Should we test the theory?

[AZ54]

I've been thinking about all the recent chatter about if the board could be smarter than a GM (or let's say as smart as). Now there are far too many aspects of a GM's job for us to sit here and say we got it...from FA, to staffing levels, scouting, knowing the inside details of player's behavior, details on injuries, etc. However we can approximate the one area of most interest these days...the draft. This is some long term thinking here for those who have been with this board for several years. I believe we can build our own draft and save it for future evaluation.

 

After the draft the board is usually quiet. This off-season I propose we take on the challenge of acting like a front office and run our own draft. Once the draft is in the books we will know which players are available at our picks. We can setup simple votes for each pick. That's the easy part.

 

I think we should handle this round by round starting with round 1 of course.

 

First, we have to setup the "board". Give us some time perhaps a 2-3 days for everyone to submit, debate, and negotiate who should be our top 5 on the board at that pick. Or will we need more players on the list? Then post the vote for a couple days so everyone gets a shot to vote. This approximates what teams are doing these last couple weeks.

 

We'd have to decide on criteria for winning or choosing the draft pick. Will it be simple largest % of votes wins. Or do we run a second vote of top 2 players if nobody gets more than say 35% of the vote? We'd have to debate how best to handle this as there are a myriad of options. In the unlikely event of a tie I propose Pixote gets the tie breaking vote on behalf of his extensive history as a Bears fan and as an admin here.

 

If we need to include more than 5 players (more likely in last few rounds as opinions will be more diverse there) we might have to do two rounds of voting to narrow down the list to a small enough group that the final vote will identify a clear draftee.

 

This is simpler in the first round since we know more about the candidates and who is likely to be there but it does get more interesting in the later rounds and we will (at least I will) be relying on our draftniks for input on players in the later rounds of the draft. Once our round 1 draftee is complete we move on to build the board for round 2, vote on Rd 2 draftee, then build the board for Rd 3, and so on.

 

It's a way to pass some time over next few weeks and it will also build the official 2013 TalkBears draftee list. We can have it archived and reference during the season, next year, and down the road to see how we would have done compared what the Bears did. If we do this annually we'll have a solid history of board vs. Bears GM for the draft.

 

Thoughts?

 

 

 

 

[Stinger226]

I've been thinking about all the recent chatter about if the board could be smarter than a GM (or let's say as smart as). Now there are far too many aspects of a GM's job for us to sit here and say we got it...from FA, to staffing levels, scouting, knowing the inside details of player's behavior, details on injuries, etc. However we can approximate the one area of most interest these days...the draft. This is some long term thinking here for those who have been with this board for several years. I believe we can build our own draft and save it for future evaluation.

 

After the draft the board is usually quiet. This off-season I propose we take on the challenge of acting like a front office and run our own draft. Once the draft is in the books we will know which players are available at our picks. We can setup simple votes for each pick. That's the easy part.

 

I think we should handle this round by round starting with round 1 of course.

 

First, we have to setup the "board". Give us some time perhaps a 2-3 days for everyone to submit, debate, and negotiate who should be our top 5 on the board at that pick. Or will we need more players on the list? Then post the vote for a couple days so everyone gets a shot to vote. This approximates what teams are doing these last couple weeks.

 

We'd have to decide on criteria for winning or choosing the draft pick. Will it be simple largest % of votes wins. Or do we run a second vote of top 2 players if nobody gets more than say 35% of the vote? We'd have to debate how best to handle this as there are a myriad of options. In the unlikely event of a tie I propose Pixote gets the tie breaking vote on behalf of his extensive history as a Bears fan and as an admin here.

 

If we need to include more than 5 players (more likely in last few rounds as opinions will be more diverse there) we might have to do two rounds of voting to narrow down the list to a small enough group that the final vote will identify a clear draftee.

 

This is simpler in the first round since we know more about the candidates and who is likely to be there but it does get more interesting in the later rounds and we will (at least I will) be relying on our draftniks for input on players in the later rounds of the draft. Once our round 1 draftee is complete we move on to build the board for round 2, vote on Rd 2 draftee, then build the board for Rd 3, and so on.

