Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: Grading Past Tomlin/Colbert Drafts

  1. #11
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by steeler_fan_in_t.o. View Post
    How would draft grades move if you include UDFAs? I think that the Steelers always seem to have one or two make the team and at some point contribute.
    Good point and we should factor those guys in. And we probably should factor in FA as well because itís another component of team building that has a direct impact on what we do in the draft.

  2. #12
    Hall of Famer

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by NorthCoast View Post
    Added the average media grades...gotta say at least they are consistent! The funny thing is 2015 was apparently the worst draft as rated by FO but the media numerically graded as the second highest...haahahhaa.

    2010 (avg media grade = B-)
    2017 (B-)
    2011 (B-)
    2013 (B)
    2012 (B-)
    2019 (B-)....note; 3 "A-", and one "D")
    2016 (B-)
    2014 (B)...Kiper gave us an "A"!
    2018 (C+)
    2015 (B)
    who the hell gave 2016 a B- ? When your first 2 picks are total busts that starts you off with an F. Hargrove and a 7th round Big Red gets it up to a D+. Simply can’t fail on picks 1 and 2 without setting the team back.

  3. #13
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
    who the hell gave 2016 a B- ? When your first 2 picks are total busts that starts you off with an F. Hargrove and a 7th round Big Red gets it up to a D+. Simply can’t fail on picks 1 and 2 without setting the team back.
    I read it as those were the avg grades immediately following the draft.

    So the point is wether good or bad, the pundits generally grade all the drafts the same.

  4. #14
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by NorthCoast View Post
    What is the criteria for good vs bad? Here's a study with actual numbers. For the draft capital spent, the Steelers have done remarkably well.

    By the numbers, in order of best to worst Steelers drafts:

    1. 2010
    2. 2017
    3. 2011
    4. 2013
    5. 2012
    6. 2019
    7. 2016
    8. 2014
    9. 2018
    10. 2015


    If you go on the read the details around the question; "is there a team that consistently drafts better than others?" (they get into some statistical stuff) they conclude:

    What this all tells me is that drafting well is a lot of luck, mixed with some skill and an extra layer of a random "jackpot" on top (the one or two later-round picks each draft that become unexpected Hall of Famers). This would explain the data we see (including the outliers) pretty well. The Seahawks are probably pretty good at drafting, but also had some crazy luck in hitting three jackpots in a row (Wilson, Wagner, and Richard Sherman). What this should tell NFL teams is that you need to roll the dice as many times as you can (trading down for additional value whenever possible), get the best GM you can possibly find, and get the top coaches in the league to develop the talent you draft -- which is what we already see consistently good teams generally do.

    Not very exciting but certainly expected I think. So how does this align with team performance? Well if your team is a consistent winner, it likely comes down to coaching, right?

    https://www.footballoutsiders.com/st...ency-2010-2019
    A study with actual empirical criteria...what a concept? Any study that does not compare the Steelers performance to the rest of the league is meaningless. Also, you need to factor in when teams are drafting because that is probably the biggest variable in the draft. Teams drafting late like the Steelers should be expected to perform less than teams that have traditionally drafted early in each round. The number of variable is what make a real meaningful statistical analysis of draft performance extremely difficult. One you start discounting certain variable, it is a flawed analysis.
    Taking pride in the fact that I'm right so often and he is wrong so often, that Steel Maniac has to have me on "Ignore"

  5. #15
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by flippy View Post
    I read it as those were the avg grades immediately following the draft.

    So the point is wether good or bad, the pundits generally grade all the drafts the same.
    you're correct flippy. grades are post-draft.

  6. #16
    Hall of Famer

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by NorthCoast View Post
    you're correct flippy. grades are post-draft.
    Thanks NC and Flip. That makes much more sense. I read it wrong. As if we didn't already know it; really does go to show that draft grades immediately after the draft are meaningless.

  7. #17
    Hall of Famer

    User Info Menu

    Everyone should know by now draft grades are meaningless. Just a nice distraction to keep us occupied until camp starts.

    Half the grades aren’t even based on the actual players picked but on the players/positions the pundits wanted us to select in certain rounds.
    Tomlinís coming back so what can you do?


  8. #18
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Oviedo View Post
    A study with actual empirical criteria...what a concept? Any study that does not compare the Steelers performance to the rest of the league is meaningless. Also, you need to factor in when teams are drafting because that is probably the biggest variable in the draft. Teams drafting late like the Steelers should be expected to perform less than teams that have traditionally drafted early in each round. The number of variable is what make a real meaningful statistical analysis of draft performance extremely difficult. One you start discounting certain variable, it is a flawed analysis.
    Good points on the relative performance and the slot where we draft. There’s still a lot of other missing variables that in some ways seem to me make it impossible to quantify and why I generally go back to my gut feeling on most things.

    My instinct is to generally consider how we do relative to teams like Baltimore and NE that generally draft in our neighborhood most years and generally do a pretty good job as well.

    But there’s a lot more variables like coaching, FA, systems, etc. that have an impact on the draft. Just look at when Cowher’s teams could draft OLB vs the premium on Edge defenders now.

    Eventually the ML and AI will look at and use broader and broader data sets to come up with patterns we couldn’t imagine. Just like the way the robots beat Go players in China using gambits no human has ever considered.

    I think eventually teams will figure out how to use the patterns to not only draft better players, but to find better coaches and guide them to build better systems so they can identify and draft players that the majority of the league undervalues and use them in ways that maximizes their value.

    The smart teams have to look at the draft as a tiny piece of their eventual equation of how do we win more SuperBowls?

    The ultimate question here is can a robot own a team and outperform all the other owners? And eventually they’re going to have to NASCAR this whole system to put limitations on the athletes as the lines between technology and Humans blur.

    The owners, GMs, coaches, and players can all be replaced by tech at some level and it’s only going to accelerate.

  9. #19
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Oviedo View Post
    A study with actual empirical criteria...what a concept? Any study that does not compare the Steelers performance to the rest of the league is meaningless. Also, you need to factor in when teams are drafting because that is probably the biggest variable in the draft. Teams drafting late like the Steelers should be expected to perform less than teams that have traditionally drafted early in each round. The number of variable is what make a real meaningful statistical analysis of draft performance extremely difficult. One you start discounting certain variable, it is a flawed analysis.
    The analysis did factor in draft position in the 'capital spent' calculation (using either Johnson's or Pearson's draft value chart). On Draft Value returned they used player career AVs (see profootballreference). This is based on individual player stats accumulated over time. So in determining Draft Efficiency for each team they use a ratio of the Draft Returned and Capital Spent. In any given season you hope it would be 100% or greater.

    PIT ends up ranked 4th in the NFL over that 10 yr time period. CLE and NYJ not surprisingly are at the bottom, having spent enormous draft capital and gotten little return.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •