Great Article

[jason]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-tea...beat-the-draft/

 

It basically says that nobody is beating the draft. Most are average at best. Only a few teams do well consistently, and even then their main guys get fired after one or two misses. It also analyzes the GMs (I'd love to see where Angelo falls into that analysis).

 

I particularly liked the portion about "The Loser’s Curse", which essentially "argues that NFL decision-makers shouldn’t be so quick to attribute the apparent efficiency of the draft market to an abundance of picking skill. To do so is hubris." I've been saying this for quite some time. These owners/GMs aren't as good at picking players as everyone tries to give them credit for, and their proximity to the issue probably creates overconfidence despite the complete crap-shoot nature of the draft.

[CrackerDog]

Love it. I particularly like the analysis of Jimmy Johnson's chart which is basically gospel in the NFL. If you look at the analysis, the lines cross at selection number 50 (which means Johnson's chart reflects reality at pick 50 if you assume the AV methodology is right and the scales are equivalent) and how far things are apart both before and after they cross. The AV line barely moves down between player selection number 50 and 100 whereas Johnson's chart shows player values by selection 100 have gone nearly to zero. That's essentially the end of the third round!

 

What none of this takes into account is that the draft is only one part of an organization's success. The Bears could've drafted Randy Moss and his career would've been, in my opinion, dramatically worse than it was in Minneapolis due to our coaching and other surrounding players, for example. I think the best coaches get the most out of their average players and the worst get almost nothing out of them. That's a bigger difference than how well you draft in the first place. Again, just my opinion.

 

Then you get into intangible items like team chemistry, leadership, etc. And in the NFL, frankly, ease of schedule. One team can face a dramatically harder road than another. That's all supposed to even out in the end but I'd say over a 10 year range that's probably true, not within a single season for sure.

 

Lastly, the difference in the Johnson chart shows that teams are vastly overpaying guys who aren't significantly better risks than other cheaper players. And that use of the cap can cripple a team that does it wrong. Look at where we are today with Cutler. Love him or hate him, the Bears new staff had their hands essentially tied by what was done by the prior decision makers. This effect can make it difficult for a team to make corrections quickly, leading to coaching staffs getting fired perhaps despite their actual relative responsibility for the team's winning percentage.

 

Good find Jason. Thanks.

[madlithuanian]

Really interesting read.

 

Thanks for sharing!

 

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-tea...beat-the-draft/

 

It basically says that nobody is beating the draft. Most are average at best. Only a few teams do well consistently, and even then their main guys get fired after one or two misses. It also analyzes the GMs (I'd love to see where Angelo falls into that analysis).

 

I particularly liked the portion about "The Loser’s Curse", which essentially "argues that NFL decision-makers shouldn’t be so quick to attribute the apparent efficiency of the draft market to an abundance of picking skill. To do so is hubris." I've been saying this for quite some time. These owners/GMs aren't as good at picking players as everyone tries to give them credit for, and their proximity to the issue probably creates overconfidence despite the complete crap-shoot nature of the draft.

 

[jason]

What none of this takes into account is that the draft is only one part of an organization's success. The Bears could've drafted Randy Moss and his career would've been, in my opinion, dramatically worse than it was in Minneapolis due to our coaching and other surrounding players, for example. I think the best coaches get the most out of their average players and the worst get almost nothing out of them. That's a bigger difference than how well you draft in the first place. Again, just my opinion.

 

I've been saying the same thing for years. I still contend David Terrell would have been a good pro if he went elsewhere. And I completely agree that Randy Moss would not have turned out as well had he been with us.