 

It's a way to pass some time over next few weeks and it will also build the official 2013 TalkBears draftee list. We can have it archived and reference during the season, next year, and down the road to see how we would have done compared what the Bears did. If we do this annually we'll have a solid history of board vs. Bears GM for the draft.

 

Thoughts?

That all sounds good to me. Now in compiling our list we have to be realistic on who will be there at our pick. Everybody would take Dee Millner, or Dion Jordan but they wont be there.

I have been looking at Big Boards lately and most of the same names fall in the first 20 most of the time. I tried to post a thread where everyone would take a shot at who would be our first pick( 17 days to go-pick our 1st rounder?) but everybody got off track from that. I will give it the first shot at that list-of players who could be there-and our list. I look at several big boards and they vary quite a bit. GBND, Draftcountdown, NFP, Walters, and that consensus is what I am using as a general format.

 

Travin Austin- Since we have filled some needs in FAgency, and Emery has talked about playmakers I think he has fallen to the top of the list. He regularly falls in the teens as far as rating.

 

Desmond Trufant- He falls in our range on almost all BBs so I think he will be a player that will see some time on the field and be a starter after this year. With all the passing teams in the league, you can never have enough CBs.

 

Alex Ogletree- We still need youth at LB and he could be a stud at the position, I guess we need to determine if his off field trouble will lower his rating. If we decide that Arthur Brown would slide into this spot.

 

Sheldon Richardson- We still need one more DT for our rotation and is a high rated prospect that could easily be there when we pick.

 

D.J. Fluker- I think he will be to good of a player to pass on, but is not at the top of the list due to the log jam at our RT position. When we resigned Scott, and Webb and Carmi, I think we might address other needs first.

 

My take: Austin will be a play maker that we wont find later in the draft. Trufant is generally rated the 2nd best CB in the draft and will make a contribution all season. Ogletree could be the next big thing at LB for us. If Richardson falls to us, he would be to good to pass up. Fluker could be taken if the others are gone before us.

 

FOOTNOTE: COPPER AND WARMACK WOULD BE AT THE TOP OF THE LIST, BUT I DONT SEE ANY SCENARIO THAT THEY FALL TO US.

[Mongo3451]

I don't think I can do better, but I'm in!

[jason]

That all sounds good to me. Now in compiling our list we have to be realistic on who will be there at our pick. Everybody would take Dee Millner, or Dion Jordan but they wont be there.

I have been looking at Big Boards lately and most of the same names fall in the first 20 most of the time. I tried to post a thread where everyone would take a shot at who would be our first pick( 17 days to go-pick our 1st rounder?) but everybody got off track from that. I will give it the first shot at that list-of players who could be there-and our list. I look at several big boards and they vary quite a bit. GBND, Draftcountdown, NFP, Walters, and that consensus is what I am using as a general format.

 

Travin Austin- Since we have filled some needs in FAgency, and Emery has talked about playmakers I think he has fallen to the top of the list. He regularly falls in the teens as far as rating.

 

Desmond Trufant- He falls in our range on almost all BBs so I think he will be a player that will see some time on the field and be a starter after this year. With all the passing teams in the league, you can never have enough CBs.

 

Alex Ogletree- We still need youth at LB and he could be a stud at the position, I guess we need to determine if his off field trouble will lower his rating. If we decide that Arthur Brown would slide into this spot.

 

Sheldon Richardson- We still need one more DT for our rotation and is a high rated prospect that could easily be there when we pick.

 

D.J. Fluker- I think he will be to good of a player to pass on, but is not at the top of the list due to the log jam at our RT position. When we resigned Scott, and Webb and Carmi, I think we might address other needs first.

 

My take: Austin will be a play maker that we wont find later in the draft. Trufant is generally rated the 2nd best CB in the draft and will make a contribution all season. Ogletree could be the next big thing at LB for us. If Richardson falls to us, he would be to good to pass up. Fluker could be taken if the others are gone before us.

 

FOOTNOTE: COPPER AND WARMACK WOULD BE AT THE TOP OF THE LIST, BUT I DONT SEE ANY SCENARIO THAT THEY FALL TO US.

 

I think the original message is meant to imply that we can't select a player who is not available. Seems pretty obvious to me. The Bears have #20. Anyone >19 is up for grabs.

[jason]

I've been thinking about all the recent chatter about if the board could be smarter than a GM (or let's say as smart as). Now there are far too many aspects of a GM's job for us to sit here and say we got it...from FA, to staffing levels, scouting, knowing the inside details of player's behavior, details on injuries, etc. However we can approximate the one area of most interest these days...the draft. This is some long term thinking here for those who have been with this board for several years. I believe we can build our own draft and save it for future evaluation.

 

After the draft the board is usually quiet. This off-season I propose we take on the challenge of acting like a front office and run our own draft. Once the draft is in the books we will know which players are available at our picks. We can setup simple votes for each pick. That's the easy part.

 

I think we should handle this round by round starting with round 1 of course.

 

First, we have to setup the "board". Give us some time perhaps a 2-3 days for everyone to submit, debate, and negotiate who should be our top 5 on the board at that pick. Or will we need more players on the list? Then post the vote for a couple days so everyone gets a shot to vote. This approximates what teams are doing these last couple weeks.

 

We'd have to decide on criteria for winning or choosing the draft pick. Will it be simple largest % of votes wins. Or do we run a second vote of top 2 players if nobody gets more than say 35% of the vote? We'd have to debate how best to handle this as there are a myriad of options. In the unlikely event of a tie I propose Pixote gets the tie breaking vote on behalf of his extensive history as a Bears fan and as an admin here.

 

If we need to include more than 5 players (more likely in last few rounds as opinions will be more diverse there) we might have to do two rounds of voting to narrow down the list to a small enough group that the final vote will identify a clear draftee.

 

This is simpler in the first round since we know more about the candidates and who is likely to be there but it does get more interesting in the later rounds and we will (at least I will) be relying on our draftniks for input on players in the later rounds of the draft. Once our round 1 draftee is complete we move on to build the board for round 2, vote on Rd 2 draftee, then build the board for Rd 3, and so on.

 

It's a way to pass some time over next few weeks and it will also build the official 2013 TalkBears draftee list. We can have it archived and reference during the season, next year, and down the road to see how we would have done compared what the Bears did. If we do this annually we'll have a solid history of board vs. Bears GM for the draft.

 

Thoughts?

 

I like the general idea, but there is always one "what if" we can't factor. We never really know what would happen to player X on team Y if he actually ended up on team Z. For instance, Randy Moss would never have exploded onto the league if he were drafted by the Bears. The combo of Kramer, Stenstrom, and Moreno would not have been able to reproduce what Randall Cunningham and that offense did. Most likely, Moss would have seen a significantly smaller number of passes his way, and his attitude would have started much earlier in his career. With his emotion/attitude, it could have derailed his entire career. And that's just one of countless examples.

[scs787]

That all sounds good to me. Now in compiling our list we have to be realistic on who will be there at our pick. Everybody would take Dee Millner, or Dion Jordan but they wont be there.

I have been looking at Big Boards lately and most of the same names fall in the first 20 most of the time. I tried to post a thread where everyone would take a shot at who would be our first pick( 17 days to go-pick our 1st rounder?) but everybody got off track from that. I will give it the first shot at that list-of players who could be there-and our list. I look at several big boards and they vary quite a bit. GBND, Draftcountdown, NFP, Walters, and that consensus is what I am using as a general format.

 

Travin Austin- Since we have filled some needs in FAgency, and Emery has talked about playmakers I think he has fallen to the top of the list. He regularly falls in the teens as far as rating.

 

Desmond Trufant- He falls in our range on almost all BBs so I think he will be a player that will see some time on the field and be a starter after this year. With all the passing teams in the league, you can never have enough CBs.

 

Alex Ogletree- We still need youth at LB and he could be a stud at the position, I guess we need to determine if his off field trouble will lower his rating. If we decide that Arthur Brown would slide into this spot.

 

Sheldon Richardson- We still need one more DT for our rotation and is a high rated prospect that could easily be there when we pick.

 

D.J. Fluker- I think he will be to good of a player to pass on, but is not at the top of the list due to the log jam at our RT position. When we resigned Scott, and Webb and Carmi, I think we might address other needs first.

 

My take: Austin will be a play maker that we wont find later in the draft. Trufant is generally rated the 2nd best CB in the draft and will make a contribution all season. Ogletree could be the next big thing at LB for us. If Richardson falls to us, he would be to good to pass up. Fluker could be taken if the others are gone before us.

 

FOOTNOTE: COPPER AND WARMACK WOULD BE AT THE TOP OF THE LIST, BUT I DONT SEE ANY SCENARIO THAT THEY FALL TO US.

 

I believe AZ is talking about doing this AFTER the draft with players we thought the Bears should have drafted.

 

An interesting thought, basically a mock draft based off the real draft.

[Stinger226]

I like the general idea, but there is always one "what if" we can't factor. We never really know what would happen to player X on team Y if he actually ended up on team Z. For instance, Randy Moss would never have exploded onto the league if he were drafted by the Bears. The combo of Kramer, Stenstrom, and Moreno would not have been able to reproduce what Randall Cunningham and that offense did. Most likely, Moss would have seen a significantly smaller number of passes his way, and his attitude would have started much earlier in his career. With his emotion/attitude, it could have derailed his entire career. And that's just one of countless examples.

Your right so leave that out of it.(That what if comes from left field, keep the ball in the infield) The list I gave is what is possible to be there. If there is a run on OL and DE that gives us different players to choose from.If there is a run on QBs that changes the list. Like the Bears, we have to put a list together that might be there, it changes as the draft goes on. So because Austin may be gone do we leave him off the list? It is a probability thing. It will be a consensus of what we all think, so just make a list and AZ puts it together and we make a pick.

[Stinger226]

I believe AZ is talking about doing this AFTER the draft with players we thought the Bears should have drafted.

 

An interesting thought, basically a mock draft based off the real draft.

You should completely wake up before you answer a thread, he is talking about doing this now,(as the Bears would do it) before the draft(.It's a way to pass some time over next few weeks and it will also build the official 2013 TalkBears draftee list.)

 

 

[Stinger226]

You should completely wake up before you answer a thread, he is talking about doing this now,(as the Bears would do it) before the draft(.It's a way to pass some time over next few weeks and it will also build the official 2013 TalkBears draftee list.)

PEOPLE KEEP INJECTING OTHER POINTS INTO A SIMPLE POST; JUST PUT A LIST TOGETHER AND LETS DO IT,ENOUGH WITH THE UNNECESSARY POINTS.

[scs787]

After the draft the board is usually quiet. This off-season I propose we take on the challenge of acting like a front office and run our own draft. Once the draft is in the books we will know which players are available at our picks. We can setup simple votes for each pick. That's the easy part.

 

 

We've put up list after list before the draft, I'm fairly certain this is a mock off the actual draft....Cool your jets plumber boy

[jason]

You should completely wake up before you answer a thread, he is talking about doing this now,(as the Bears would do it) before the draft(.It's a way to pass some time over next few weeks and it will also build the official 2013 TalkBears draftee list.)

 

After the draft the board is usually quiet. This off-season I propose we take on the challenge of acting like a front office and run our own draft. Once the draft is in the books we will know which players are available at our picks. We can setup simple votes for each pick. That's the easy part.

[Stinger226]

After the draft the board is usually quiet. This off-season I propose we take on the challenge of acting like a front office and run our own draft. Once the draft is in the books we will know which players are available at our picks. We can setup simple votes for each pick. That's the easy part.

I get all that, but the point I thought he was taking was (it is easy to do after the fact) When he referred to the next few weeks of compiling the lists, I thought he was talking about doing in now, as I last checked this is part of the off season. Hell lets go back a few years and redo the draft of the Bears and we all can look like heros. If were going to play GM, they dont usually wait until after the draft to put a draft board together. I thought we could play this realistically, but as I reread it you guys are probably right and Im the dump ass. It isnt the first and it wont be the last.

