Official 2019 Pre Draft Discussion

[like54ninjas]

Bosa still has a year left on his deal...and Bolts can franchise him the next year...

5th year team option in 2020, Franchise tag 2021, or we can just sign him to an extension anytime from now till early 2020 offseason that takes effect after 2020 year.

[wu-dai clan]

LOL.

He was talking about Nick Bosa to the 49ers @#2 !

Reread the post.

Context is everything...
in life,
on TPB.

I will translate beach's gnarly posts, dude.

[Fleet]

[like54ninjas]

Good to hear Haskins is throwing.

[Steve]

Below is a link to an article that I did some number crunching on. He looked at 2005-2014 and used a somewhat flawed methodology in that he used guys listed as starters, which means a key "backup" like a nickel DB would be not listed, even though they play a lot more than a 3rd LB in a 43 D. He also listed them for the number of guys who were a starter for half or more of their career. Since a lot of high draft picks are thrown to the wolves and then trams may take years to replace them, this has some bad players being counted as a success.

In the period 2005-2014, 2465 players were drafted, and of those were starters for half their careers -> 26% success rate, with much of that success coming in the 1st three rounds.

By round
1st -> 65%
2nd -> 44%
3rd - > 28%
4th -> 20%
5th -> 13%
6th -> 10%
7th -> 4%

by position - highlighted values are the highest success rate in a given round.
draft success 2005-2014.png

https://www.arrowheadpride.com/2015/...draft-by-round

The reason I put this up is the list of comp picks came out and I was curious if comp picks really help teams. I guess it depends. Since comp picks come at the end of the 3rd round (after the 96 regular picks in the 1st 3 rounds), that means a 3rd round comp pick has approximately the same value of a 4th rounder. You would have to get 5 comp picks, on average to compensate for the loss of a starter. Allowing a pro bowler or all pro caliber to leave is probably more problematic, since, since the majority of starters are pretty ordinary.

In conclusion, as FA starts and pundits start talking about adding comp picks as a way of compensating for lost FA, that seems like a weak argument. I wouldn't turn down a comp pick, but when setting up by offseason, I wouldn't put too much faith in adding a comp pick to let a top player be the way I want to replace that player.

[glutton4Bolts]

Thanks for the info Steve. I wish they had broken the DL into DE and DT. I think I recall that 1st round DTs have a high bust factor. We went heavy on D in the draft last year and we are still so thin at DT and LB.... We also need a stud OT in a big way. We can't fill all these holes in the draft.... we have to get at least one impact player at DT or LB in FA.

[Formula 21]

If the hit factor is so high on OL, why is there such a scarcity of them?

[jamrock]

If the hit factor is so high on OL, why is there such a scarcity of them?

yeah I noticed that but it hasn't been the case for the chargers.

I think some of that is I am not sure the problem is the player evaluation as much as the injury issues. You can argue that the higher draft picks either were cut because they couldn't stay healthy, or missed so much time that they were not going to be very effective because they don't practice and were always rehabbing.

All things being equal, I think you need to trust the draft process. You grade the players, rank them, and then stick with it. You can't start reaching for players and think that will work out. If a player doesn't get a 1st round grade, they are going to skew the odds for the 1st round percentages.

[beachcomber]

the year that sticks in my craw is the drafting of DJ over Star Lotulelei, and thinking that drafting Dex or Simmons might remedy that remission, and then again.... if I'm Tommy T. and I've got my job on the line and I can have an eighty percent success rate w/an OT (Fluker notwithstanding), think I'm leaning Cajuste or my OT of choice, no ??

[Steve]

If the hit factor is so high on OL, why is there such a scarcity of them?

Look at the period this is taken from. OL play is falling with time. Much of this time is prior to the widespread adoption of spread offenses. Back in 2005, there were a lot more variety of offenses, most paid more effort to teaching technique. The spread offense is mostly in favor because it puts everyone in space, paying dividends to athletes, and less on how solid their technique is. In coaching clinics, there is a school of thought that many spread coaches now claim it is a complete waste of time teaching players to use NFL technique. They simply teach players to "get in the way".

The evaluation of the players themselves is still done the old fashion way, study of film and with scouts. Players who are just good athletes and have to be taught simply don't get high grades, even if they are great athletes. You might even be able to justify that many of the best athletes get turned into DL, rather than OL, since the OL requires so much more technique.

I like to think of the table above as being part of the uncertainty in judging athletes. With OL, it is probably a lot more about just being able to see if players have good technique and are able to use it on the field. Some of the other positions (QB) are more uncertain, because there is a lot about the position that goes beyond what can be objectively evaluated. QB it probably has a lot to do with how well they read defenses and can see plays develop on the field, and since college if very different than the pro game, scouts don't necessarily get a good read.

Fluker would have considered a big success using this method. For the most part, unless he has been hurt, he has been a starter. The method used by this guy doesn't distinguish between the players ability and how much they are on the field. And while he might have been a bust for us, and the Giants, he is generally having some success in Seattle. A bit late, but still....

[sonorajim]

Drafting is as much art as science. Talent is always good but is wasted in some players. Intelligence & attitude are big factors. Position & team fit matter.
Pro scouts usually get guys bracketed fairly close to where they should go but when the pick is on the clock, it's all about the eval work put in by the specific team. At 28,60, 91 we should get players who play a lot of snaps. Over the balance of the draft we should get players who improve "teams", position depth and may turn out to be gems.
My 1st rd cluster could include darn near any 1st rd talent right now. I'd like to see which way TT leans in FA choices first.

[Fleet]

Walter Football running a live Mock Draft today.

http://walterfootball.com/draft2019.php