A Study on the effectiveness of Bum Mining

[Guiness]

Interesting analogy there, Mr. Wist#43. Batting average. But your batting average is the equivalent of percent Home Runs. Or better, RBIs. You are comparing whether 1-3 versus 4-7 become starters, not whether they contribute. That's like comparing RBIs between your clean up batter and other positions. Your top picks should be mostly starters, your bottom picks mostly role players and backups, no? Thompson and MM prefer to have backups and role players mostly consist of rookies that come up in the system - they and others claim it's easier to train them, rather than re-train veterans with other habits/learning, maybe other reasons as well. Thompson, with a deep roster, has shown more willingness to move up to get a guy, but he has to be careful, because if he does that too often, he loses his depth.

Another thing to consider: Because of TT's success in rounds 1-3 - 63%, there is less space for those 4-7 players to fill in the starting lineup. Again, the numbers support the reality: 1-3 (maybe even 1-4 - what is TT's success drafting starters in 1-4?) should be your starters and 4/5-7 should be your depth.

The main difference is in how to fill out the roster - with rookies and UDFAs or with cast-offs from other teams. Evaluating that way, and TT is doing pretty well.

Agreed Cleft, but I'm concerned. That post is almost lucid and insightful. I'm not sure if that means you're off your meds, or the doctor has raised the dosages again.

[swede]

Interesting analogy there, Mr. Wist#43. Batting average. But your batting average is the equivalent of percent Home Runs. Or better, RBIs. You are comparing whether 1-3 versus 4-7 become starters, not whether they contribute. That's like comparing RBIs between your clean up batter and other positions. Your top picks should be mostly starters, your bottom picks mostly role players and backups, no? Thompson and MM prefer to have backups and role players mostly consist of rookies that come up in the system - they and others claim it's easier to train them, rather than re-train veterans with other habits/learning, maybe other reasons as well. Thompson, with a deep roster, has shown more willingness to move up to get a guy, but he has to be careful, because if he does that too often, he loses his depth.

Another thing to consider: Because of TT's success in rounds 1-3 - 63%, there is less space for those 4-7 players to fill in the starting lineup. Again, the numbers support the reality: 1-3 (maybe even 1-4 - what is TT's success drafting starters in 1-4?) should be your starters and 4/5-7 should be your depth.

The main difference is in how to fill out the roster - with rookies and UDFAs or with cast-offs from other teams. Evaluating that way, and TT is doing pretty well.

Agreed Cleft, but I'm concerned. That post is almost lucid and insightful. I'm not sure if that means you're off your meds, or the doctor has raised the dosages again.

He is always pretty lucid in the first few days following an organ transplant. There was a sale on kidneys at Sendek's last week.

[Cleft Crusty]

He is always pretty lucid in the first few days following an organ transplant. There was a sale on kidneys at Sendek's last week.

sale on kidney beans. It explains the gas and bloating.

[smuggler]

Misses
Brohm, Lee, Harrell, Murphy, Jackson, Rouse, Hodge, and Spitz.

I'm late on this, but Murphy was probably a hit. He was playing pretty well in his rookie year until he got Sterling Sharpe'd. Spitz wasn't bad, either, but had injuries also.

[Pugger]

I wonder how good Harrell could have been had injuries didn't do him in...

[RashanGary]

People don't think in terms of exponential decay which is what the value of draft picks are.

I don't even know what that means

I hope I think in those terms tho. It sounds good.

[Gunakor]

Interesting analogy there, Mr. Wist#43. Batting average. But your batting average is the equivalent of percent Home Runs. Or better, RBIs. You are comparing whether 1-3 versus 4-7 become starters, not whether they contribute. That's like comparing RBIs between your clean up batter and other positions. Your top picks should be mostly starters, your bottom picks mostly role players and backups, no? Thompson and MM prefer to have backups and role players mostly consist of rookies that come up in the system - they and others claim it's easier to train them, rather than re-train veterans with other habits/learning, maybe other reasons as well. Thompson, with a deep roster, has shown more willingness to move up to get a guy, but he has to be careful, because if he does that too often, he loses his depth.

Another thing to consider: Because of TT's success in rounds 1-3 - 63%, there is less space for those 4-7 players to fill in the starting lineup. Again, the numbers support the reality: 1-3 (maybe even 1-4 - what is TT's success drafting starters in 1-4?) should be your starters and 4/5-7 should be your depth.

The main difference is in how to fill out the roster - with rookies and UDFAs or with cast-offs from other teams. Evaluating that way, and TT is doing pretty well.

The concern Wist is voicing is Ted's predisposition to trade down out of one of those first 3 rounds. We all agree starters generally come from those first 3 rounds, but when a GM uses his picks in those first 3 rounds simply to accumulate picks in the last 4 then we should be looking at what that GM is getting in terms of value from those trades.

Roster turnover is inevitable. The bottom of the roster is reevaluated every year, and fresh blood is brought in while others are let go. But when you continually trade down, all you're doing is reshuffling the bottom of the roster. Where are the starters coming from? That's Wist's point here. You want starters, you don't trade out of the top of the draft to accumulate picks at the bottom of it. If a team has 22 players locked into starting positions before the draft starts and every draft selection is a luxury pick that's one thing - but when there's holes in the starting 11 on either side of the ball...

[wist43]

Interesting analogy there, Mr. Wist#43. Batting average. But your batting average is the equivalent of percent Home Runs. Or better, RBIs. You are comparing whether 1-3 versus 4-7 become starters, not whether they contribute. That's like comparing RBIs between your clean up batter and other positions. Your top picks should be mostly starters, your bottom picks mostly role players and backups, no? Thompson and MM prefer to have backups and role players mostly consist of rookies that come up in the system - they and others claim it's easier to train them, rather than re-train veterans with other habits/learning, maybe other reasons as well. Thompson, with a deep roster, has shown more willingness to move up to get a guy, but he has to be careful, because if he does that too often, he loses his depth.

Well, the problem is that we don't have a fully staffed starting lineup. Teams that will sign the occassional vet can help bridge the gap for the developmental prospects, but TT doesn't do that.

Another thing to consider: Because of TT's success in rounds 1-3 - 63%, there is less space for those 4-7 players to fill in the starting lineup. Again, the numbers support the reality: 1-3 (maybe even 1-4 - what is TT's success drafting starters in 1-4?) should be your starters and 4/5-7 should be your depth.

The main difference is in how to fill out the roster - with rookies and UDFAs or with cast-offs from other teams. Evaluating that way, and TT is doing pretty well.

You didn't read my post, did you?? I don't think any of you did.

I accounted for these things.

There are 10 early picks in the starting lineup that are legit starters; there are 4 FA's/street FA's. That means you have to cover the other 8 starting spots out of the lower end of the draft. TT has hit on 3 picks over the past 8 years that are contibutors in our starting lineup.

Of course players along the way will contribute; of course the team needs developmental players; of course the team needs special team contributors - it also needs 22 starters.

[RashanGary]

Here are three different pools of players. The first group is Ted's 3rd round picks. The 2nd group is his 4th round picks, and the third group are his 7th round picks.

Adding up TT's 4 trades:
He moved back 6 spots in the 2nd round
He gave away 1 pick from group 1
He picked up 2 picks in group 2
He picked up 2 picks in group 3



Hodge
Spitz
James Jones
Rouse
Finley
Burnett




TJ Lang
Jeremy Thompson
Josh Sitton
Allen Barbre
Corey Rodgers
Will Blackmon
Marviel Underwood
Brady Poppinga



Will Whittaker
Kurt Cambell
Tave Tollefson
Clark Harris
DeShawn Wynn
Matt Flynn
Brett Swain
Brad Jones
CJ Wilson


For shits and giggles, I'm going to go create a randomizer online and assign the 3rd, 4th and 7th round picks numbers. Then I'll run a couple of mock drafts to see which draft strategy works best using TT's past draft picks as examples of what we might expect from this years.

[3irty1]

I don't even know what that means

I hope I think in those terms tho. It sounds good.

Here is a picture of exponential decay:

That highest point on the left is the value of the first pick in the draft and that lowest point of the draft on the right is the value of the last pick of the draft. Ignore the numbers, we're just looking at the shape. We like to think each pick is just a little less valuable than the last one but in reality each pick is a lot less valuable than the last one. Really whenever you measure a diverse group of humans who are competing it looks like this. That left side could be the richest people in the world, or the kids in the class that got A's, or the hottest chicks in the world. Its why a teams first round pick is worth more than the rest of its picks combined.

This is why it takes a lot of picks to find stars among the bums but why its super kick ass when you do. When you do find one its like getting one for 97% off.

[RashanGary]

Here are 10 completely random drafts using random.org/lists to randomize drafts for me.

James Jones

vs

TJ Lang
C Rodgers
B Swain
B Jones




M Burnett

vs

J Thompson
W Blackmon
B Jones
D Wynn



M Burnett

vs

J Thompson
TJ Lang
K Campbell
C Harris




Hodge

vs

Sitton
C Rodgers
B Swain
K Cambell




J Jones

vs

C Rodgers
C Rodgers
C Harris
W Whittaker


Hodge

vs

Poppinga
Underwood
Wynn
Flynn


Burnett

vs


Lang
Poppinga
Wynn
C Harris


Spitz

vs

Lang
Barbre
Wynn
Whittaker




Hodge

vs

Lang
Thompson
B Jones
B Swain


J Jones

vs

Thompson
Sitton
CJ Wilson
C Harris

[RashanGary]

I count it as:

5 W
1 L
4 Tie


5 W for using the "accumulating extra picks" method TT used this year.




Whoever Wist would have taken

vs

JC Tretter/Jonathan Franklin/Charles Johnson/Kevin Dorsey




Pick a guy, Wist and Woody. We'll compare him against these four 3 years down the road.

[hoosier]

This is why it takes a lot of picks to find stars among the bums but why its super kick ass when you do. When you do find one its like getting one for 97% off.

No, it's like Gilligan getting laid with Ginger.

[3irty1]

J Jones

vs

C Rodgers
C Rodgers
C Harris
W Whittaker

2 Corey Rodgers in 1 draft? Gross.

[wist43]

You guys have wandered off the reservation, and want to play a moneyball/statisics game. So have at it. You haven't read anything I've written, so I'm out.

Let me ask ya this before I move on to other threads - how did you feel in your gut when Jeremy Ross was settling under that punt in the playoff game?? I'm sure he'll develop into a fine punt returner some day. I would argue a road playoff game against the toughest team in the NFL is not the place to get his feet wet.

Good learning experience for Ross though, huh??