[scs787]

I get all that, but the point I thought he was taking was (it is easy to do after the fact) When he referred to the next few weeks of compiling the lists, I thought he was talking about doing in now, as I last checked this is part of the off season. Hell lets go back a few years and redo the draft of the Bears and we all can look like heros. If were going to play GM, they dont usually wait until after the draft to put a draft board together. I thought we could play this realistically, but as I reread it you guys are probably right and Im the dump ass. It isnt the first and it wont be the last.

 

If you do it before they hit the field then there won't be any Tom Brady in the 5th type picks we can do as far as "playing hero" goes. It's about who you would have drafted instead and then looking back a year or 2 down the line to see how we fared as a collective fan base ("testing the theory") in picking vs what Phil actually did. Instead of taking guesses with mock drafts we're mocking the real deal.

 

I like the idea.

[jason]

If you do it before they hit the field then there won't be any Tom Brady in the 5th type picks we can do as far as "playing hero" goes. It's about who you would have drafted instead and then looking back a year or 2 down the line to see how we fared as a collective fan base ("testing the theory") in picking vs what Phil actually did. Instead of taking guesses with mock drafts we're mocking the real deal.

 

I like the idea.

 

Exactly. It's something we've done before (not collectively). What's so difficult to figure out?

 

If players X, Y, and Z are available at the Bears pick, and they select X, but the Board thinks Z would have been a better pick, we pick Z. Three years down the road, if Z kicks ass and X is selling tires in Detroit, then we can pat ourselves on the back.

[bowlingtwig]

If you do it before they hit the field then there won't be any Tom Brady in the 5th type picks we can do as far as "playing hero" goes. It's about who you would have drafted instead and then looking back a year or 2 down the line to see how we fared as a collective fan base ("testing the theory") in picking vs what Phil actually did. Instead of taking guesses with mock drafts we're mocking the real deal.

 

I like the idea.

I read it the same exact way u did. To hard to do it right now cuz u don't know what trades will go down and we all know there will be a ton of trades on draft day. I'm totally game for this. I only ask we stay away from name calling. Trust me stinger and I go way back. Even having all out arguments while playing FF and of course on this board. While "plumber boy" is cute let's keep this some what civil.

[Stinger226]

I read it the same exact way u did. To hard to do it right now cuz u don't know what trades will go down and we all know there will be a ton of trades on draft day. I'm totally game for this. I only ask we stay away from name calling. Trust me stinger and I go way back. Even having all out arguments while playing FF and of course on this board. While "plumber boy" is cute let's keep this some what civil.

I called myself a dumb ass for taking the thread wrong, it doesnt bother me. As far as the "plumber boy comment" I dont have any problem with that either. If you have ever called a plumber you will realize they make good money doing shitty work. Although I usually do hospitals, schools, industrial work, I still get my face dirty once in a while.

[bowlingtwig]

I called myself a dumb ass for taking the thread wrong, it doesnt bother me. As far as the "plumber boy comment" I dont have any problem with that either. If you have ever called a plumber you will realize they make good money doing shitty work. Although I usually do hospitals, schools, industrial work, I still get my face dirty once in a while.

Just trying to keep things civil. God only knows the # of times we have gone off on each other Lol. I would like yo think we are all friends here Lol. I know wishful thinking right

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

Yeah, if I say they should pick X over Y and X is better, I should write that on a resumé and submit it to all 32 teams. I mean, I said they should pick X and he ended up better than Y ONE time, so why the hell not?

[Stinger226]

Just trying to keep things civil. God only knows the # of times we have gone off on each other Lol. I would like yo think we are all friends here Lol. I know wishful thinking right

Im all cool with you,I have called you out on some things you have said, but I never meant it to be personal, as you have witnessed, I say stupid stuff sometimes(or a lot) . There are a lot of different posters that ride each other on this site, but that is what makes this interesting, the passion at which people have with their opinions. Sometimes I say things with out putting a lot of thought into and dont always do the research on every point I try to make, but having said all that I still make contributions on here. 6 of the 17 threads posted on here now are I ones that I started. If everybody drank the same koolaid, and agreed with each other, this would be a boring site. I am happy to say, this is not a boring site to visit.

[Stinger226]

Just trying to keep things civil. God only knows the # of times we have gone off on each other Lol. I would like yo think we are all friends here Lol. I know wishful thinking right

Im all cool with you,I have called you out on some things you have said, but I never meant it to be personal, as you have witnessed, I say stupid stuff sometimes(or a lot) . There are a lot of different posters that ride each other on this site, but that is what makes this interesting, the passion at which people have with their opinions. Sometimes I say things with out putting a lot of thought into and dont always do the research on every point I try to make, but having said all that I still make contributions on here. 6 of the 17 threads posted on here now are I ones that I started. If everybody drank the same koolaid, and agreed with each other, this would be a boring site. I am happy to say, this is not a boring site to visit.

[jason]

Yeah, if I say they should pick X over Y and X is better, I should write that on a resumé and submit it to all 32 teams. I mean, I said they should pick X and he ended up better than Y ONE time, so why the hell not?

 

Are you planning on quitting the board after the first pick, or after this year? Or maybe it didn't occur to you we could do this for future drafts and begin to form a better picture of the board>GM theory.

[AZ54]

Yeah, if I say they should pick X over Y and X is better, I should write that on a resumé and submit it to all 32 teams. I mean, I said they should pick X and he ended up better than Y ONE time, so why the hell not?

 

Football is game. This message board is also just for fun and this is to play "what if". I'm not sure why you are so stuck on this issue. Like I said, there are too many other variables as Jason correctly noted with schemes and coaching that will impact how a player ends up performing. Nonetheless, we can isolate on the draft itself and choose our players versus what the Bears chose.

 

This has to happen AFTER the draft in order for us to know:

 

a) where we pick in case we trade down or up

 

what players are available when the Bears pick

 

 

It seems the majority are on board with the concept let's begin defining the rules. How will we setup the "board" of the players that will be in the poll?

 

 

 

[Stinger226]

Football is game. This message board is also just for fun and this is to play "what if". I'm not sure why you are so stuck on this issue. Like I said, there are too many other variables as Jason correctly noted with schemes and coaching that will impact how a player ends up performing. Nonetheless, we can isolate on the draft itself and choose our players versus what the Bears chose.

 

This has to happen AFTER the draft in order for us to know:

 

a) where we pick in case we trade down or up

 

what players are available when the Bears pick

 

 

It seems the majority are on board with the concept let's begin defining the rules. How will we setup the "board" of the players that will be in the poll?

The most obvious would be who goes in the first round behind our pick. I also see a really good chance we trade back,so that will change our approach. That will still leave us with the option of who we would have taken in the first round.

[AZ54]

The most obvious would be who goes in the first round behind our pick. I also see a really good chance we trade back,so that will change our approach. That will still leave us with the option of who we would have taken in the first round.

 

It doesn't change our approach, we will base our picks on where the Bears draft, including any trades up or down during the draft. We'll just evaluate the players available at that pick and then vote for our draftee.

 

Is there a site with a player ranking system we can all agree is worth using, at least as a basis for starting the discussion of who should be our top 5 or so for voting on our draft pick?

 

Or do we just open the discussion for everyone to submit player names and state their case for those players? Like I said, I can see these debates taking place over a few days as we all have jobs/family and will need time to get everyone's input, as well as for some of us who aren't avid draftniks (like me) to do a bit of research. I think it is very fair for people to try to persuade others to their side. Then gather all the names and make the poll with them? Perhaps we do a couple rounds of voting to narrow down the choices? Again first round is easier but later rounds it gets more challenging as you have more prospects with similar grades.

 

In reality this is how teams build their draft boards and coaches and scouts gather together and give input on the various players. We're going to have the same debates via the message board but on a much more limited scale since we're just looking at the players who were actually available for a known draft spot.

[jason]

I like the idea of getting everyone's input on which available players should have been targets. From there it seems better that we either advocate individually or we arrive at a player ranking combination (since no site is all-encompassing). Having people advocate for their own guy seems like a better way to do it. Narrow that down to X number of choices. Vote. Top 3 go forward. Vote for the actual selection.