I don't agree. Its about finding talent. Teams with more picks could just as easily hurt their score as they could help it. Its not about judging everything a GM does, just his ability to draft talent. Trades are irrelevant in that regard, because the same reason as #1. Like I said, there are plenty of scores that could be off, but the point of this was to show a non-biased assessment of all the teams in the league to see if we can get a more realistic view of Ireland's drafting ability.
That's not true. KC, Ten & Min are all in the Top 5 and they aren't doing anything. Here's the simple truth of it all, Ireland drafts well enough for us to be SB winners as long as QB pans out.
I was being conservative. Anybody who has followed the NFL knows that all GMs will go in cycles. If you're in the top half you're better than most and capable of putting a SB team together. In the NFL it mostly comes down to the QB. If you get that right then people will assume you're top 5. Until you get that QB your record won't be good and people won't recognize your ability to pick talent regardless of how good you are.
DING DING DING..............return to your corners. Next round starts in 3 minutes. I can't wait for the draft.............. just kidding guys.
Minnesota has made the playoffs. KC does have 5 players in the probowl and a very bad team. But a single pick right pick/up at QB and they're set. KC might (and I stress might) be a playoff team this year. Yes it's all about QB I've said it before. Spending 100 million and nailing/missing on the draft picks can be amplified, or muted, depending on how Ryan Tannehill plays. If he plays well, job security for a few more years. If he regresses, bye bye. No one wants to see Tanehill to Wallace more than me. Oh boy that would be exciting. I have one quibble with these rankings. And correct me if I'm wrong, because I don't see the actual methodology in the link and it just takes me to a premium area, so I'm going off of what people have said. But PFF ranks each player, assigns them a score, and then just tallies it up? Is that right? If so, I think there is a major flaw in that. A team that hits with a bunch of 2's, and a bunch of -2's, is going to average out close to 0. So is a team with a bunch of 1s and -1s, and 0.5's and -0.5's. I'd rather see the teams that had more hits, bigger hits. Because nobody keeps all of their draft picks anyway. The 0's, -1s and -2s naturally drop off. What are you left with after they drop off? Also, are the picks weighted by round? Higher rounds should carry a negative weight on misses. Lower rounds carry a positive weight with hits. Missing on Jamarcus Russell is different than missing on Jalen Parmele. Anyway, those are my observations which might be pointless if I got the methodology wrong.
1. We made the playoffs too in the time period of this eval. 2. Agree about the QB. 3. I've said many times, that its the playoffs or bust (barring major injuries) this year in regards to Ireland. 4. They didn't them add up, I did. I think adding them up is valid. I think it shows the net effectiveness of your picks. A +2 should cancel out a -2, because the chances are strong a +2 was a lower round pick while a -2 was major high round bust. 5. I don't know why that link took you to a premium spot, as I don't have a premium account or any account at all. It shouldn't be to hard to go the homepage and find these evals. They're listed individually by team.
I just don't like the cancelling out. Because bad picks cancel themselves out. They get cut. If Team A, has a 2 and a -2, and Team B has a 0.5 and a -0.5, they both have the same score when you add them up. When training camp cuts happen those two negs should be gone (unless you're really bad). So team A is left with a 2, and team B is left with a 0.5. One team did infinity better than the other. Adding them up is a quick and easy way to get a general idea of how effective the talent picker is, I'll grant you that. But it doesn't paint a whole picture. You can select a 2 at QB, and miss every other pick (Dan Marino/Manning/Brady anyone? LOL) and get away with it for a while. Ok I don't want to get into a QBR thing with this, as it can head that way easily. I'm just pointing out a nit with the above methodology that's all.
FTR, I've said this wasn't gospel or the end all be all. Its just one of the few things I've seen that gives a number to all draft picks for all teams in a set time frame that isn't subject positively or negatively about one team or another. I was originally going to just post the scores but thought showing how many are in each score group would provide a better understanding. Also, busting on a high pick can negatively impact your team to the same degree uncovering a gem can help it. My biggest gripe with this system, is that QBs should be separate and graded differently.
They don't just cancel each other out. If you're replacing drafted players with FAs, thats not a good thing. FA very rarely provides value-added.
Um no. You're keeping players already on the team. Filling holes here and there with key FA's. How are FA's rarely providing value added? They do all the time. They're free too. No draft picks. Pick them u p, they suck, drop them off. I'm talking role players here not high value FA's. Also, Wake, Bess, Starks. FA's cannot/should not lead your team, but they fill warm bodies better than rounds 6-7 usually. Plenty of value in FA. You can't start 22 superstars. You hit on QB though and you make the championship game with Reche Caldwell as your leading receiver.
Oh the sweet...sweet....Irony. I remember I used this same site to gather/find stats on a player. Those stats showed he isn't as good as some think he is. Some people dismissed those stats/facts even though they were "without bias and gave us a comparison to the rest of the league". lol...
WTF are you talking about? If you're going to cry about something at least state clearly what has your ample panties in a bunch.
Because their cost is almost always equal to their production, if not higher. You will rarely find FAs that are underpaid. Cameron Wake is a good example of the exception. Agreed.
Yes costs are high, and that's why with the mid to bench warmer level, the variance between cost and benefit are pretty close. Will we notice if we overpaid a player $500,000 to a million? Value is still added even if we overpay a little and the salary cap isn't an issue
