points: "A few years, Cade Massey and Richard Thaler came out with a paper that looked at the “return on value” from these early draft picks. In essence, they constructed a model in which all the players at a given position – quarterback, running back, linebacker, etc. – were ranked according to the order in which they were picked in the draft. Then, they compared any two of these players in consecutive order, so that a tight-end taken early in the first round might be pitted against a tight-end taken late in the third. The comparisons were based on a number of performance metrics, such as number of games started and yards per catch. As Thaler notes, if teams knew nothing, the player that went higher in the draft would outperform the lower ranked player 50 percent of the time. In other words, drafting talent would be roughly equivalent to a coin flip; all the scouting would be perfectly useless. In contrast, if teams knew what they were doing – if they could effectively identify the best college players – then the higher draft picks should outperform their competition close to 100 percent of the time. So what did Thaler find? Flipping a coin is the apt metaphor, as the higher picks proved better only 52 percent of the time. The teams beat randomness, but barely." My conclusion, teams like the Bills need to put far more stock in production than combine scores. Draft people that play the best competition, and who have had the best results (winners) . . . they look at production first but the combine can be used to decide between evenly matched players. Also when players "move" up and down boards teams need to draft accordingly; say you have a player slated for the second round talent wise but you know he is going in the first you may have to take him before his actual ranking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 The combine basically tells you if a guy has been working out. Throwing the ball against air or against not defenders doesnt tell you anything film study cant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 The combine does have it's uses. The medical exams and interviews play a very important role to teams in the evaluation process. While the raw athletic numbers mean far less, the combine does allow for a standard set of measures to be used on all participants. Colleges fudge weights and heights of almost every player, so having the exact set of measureables for players gives a nice baseline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealityCheck Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 To the OP, the combine makes a lot of people a lot of money and promotes further NFL propaganda. You don't really explain your perception that money is being wasted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 The fact that the combine is televised is really ridiculous. Watching guys running around cones, jump vertically, bench pressing, and running the "gauntlet" drill has got to the biggest waste of time. or at least until they televise the entire draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTimer1960 Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 The combine basically tells you if a guy has been working out. Throwing the ball against air or against not defenders doesnt tell you anything film study cant That, but it also gives an indication of each player's basic athletic ability. There are TONS of factors involved in a player's productivity in college: His ability, ability of his competition, scheme he plays in, ability of the players around him, competition on his own team for playing time, etc... For example, a player on a top-level college team may benefit from the fact that the opponents can't focus solely on him because his teammates are also great. Or- a great player may not put up a ton of stats for the same reason - he has so much competition on his own team for those stats - or- a player's stats might not be high because his team is so dominant that the starters are often pulled by half-time. Another factor is distribution of productivity against competition. Some players rack up a high percentage of their stats against a few very inferior opponents. There are lots more reasons that it is very difficult to rely on only college production. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zonabb Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 So you're saying that a Japanese guy playing a good week of basketball means all the scouts in the NFL should be fired? What happens if a Hungarian left wing gets a hat trick? NFL teams should not watch film any more? AMEN! I'm hearing Jeremy Lin news on WBEN in the morning, it;s sickening. If this kid wasn't playing in NYC, his 7 or whatever game strecth would be meaningless but because it's nYS, everyone from that blowhard from the News Jerry Sullivan to Susan Rose on WBEN is talking about the guy. I seem to recall a hockey playe rin Edmonton with 8 points in a game a week or so ago who had 14 points in 6 games, why are we not hearing about him? Becuase he's in Edmonton! As for the draft and combine, I think its the most fascinating think about the NFL. That process makes and breaks teams and there is so much irrational decision-making. Some argue take the best player available regardless of position and some take the approach of taking the best player at your highest need. Both have inefficiencies in them. For example, the BPA might step in an displace a very good player, offering minimal improvement while taking the bets player at a position of need would arguably have better overall impact. Another research paper on the topic is McKee and Burkett's 2003 article titled The National Football League Combine: A Reliable Predictor of Draft Status? Using the 2000 combine, they hypothesize that the combine tests and metrics, in laymens terms, are a waste, that they have no impact on draft status or round selected. However they did find that for specific positions, some of the drills were worthless in their draft stock. RBs vertical jump was more a predictor of where they would be draft than the bench press. So its interesting because you wonder how some teams consider certain tests and rate their importance! Place importance on the wrong metrics or discounting others could be problematic. Another one I plan to get to seems more interesting and can be downloaded from Google Scholar. Title: Uncertainty, Hiring and Subsequent Performance: The NFL Draft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonborn10 Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 My headline may be an overstatement, but not by much. Read this article . . . What Jeremy Lin Teaches us About Talent (Measurement/Evaluation) The article has much more to say about football than Jeremy Lin or basketball. Here is one of the more interesting points: "A few years, Cade Massey and Richard Thaler came out with a paper that looked at the “return on value” from these early draft picks. In essence, they constructed a model in which all the players at a given position – quarterback, running back, linebacker, etc. – were ranked according to the order in which they were picked in the draft. Then, they compared any two of these players in consecutive order, so that a tight-end taken early in the first round might be pitted against a tight-end taken late in the third. The comparisons were based on a number of performance metrics, such as number of games started and yards per catch. As Thaler notes, if teams knew nothing, the player that went higher in the draft would outperform the lower ranked player 50 percent of the time. In other words, drafting talent would be roughly equivalent to a coin flip; all the scouting would be perfectly useless. In contrast, if teams knew what they were doing – if they could effectively identify the best college players – then the higher draft picks should outperform their competition close to 100 percent of the time. So what did Thaler find? Flipping a coin is the apt metaphor, as the higher picks proved better only 52 percent of the time. The teams beat randomness, but barely." My conclusion, teams like the Bills need to put far more stock in production than combine scores. Draft people that play the best competition, and who have had the best results (winners) . . . You missed the point entirely. You need to trade down. The draft is a crap shoot and if you have three more picks the odds of finding talent increase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 You missed the point entirely. You need to trade down. The draft is a crap shoot and if you have three more picks the odds of finding talent increase. The Bills do have 9 picks this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2o Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 In other words, draft Whitney Mercilus with our 1st Rnd pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts