1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Patriots beat Dolphins to punch on Boyce

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by rdhstlr23, Apr 30, 2013.

  1. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Sounds like you'll never get it. And if you see me as "buried," I'd suggest you move on. I mean what more do you need to do? I'm already "buried," right? :)
     
  2. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Personally, I'm talking about the meaning that should be ascribed to "missing out" on Josh Boyce. IMO that meaning is very likely to be nil.
     
  3. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin Premium Member Luxury Box Club Member

    42,442
    24,982
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    then show us the statistical data supporting your notion that early 4th round slot receivers are likely to become non contributors.
     
  4. Back on page 3 a wise man shared some advice with me that I would like to pass on to you now:

     
    ToddPhin and MrClean like this.
  5. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Sure thing. I think you'll find here:

    http://www.pro-football-reference.c...llege_id=all&conference=any&draft_pos_is_wr=Y

    ...that there were 19 total wide receivers taken in the first half (picks 1 through 16) of the fourth round, in the years between 1999 and 2009.

    In the seasons between 1999 and 2012 (giving the 2009 guys three years to develop), only seven of them (the top seven on the list) became significant contributors for any team in the league.

    Moreover, none of them have become Pro-Bowlers.
     
  6. VanDolPhan

    VanDolPhan Club member Club Member

    13,057
    8,875
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Hamilton, Ontario Canada
    Personally I am happier with Sims in the 4th. Helps solidify our TE's in a way that hasn't been seen since 2008. If Clay or Egnew make the next step each...could be a solid TE group.
     
  7. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin Premium Member Luxury Box Club Member

    42,442
    24,982
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    I said slot receivers....... and since your premise involves picks 50 and beyond you should probably start there.
     
  8. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Sure. What percentage of slot receivers in the list I linked do you believe have become significant contributors?
     
  9. MrClean

    MrClean Inglourious Basterd Club Member

    Check out #45 in coverage, what a lazy *** dog. If I'd been the coach of that team, he'd have rode the bench the rest of the season. Bumphis runs right in front of him one time where he appears to be within arm's reach, and there's #45 just jogging along, can't be bothered to even make an attempt to tackle him. Did some checking and from what I could tell, #45 for La Tech in 2011 was named Jay Dudley, and he lives up to that last name on that play.
    Still very nice effort by Bumphis. Hopefully he'd be our new Bess, but with more speed.
     
  10. padre31

    padre31 Premium Member Luxury Box

    99,377
    37,301
    0
    Nov 22, 2007
    inching to 100k posts
    TBH, and it does not reflect well on Jeff Ireland, but did we really want him to draft another Wr?

    Granted he's 1 for 3 (Hartline v Turner and Gates) and Matthews will probably play a lot this season, but he is not exactly known for finding dynamic playmaking Wr's at this point in his career.
     
  11. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin Premium Member Luxury Box Club Member

    42,442
    24,982
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    Here's a fun one: 50% of Pro Bowlers the past 40 years were drafted 50th or later (including undrafted).
     
    jim1, shula_guy and MrClean like this.
  12. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    I conceded earlier in the thread that there is a chance that picks drafted at #50 or later will be successful. However, when you focus only on the ones who were successful, you can't establish an accurate probability that any one such pick will be.

    For example, just glancing at this page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._Irrelevant) very quickly, it looks like a rough estimate of the total number of draft picks beyond #50 in the past 40 years is about 11,000. If there have been roughly 50 Pro Bowl players per year (25 on each team) for the past 40 years, that means there have been 2,000 total Pro-Bowlers in the past 40 years.

    If 50% of those Pro-Bowlers have been picked beyond #50, and there have been roughly 11,000 such players beyond #50 picked overall in the last 40 years, then there is about a 9% chance (1,000 divided by 11,000) that a Pro Bowl player will be picked in that part of the draft.

    That of course means there's a 91% chance you won't pick a Pro Bowl player in that part of the draft.

    Now, since you included undrafted players as well, I have to think that number is even higher when those players are considered. In other words, players picked beyond #50, including UDFAs, could very well have around a 95% chance of not being future Pro-Bowlers.

    Also, this is assuming that we're considering these players to be only one-time Pro-Bowlers, which is highly doubtful. Obviously if a guy is picked at #50 or beyond and makes the Pro Bowl more than once, that 91% figure is going to go up.
     
    Steve-Mo likes this.
  13. MrClean

    MrClean Inglourious Basterd Club Member

    It appears you are trying to reach a new high for how far you can move the goalposts from your original statement in this thread. Typical.
     
    jim1 and ToddPhin like this.
  14. GMJohnson

    GMJohnson New Member

    14,291
    5,841
    0
    Jan 27, 2010
    If we're gonna waste time talking nonsense let it be about beer and big asses.
     
