Idk about the rest of you but in all these years that I've been on this board I have never seen such a divide ... so much hate for a team that is tied with NE with the same record 4 weeks into the season ... for a while there when they were breaking all those huge runs and took a 20 to 10 lead it might have been the most fun I've had watching a game since back when they beat NE in the playoffs ... Forget the tank ! ok if this team had any sort of a resemblance to drafting winners I would be all for it but we all know we're not so why not live in the moment and enjoy this high ... We all have seen guys taken in the later rounds turn out to be studs while so many top picks waste away ... I for one love the fact that all these experts were so wrong in what they thought of this team ...
I understand that, and I do agree that this is hard to get your head around, because it seems counter-intuitive. It doesn't feel right, but the logic is irrefutable. Think of it in terms of the draft value chart. Add up the value of all your picks after the overall No. 1 pick. The combined values for every other team would be greater. Only that first pick sets your draft apart. Aside from that one pick, your draft is inferior in terms of abstract value to everyone else's. Of course, there are many wild cards, such as trades etc. (or forfeited picks if you're the Patriots). And it's up to you to make the most of the opportunity you've been given. But there's really no way around the logic. Of course, that first pick is so valuable it makes your overall draft the most valuable of all. But that's the only advantage you get, the only 'first pick' you get. Every other pick comes after everybody else.
Maybe I don't understand what you mean by "greater". If you take the numerical number associated with each pick - so pick #1 = 1; the first second round pick = 33. etc. what you get is this: Team 1: 1 + 33 + 65 +108 + 145 = 352 Team 2: 2 + 34 + 66 + 109 + 146 = 357 Team 3: 3 + 35 + 67 + 110 + 147 = 362 (I limited this to 3 teams and 5 rounds because it illustrates the pattern). And if you accept that the LOWER the total - that is, the #1 pick is better than the #2 pick - the BETTER your team's choices are, then it proves my point. What else did you mean?
Sorry, I meant the draft value chart that assigns a value to each pick - like 2,000 points for the No.1 pick, 1,800 for the No.2 and so on. (I don't know off the top of my head what the actual values are). It's the chart that gives an idea of how much you need to give up to trade up a few spots or a few rounds. Using that chart, the higher the cumulative value of your picks, the greater the net worth of your draft, in abstract terms. Throw out the No.1 pick in that scenario, and every other team would have a higher net worth (absent any trades etc.). Only the No.1 pick sets your draft apart. After that, everybody else's draft is more valuable.
The difference between your approach and mine is simply that in your approach, the "draft value" when added up for all the teams will show that the team with the HIGHEST total - as opposed to the lowest in my approach - has the highest value of picks. In looking at the Draft Value Chart from 2017: http://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp If a team holds their relative position (which last year wasn't true, but to have some stability to discuss this we need to eliminate trades, etc.), Team #1, picking 1, 33, 65... tallies up 3976.4 "value points". Team #2 tallies 3548 "value points", so as in my approach, the result is the same: the team having and holding the #1 pick in all rounds has an advantage.
What I'm saying is that excluding the No.1 pick, you would actually have a weaker draft than everybody else. The artificiality of the round system makes you think you keep getting a pick before everyone else. You do not. In the second round you are not picking first. You are picking 33rd. Every other team has picked before you. The same holds true for every other round. I'm not arguing that having the top pick isn't an advantage. Of course it is, but that No.1 pick is the ONLY advantage. After that pick is in, the rest of your draft is weaker than every other team's draft. I know it feels wrong, but the numbers don't lie. You do not have an advantage after that first pick. The dividing of the draft into rounds just makes you think you do.
Look, I used your method, and my method, both numerically based, and produced the same result: the team picking first in each round have the advantage. Did you even look at the Draft Value Chart I embedded the link to? Do the math, it still proves my point.
I think we're talking at crossed purposes. I'm not trying to argue that having the No.1 pick is somehow not the best place to be in the draft. Of course your draft has the most potential. But it's only because of the first pick. After that, your draft value is lower than every other team. AFTER the first pick.
