Unless I'm reading it wrong .... Please tell me if so .... This metric was thought up by a noob who knows nothing about football ..... To be a "bust" according to this idiot, it means you NEVER started a game by year 4 or 5. I'm unclear on that. What a joke. Of course 84% of 1st round picks have at some point been given an opportunity to start. Duh. My definition of a bust has Much higher standards. My def of a bust for a 1st round pick is that u never produced, and didn't even make it to year 6-7 in the NFL. Off the top of my head I calculate a bust rate at wrs taken in the first round at about 60+% This guys metric is bogus man please don't even post that nonsense again. Lol I'm kidding but really get a better source bud. Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk
You didn't' read article correctly it's not just starting for an NFL team it's the points players produced. If you think A.Boldin,C.Ochochinco, or G.Jennings never helped a team score touchdowns please check their records. It is not "the opportunity to start". You are the duh who needs glasses.
Two picks is MULTIPLE picks. It doesn't matter that we didn't have one of them before. The point of trading back is to garner an additional pick or picks. 13 picks is better than 12 and increased the chances of the Jets coming out of the draft with a number of needs addressed or positions upgraded. Trading away the pick or picks you got for trading back is not smart. Tanny showed what trading up does. It kills your roster, creating holes and no depth. The lesson's there if you open your eyes and choose to learn it.
Pretty sure? I can hear Idizk now at his post-draft press conference when explaining how he failed to get a topflight WR prospect in this draft. "Well, when I traded down from 18 to 24, I was pretty sure I could still get one of the three WRs we really coveted..." You don't draft and risk your job on "pretty sure."
No way Idzik trades down, I think they have their eyes set on one of the top three or four receivers and if they are not there at 18 they will go in a different direction and select a WR in the second round. JMO
the "phenom index" is an interesting way to look at the 2014 WRs. i always forget that lee is almost two years older than cooks ... http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/46661/311/nfl-draft-the-phenom-index?pg=1
I'd be so happy if we got Matthews in the second round. would make that selection real fast even if we already drafted Cooks or Beckham in the first round. what are the odds he falls that far tho? might be a pipe dream.. he has first round talent imo.. another guy i'm interested in the 2nd round is Robinson. i need to watch some film on him tho to get a better idea on how he can fit best.
If he trades down we only have a shot at Lee if that... Cooks and Beckham will be taken (1/2) by Steelers. Doubt other 1 falls.
Stephen Hill ranks higher than Calvin Johnson and DeMaryius Thomas in that index. That's like the definition of "I made up a useless number."
there are outliers in any metric, that doesnt make this "useless" my biggest gripe with their calculation is that they only use the stats from the player's final college season ... aside from that, i think it provides an interesting perspective
The guys who rank high in that metric are young and the best ranks had good final seasons in school. Then you have the problem that youth is more important than performance, which is why Hill ranked higher than Johnson and Thomas. The NFL isn't baseball. You can't take a 19 year old player and have him in camp and then send him down to the minors for a year to get some real seasoning against live competition. You can't bring him up for September to get a taste of major league competition. In the NFL players have to be able to perform at some level from day one. Special teams, 4th WR, KO returns, they have to be able to do something because the practice squad doesn't give them enough opportunities to grow and teams never use the practice squad for high picks anyway. That fact is an acknowledgment that the NFL is a "prove it" competition and players need to be ready to go. Every time I hear somebody say that Stephen Hill was a development pick expected to take 3 or 4 years to mature I think it's bullshit. Nobody drafts a player with a 2nd round pick with the expectation that they will be useless for 2 or 3 years. You can't afford to do that because you don't actually control the rest of the player's career at that point. The only thing you control is the cheap rookie contract and you need to get production out of that contract. In baseball I see a 19 year old prospect and I think the guy has real value most of the time. In football I see a guy performing on the field as a young player and I see the same value. Football prospects don't exist except in the minds of people who believe in fairy tales.
this metric is not valuing age over production, its valuing younger players over older players with equal production, relative to their teams ... i already stated that only using the final season is a big flaw the rest of your weak analogy assumes that draft eligible 21(ish) year olds are not prepared to immediately contribute at the nfl level, and that is just flat out false
What was Stephen Hill's production in his last year at Georgia Tech? What was Calvin Johnson's? What was DeMaryius Thomas? The system ranks Hill above the other two solely because he was younger than them. It might just as well have just lined up their ages and used that. That's a useless system.
no it doesnt, it ranks him higher because he was younger during his final collegiate season AND he accounted for a higher percentage of his teams receiving yards which, if taken with a grain of salt, is understandable because tech rarely threw the ball during hills final season and when they did, it was often a bomb to hill