    ToddPhin and Sceeto like this.
  15. jim1

    jim1 New Member

    5,902
    3,054
    0
    Jul 1, 2008
    Get what? That you hijacked this thread because you didn't get enough attention with the topic of your NFL Draft Psychology 101 thread and you felt like beating the same tired drum, reviving the same point? Your same point being that individually, draft picks after #50 are fairly irrelevant?

    Well, they are relevant- collectively, they pretty much make up a football team. And although that has been shown repeatedly, you'll cling to your opinion that singularly they are of very little importance. How brilliant. NFL front offices spend countless hours and plenty of money to fight for these inches, to make the correct choices because they form the backbone of the team, because these picks do matter.

    Again, let's get some insight from a couple of your posts from another thread:

    #1 "Sounds like "psychological incite" is exactly what I've done."

    #2 "What these folks don't seem to realize is that they're making me and what I do a topic for conversation, which is giving me a level of importance I truly don't deserve."

    Are those the words of a poster who wants to have a productive discussion, or the words of someone who stopped taking his meds regularly and wants to fill the void with baiting and inciting others?

    Exactly.
     
    ToddPhin and MrClean like this.
  16. padre31

    padre31 Premium Member Luxury Box

    99,377
    37,301
    0
    Nov 22, 2007
    inching to 100k posts
    "..these are a few of my favorite things..."

    I do think there is a faulty logic in assuming b/c "6 of 18 players taken in that rd" then means every player taken in that round will perform the same way.

    Basically, the NFL boils down to opportunity, and health, a guy like Amendola springs to mind, he made the most of his opportunity, then suffered injuries.

    The opportunity porition is one of the reasons why Bess is in Cleveland, imo they determined that someone else should receive those opportunities b/c Bess was not doing enough with the ones he received in Miami.

    Could be a mistake, maybe not, that is how a team trying to upgrade approaches opportunities.

    This is one of my complaints about the Parcellian Era, they drafted polished guys who could play quickly, but physically had low ceilings meaning the team had to be perfect to beat better teams.
     
  17. Point of clarity about what started this debate before Shou attempts to further convlate what everyone arguing with him took issue with:

    Lets stop this nonsense about resetting the goal posts to becoming good as meaning if they reach the Probowl or not.

    also we can look at how many top 50 draft picks bust out and compare that % to the rest of the drafts. Without looking I would naturaly assume that top 50 picks have a higher overall % of sucess but that does not negate the fact that the NFL has a siginificant amount of lower picks that contribute to their respective teams.

    Give us all a break and just admitt that you misspoke and lets all move on from it. If later picks did not matter then why would any team ever trade out of the top 50 for mutiple but lower picks? It would be a fools errand by them to do such a thing.
     
    ToddPhin and MrClean like this.
  18. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Sure, and I stand by my original statement that players drafted beyond about #50 are unlikely to become starters (or as I said it originally, "significant contributors") in the league. I responded to the issue about Pro Bowlers because someone else brought it up, and to show that if you focus only on the players who have made the Pro Bowl drafted at #50 and beyond, versus those and the ones who did not, you're left with a skewed impression of the likelihood with which any one player drafted there is to make the Pro Bowl.

    Try to follow the discussion please. Take a look back through the last 10 or so drafts and determine the percentage of players drafted at #50 and beyond who have gone on to become regular starters in the league. That number won't be greater than 50%. Now, we can leave it at that, or we can continue the song and dance. Your choice.
     
  19. How many players on our current roster were taken @ 50 or higher?
     
  20. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Yes they are relevant, and yes they collectively comprise a good percentage of football teams. However, there are a whole lot more of them who have gone on to do nothing significant in the league. Once again, you're failing to consider all of the players drafted at #50 and beyond who have never done anything significant in the league. You're focusing only on those who have.

    Here's the main point: when you put 200 or so players (the ones drafted at #50 and beyond) in a hat who are collectively unlikely to contribute significantly in the league, and you choose any two of them out of the hat, the one you chose first is highly unlikely to be any more a significant contributor in the league than the guy you chose second. That's the analogy for what happened in this instance regarding Josh Boyce. The "missing out" on Josh Boyce is unlikely to mean anything, ultimately, because picks made in that part of the draft as a group are unlikely to produce significantly.

    Now, if you can't get that point, I can't help you. I've done all I can.
     
  21. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Once again, you view that question as relevant to my point, and I do not. The question relevant to my point is, what percentage of players who have been taken at #50 and beyond have become significant contributors in the league?

