TPS Posted February 7, 2019 Posted February 7, 2019 On 2/4/2019 at 7:44 PM, The Wiz said: But unless the qb works out it doesn't matter though. The other thing some people don't realize about those crappy late round picks is they provide ammo for jumping other teams, which McBean have done quite a bit when a guy is there they really like (Edmunds, Jones, and Dawkins). For example in R3, the Bills have the 74th pick worth 220 points and the Pats are at 73. The Bills second R4 pick is worth 48 points (Draftek chart) which could put them at the top of R1 in a trade with AZ, jumping ahead of the Pats and the Jets in the process. Or, they could use their own R4 pick worth 84 points which would get them back into R2.
Shaw66 Posted February 7, 2019 Posted February 7, 2019 1 hour ago, BillsVet said: This a heavy dose of sophistry here and...you've completely missed the point. I'm talking specifically about rounds 4-7 and how many are starting NFL players. The Bills have a handful (that's less than 5) from 2001-2015 with a few who went to other teams. And that's out of about 85 picks over those years. I love when people talk about rookies or second year players being good after such a short time in the league. Reminds me of the 2006 Marv/DJ draft people were giddy about. By 2011, only Kyle Williams remained on the team. Well, if you're limiting the discussion as a comparison of rounds 1-3 to 4-7, I agree completely. Many more starters come from the first three rounds than the last four. But I don't think that's the point. The point is that ALL teams have to get a lot of players from 4-7 and the undrafteds. They can't fill their rosters with players from the first to third rounds. There's a league-wide free-for-all after the draft, trying to sign the undrafteds. If you have seven picks in the last four rounds, instead of four, you have a serious advantage over most other teams, because you can draft extra players that you would otherwise not get. Yes, the yield, on a percentage basis, is lower in the later rounds, but if you double your picks in those rounds, you should double your yield on an absolute numbers basis. Just took a quick look - looks like 10 of 22 starters on the Patriots were drafted 4-7 or undrafteds. 10 of 22. Those three extra picks are important. THAT's the point. 1 1
The Wiz Posted February 7, 2019 Posted February 7, 2019 1 hour ago, Shaw66 said: Well, if you're limiting the discussion as a comparison of rounds 1-3 to 4-7, I agree completely. Many more starters come from the first three rounds than the last four. But I don't think that's the point. The point is that ALL teams have to get a lot of players from 4-7 and the undrafteds. They can't fill their rosters with players from the first to third rounds. There's a league-wide free-for-all after the draft, trying to sign the undrafteds. If you have seven picks in the last four rounds, instead of four, you have a serious advantage over most other teams, because you can draft extra players that you would otherwise not get. Yes, the yield, on a percentage basis, is lower in the later rounds, but if you double your picks in those rounds, you should double your yield on an absolute numbers basis. Just took a quick look - looks like 10 of 22 starters on the Patriots were drafted 4-7 or undrafteds. 10 of 22. Those three extra picks are important. THAT's the point. Can you do this analysis with a different team? It doesn't matter where you are drafted if you are coached to cheat right so I want the comparison to be fair.
Recommended Posts