I'm sorry, but your thinking on this is just assbackwards and totally nonsensical imo. You act like after the 1st team's 2nd pick the draft stops and other teams don't draft AFTER that 2nd pick. How many years have you been watching and following the NFL draft? We've been following it most of our lives. Are you really gonna act like you know more about the draft than we do?
Your logic is not irrefutable. It's utter nonsense and BS! That is why I didn't want to discuss it. You're ignorant and stubborn on this issue and couldn't be more wrong, and that's FACT.
Using the numbers I linked to - YOUR chosen method, Draft Value - show me where I'm wrong and you're contention is right. Do the math and show me as I've did for you. That's the only way to avoid "taking at cross purposes".
Now there's no need to get arsey. This is an interesting debate, no need to say how long have I been following the draft. Since 1984, for what it's worth, and I'm not acting like I know more than you. I'm saying that the mathematics is irrefutable, but I admit that it is counter-intuitive and feels wrong. I have no idea what you mean about me acting as if the draft stops after the top team's second pick. No idea at all. But 31 teams have made selections before that pick. And after it, 31 teams will make selections before the first pick in round three. The first pick is the difference maker.
Okay. The team picking first in each round would have a total draft value of 3976.4. The second team would have a draft value of 3548.2. And so on down the draft order, with each team getting progressively less value. Things get skewed with compensation picks later on, but the team picking 32nd in each round would have a total draft value of 1038.2 (and presumably a Vince Lombardi Trophy as compensation). Now, after the first team makes its selection with that precious first pick, once he's shaken hands with the commissioner and posed for his photo with the big No.1 jersey, the REST of that team's draft is valued at 976.4, because the first pick is rated at a whopping 3000 points. Once that pick is in, once the team drafting first has chosen it's player, the rest of its draft is inferior to that of every other team. Even the team picking last in each round has 1038.2 points of value to come, while the top team only has another 976.4. What I meant about talking at crossed purposes was that you seem to think I am arguing that the first pick is worthless or not as valuable as people think. That's not what I'm saying. It's hugely important and valuable. What I'm saying is that after that one pick, you have less draft value to come than everybody else. You are not repeatedly at an advantage at various points through the draft. The breakdown of the draft into rounds makes it seem like you do.
If you don't want to discuss, you don't need to. No need to weigh in with the name-calling. I think it's a really interesting way of looking at the draft and enjoy talking about things with other football fans. If that comes over as stubborn to you, I apologise. To me, the numbers seem to add up, if they don't to you, fine. Doesn't make me ignorant, thank you.
Math is a language, just like English or any other language. So when you use math, it's the same as using regular arguments. Specifically what you say can be true but irrelevant. Which is what's happening here. Of course the team picking first in each round has a less valuable draft than all the other teams when you strip them of their first rounder. That's what you're saying, you're just using math language when you say it. But that doesn't mean anything important. Because if you strip the worst team of its first rounder and you want to be fair, you have to strip all the other teams of their first rounders too. And then the worst team has the most valuable draft again. I could express that argument in math because I'm fluent in it, but I won't because I want other posters to understand what I'm saying (and I'm too lazy right now).
I used the maths argument to try a different angle, because simply saying every other team picks before after that first pick wasn't gaining any traction. I don't think it's irrelevant, but I'm glad you see the basic truth, even if you think it doesn't really mean anything. And that's fine, of course. And for the record, this isn't my idea, it is from one of the most respected and influential books ever written on football, The Hidden Game of Football.
OBVIOUSLY Team #1's SECOND pick is worth less than every other team's FIRST pick! But their SECOND pick is worth more than every other team's SECOND pick; their THIRD pick is worth more than every other team's THIRD pick; etc. Therefore, picking FIRST gives Team #1 an advantage in EVERY round. I'm at a loss to explain it any other way.
This is like the scene in matrix 2 where the guy in the white suit starts babbling.... wtf is everyone arguing about.