    When you ask how many players on our roster were taken at #50 or later, you're leaving out the players who were taken at #50 or later who never made the roster or have never contributed significantly to the team. You can't very well establish the probability of picking a significant contributor in that part of the draft without including those players in your assessment! You can't just stop at the guys who've made the team or who have produced. You have to consider the guys who did not and have not!
     
  22. jim1

    jim1 New Member

    5,902
    3,054
    0
    Jul 1, 2008
    Either your reading skills are subpar or you're just not reading my posts very carefully. I do get your point, for what it's worth. The problem is that it's not much of a point. Again, as an example, over 85% of the current Dolphins roster is made up of players drafted after #50. You're clinging to the notion that because many of these post #50 picks fail, that individually they are of marginal importance.

    Wow. Thanks for sharing. Others, including NFL front offices, believe that each of these picks is tremendously important, because collectively they shape football teams.

    Here's a thought: the next time that you want to revive one of your threads, in this case the Draft Psychology 101 thread, just bump it instead of polluting another thread, blatantly, with the same point.

    Your other thread died quickly for a reason- no one really cared, apparently. Instead of lying as you have in this thread about your frequent baiting and inciting, just bump your own thread if you need an attention fix.
     
    ToddPhin and MrClean like this.
  23. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    No, what I'm doing is illustrating why Josh Boyce is highly unlikely to be any better a player than the guy we took, and neither player is likely to become a significant contributor in the league. If that point has no weight or importance for you personally, fine.
     
  24. DePhinistr8

    DePhinistr8 Season Ticket Holder

    3,123
    2,247
    113
    Mar 24, 2008
    please, please, please stop quoting him
     
    shouright likes this.
  25. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Yes, please. Just realize that I've made my point, it holds water, and let's move on. :)
     
  26. jim1

    jim1 New Member

    5,902
    3,054
    0
    Jul 1, 2008
    Agreed, not much weight or importance there at all, for reasons repeatedly given. It is funny, however, that the most successful teams like the Steelers and Ravens are so good at selecting post #50 draft picks (See Mike Williams and any number of other picks). It's also kind of funny how the success that Bobby Beatherd had with post #50 draft picks led to two Super Bowl wins, as well as the Dolphins Ring of Honor members that you don't want to be bothered with and have no answer to. Just coincidence, right? As is how the Dolphins started to slide after Beatherd bolted for Washington- who started to win big not long after?

    Again, the next time that you want to promote a point that you tried to make in a thread that died, just bump that threat instead of diverting and polluting a different one.
     
    MrClean likes this.
  27. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Wonderful. I don't pretend to believe everything I say is important to everyone.

    I'd suggest you let the moderators do the job you're doing here of trying to control the behavior of other members of the forum. You're just a fellow member, not one of them, so please don't cast yourself in that role in relation to me.
     
  28. emocomputerjock

    emocomputerjock Senior Member

    5,649
    1,853
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    DC
    If anyone knows how to return more than 300 results on Pro FootBall reference when making a draft query, I'd appreciate it. Until then I can't provide any useful data to the discussion and I sadly don't have time to figure it out for myself right now
     
    shouright likes this.
  29. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    I agree. I can specify the players taken at #50 and beyond between the years 1999 and 2009, put them in ascending order by number of games started, and quickly see that the first hundred of them have started no NFL games whatsoever in their careers, but when you click on "next page," you lose the search criteria, and it defaults to all players rather than just those drafted in that range.
     
  30. emocomputerjock

    emocomputerjock Senior Member

    5,649
    1,853
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    DC
    I ran a couple of queries and picked career AV > 20 as the cutoff (roughly Chad Henne). Out of 300 results on the players picked in the first 50, I had 205 who contributed at least that much. On the players picked after 50, i had only 35. But since there were 5 times the total number of results (500 v 2501) for the two groups, and I'm only comparing a who only knows selection of 300 players from either group, I have no way to actually come up with a valid percentage of players. Seems like they'd at least offer it as a download option if they wont load it on the page.
     
  31. jim1

    jim1 New Member

    5,902
    3,054
    0
    Jul 1, 2008
    And what you're left with is what you've had since you purposefully sent this thread on a needless tangent to serve your own agenda- crap.

    Since you're on a Dolphins site and trying to convince others that post #50 draft picks are relatively meaningless, here's my suggestion:

    Go to my post #69 in this thread for a nearly complete list of the Dolphins historical draft picks taken after selection #50 that made the team. If you know your Dolphins history fairly well, you can quickly determine about how many of these picks made significant contributions to the team over the years- even if you choose to focus on the percentage that failed over the years as opposed to the importance of those who succeeded. You can check the hyperlink for a complete list of Dolphins draft picks.

    Basically what I provided is a huge list of Dolphins players who were drafted after #50 and made the team, most of them contributed significantly and some of them in fact to teams other than Miami. The point is, essentially, how many of these post #50 drafted players made significant contributions to their teams. If your focus continues to be along the lines of "Yeah, but look at how many of the draft picks never made it", then I have to wonder again why you chose to send this thread on that tangent. Everyone knows that most individual draft picks never make it. In other words, you don't really have a point to make of any merit and just want to annoy people.

    Given your history of previous threads, there's no surprise to be found there.
     
    Coral Reefer, ToddPhin and MrClean like this.
  32. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree Tank? Who is Tank? I am Guy Incognito.

    40,533
    33,035
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    One thing to consider is that Boyce was probably the Patriots 5th choice at that position. I am quite sure that by the end of the second round, most of the time teams are going, "come on, come on, dammit!" when it comes to players they want to drop.
     
  33. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    I think the point is that people tend to lose sight of this fact, especially for players in the later rounds.
     
  34. jim1

    jim1 New Member

    5,902
    3,054
    0
    Jul 1, 2008
    Lose sight of what, that later round picks fail more than they succeed?

    That's just common knowledge and common sense. It also points to the folly of this whole diverted discussion- you can focus on the importance of these picks that make it and how they in a real sense collectively shape football teams, or you can focus on how many later round picks fail, which in my opinion is a simple given.

    If you look at this thread in conjunction with and in the context of why it was hijacked, to continue the point of a thread that died (Draft Psychology 101), you'll see the same old game- try to find a subject to argue about that will annoy people. Same game, same method, same poster. Go figure.

    How often has it been said by NFL pro personnel past and present that they make their bones AFTER the first round, and how important it is to hit on middle and late round picks, because that's where the value is and where teams are built?

    And yet I keep reading the same tired, questionable point- that individually, post #50 draft picks are relatively meaningless. And that carries about as much water as the redundant point of not long ago that our Wide Receivers were fine (hello Mike Wallace and Brandon Gisbson, good bye Davonne Bess) and WR touchdowns are mainly due to chance and don't really matter. Good luck with that one as well.
     
    ToddPhin and MrClean like this.
  35. Da 'Fins

    Da 'Fins Season Ticket Holder Staff Member Club Member

    34,739
    47,801
    113
    Dec 19, 2007
    Birmingham, AL
    Simply put Shou's thoughts on value past 50 are over done. Yes, most players don't make a big impact. But, that's true for players in the top 50 as well.

    Just peruse NFL.Com and go back to draft years in the past and see how many names pop out who were drafted in year one as having had impactful careers. It's pretty stunning in many draft years how many players never panned out. Even the best drafting teams (Steelers, 49ers, etc.) have multiple non-hits.

    To that point, Chase Stuart's Draft Value chart is more pertinent (he's comparing it to the trade chart). He calculated the weighted average value of each pick. It clearly goes down through each round but not nearly as much as one typically thinks (hence, Shou's over-undervaluing of players in the middle rounds).

    http://www.footballperspective.com/creating-a-draft-value-chart-part-ii/

    But, the more salient point is this: The Dolphins have one big play WR. They have another decent #2 WR in Hartline (not a high round pick). Brandon Gibson (also not a high round pick) is a mediocre #3, imo. He makes some plays but is not a guy who gets open a lot, it seems to me. The rest are low-round UDFAs. How much hope do they have of making an impact - even though they are on the team? But, add a couple more mid-round picks to the mix (a Bailey or this kid the Pats got) and the odds increase that you are going to find a good WR out of the bunch. That's why it sometimes does matter.

    I give this kid Boyce as good as if not a better chance (if Brady remains health for 2-3 seasons) of being a player in the NFL than Dallas Thomas. And, as good or better than Wilson (that will be the comparison).
     
  36. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    All of this really isn't necessary. People were getting upset that the Dolphins missed out on Boyce. Someone made the point that there isn't much need to get upset, because its overwhelmingly likely that Boyce never produces to the level to warrant any feeling of missing out. Thats a salient point, and I don't believe its worthy of scorn.
     
  37. MrClean

    MrClean Inglourious Basterd Club Member

    None of that was your original statement. :pity:
     
  38. Sorry Jim but you can not use that post to support your postion. Any post later then 50 has no significant contribution to our conversation and in all probability will lead to failure.
     
  39. Hellion

    Hellion Crash Club Member

    1,800
    798
    113
    Dec 4, 2007
    Here and there
    Every year every team get beat to "the punch" by another team. It's the nature of the draft.
     

  40. No what set people off was this:

    That is a fasle statment and that has been whats been talked about. He just used a boyce thread to continue his agenda from another thread, apparently. How enjoyable would it be if we all started purposely derailing threads? I bet you would love moderating that?
     

Share This Page