| The Ratings are in | |
|
+7catspajamas nieemo Patstown lebronzoom ~Myyst~ SoxNats07 footballnerd85 11 posters |
|
Author | Message |
---|
~Myyst~
Number of posts : 218 Registration date : 2007-04-23
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 3:40 pm | |
| lol my mistake, TB drafted him at 8, but TB got great value at that pk. | |
|
| |
SoxNats07 Admin
Number of posts : 927 Age : 30 Registration date : 2007-05-24
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 3:41 pm | |
| - footballnerd85 wrote:
- i say just we all create a big board, or we use one that someone else has made, and determine that way, instead of using the nfl draft, becuz in the nfl, there are different scenarios and situations for the teams choosing those types of players. my way may not be perfect, but it is a little more accurate than using the real draft.
i have a question about this theory though. either one. Lets say JaMarcus Russell fell to #31 and he was picked. thats +30 for the team that got him. Then, some player taken #150 in real life falls to #181. Thats +31. In both of these theories, the 2nd team got better value than the first. | |
|
| |
footballnerd85
Number of posts : 619 Age : 29 Registration date : 2007-05-23
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 3:42 pm | |
| but i think that CJ at one is great value as well, just becuz he will be much better than J-roc in the game. | |
|
| |
~Myyst~
Number of posts : 218 Registration date : 2007-04-23
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 3:45 pm | |
| - SoxNats07 wrote:
- footballnerd85 wrote:
- i say just we all create a big board, or we use one that someone else has made, and determine that way, instead of using the nfl draft, becuz in the nfl, there are different scenarios and situations for the teams choosing those types of players. my way may not be perfect, but it is a little more accurate than using the real draft.
i have a question about this theory though. either one.
Lets say JaMarcus Russell fell to #31 and he was picked. thats +30 for the team that got him.
Then, some player taken #150 in real life falls to #181. Thats +31.
In both of these theories, the 2nd team got better value than the first. That is true. In theory yes, but you want ever see a pk#1 fall to pk #30. Most of the value gained for teams are in the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th rds. These picks get harder and harder as the rounds go on, but if you can get value for the selections, then you've done your homework. For every reach pk opens the door for some other team to get good value at their next pk.
Last edited by on Thu Jun 14, 2007 3:47 pm; edited 1 time in total | |
|
| |
lebronzoom
Number of posts : 945 Registration date : 2007-04-21
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 3:46 pm | |
| - ~Myyst~ wrote:
- lebronzoom wrote:
- not necessarilly, Williams went first overall last season and he was like 85, but Bush had a better rating. Im pretty sure they base it off of what should happen if positions werent an issue
Thats because Bush was the best player in the draft as well as CJ in this years draft will have a better rating then JR. and you make my point for me, since they're going to be better you should be using a mock draft without positions taken into account | |
|
| |
footballnerd85
Number of posts : 619 Age : 29 Registration date : 2007-05-23
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 3:54 pm | |
| - ~Myyst~ wrote:
- SoxNats07 wrote:
- footballnerd85 wrote:
- i say just we all create a big board, or we use one that someone else has made, and determine that way, instead of using the nfl draft, becuz in the nfl, there are different scenarios and situations for the teams choosing those types of players. my way may not be perfect, but it is a little more accurate than using the real draft.
i have a question about this theory though. either one.
Lets say JaMarcus Russell fell to #31 and he was picked. thats +30 for the team that got him.
Then, some player taken #150 in real life falls to #181. Thats +31.
In both of these theories, the 2nd team got better value than the first. That is true. In theory yes, but you want ever see a pk#1 fall to pk #30.
Most of the value gained for teams are in the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th rds. These picks get harder and harder as the rounds go on, but if you can get value for the selections, then you've done your homework.
For every reach pk opens the door for some other team to get good value at their next pk. but how do u determine a reach pick? u could say i reached with picking Reggie Nelson at 10, but i desperately needed a saftey, and he was the second highest rated player (and saftey) on my board. it may have been a reach in terms of talent, but i needed him and i think i made the correct decision by drafting him. it is categorized as a reach, but in reality it was who i expected to draft there. | |
|
| |
~Myyst~
Number of posts : 218 Registration date : 2007-04-23
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 3:55 pm | |
| Ok, let me break it down this way and I'll use Denver as an example.
Here is how Devner ranked with their pks based on value of which players are still on the board when Denver made a selection.
Pk 1: +12 Pk 2: +53 Pk 3: +60 Pk 4: +44 Pk 5: +88 selected 198-John Bowie draft in RL @ pk 110 Pk 6: +69 Pk 7: +14
Total +340 Thats how value is put into the equation by pk 5 example. | |
|
| |
footballnerd85
Number of posts : 619 Age : 29 Registration date : 2007-05-23
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 3:57 pm | |
| i get it, but it didnt answer my question. | |
|
| |
lebronzoom
Number of posts : 945 Registration date : 2007-04-21
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 3:57 pm | |
| I think also, that first rounders picked early should have been worth more than late rounders picked early. Its easy to get a 5th round player in the 7th round, but your never going to find a first round player in the 3rd round | |
|
| |
~Myyst~
Number of posts : 218 Registration date : 2007-04-23
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 3:58 pm | |
| footballnerd85 stop thinking First rd, the draft has 7 rds to it. I'll tell you what a reach is, selecting a WR in the 3rd rd when in RL was selected in the 5th rd, when their are tons of better WR still on the board.
Thats what I meant by teams doing their homework! Players selected in the 4/5th rds that were not even drafted! Those are reaches, and other teams benefited from those selections. | |
|
| |
footballnerd85
Number of posts : 619 Age : 29 Registration date : 2007-05-23
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 3:58 pm | |
| ya. its like what sox said before, with his example. | |
|
| |
footballnerd85
Number of posts : 619 Age : 29 Registration date : 2007-05-23
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:03 pm | |
| - ~Myyst~ wrote:
- footballnerd85 stop thinking First rd, the draft has 7 rds to it. I'll tell you what a reach is, selecting a WR in the 3rd rd when in RL was selected in the 5th rd, when their are tons of better WR still on the board.
Thats what I meant by teams doing their homework! Players selected in the 4/5th rds that were not even drafted! Those are reaches, and other teams benefited from those selections. so essentially u r saying that a reach is in the later rounds, when someone takes a player way before they shoulda been taken. but that automatically gives many people a disadvantage, for they traded all of their picks past the second round (like me). many people had no chance to get a high rating, according to what u define a reach. | |
|
| |
nieemo
Number of posts : 633 Age : 39 Registration date : 2007-04-22
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:06 pm | |
| these ratings suck ballsss | |
|
| |
catspajamas Admin
Number of posts : 388 Age : 32 Registration date : 2007-04-22
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:07 pm | |
| i told u ratings was a bad idea in the league discussion thread, lol, this was stupid | |
|
| |
SoxNats07 Admin
Number of posts : 927 Age : 30 Registration date : 2007-05-24
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:09 pm | |
| | |
|
| |
~Myyst~
Number of posts : 218 Registration date : 2007-04-23
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:12 pm | |
| - footballnerd85 wrote:
- ~Myyst~ wrote:
- footballnerd85 stop thinking First rd, the draft has 7 rds to it. I'll tell you what a reach is, selecting a WR in the 3rd rd when in RL was selected in the 5th rd, when their are tons of better WR still on the board.
Thats what I meant by teams doing their homework! Players selected in the 4/5th rds that were not even drafted! Those are reaches, and other teams benefited from those selections. so essentially u r saying that a reach is in the later rounds, when someone takes a player way before they shoulda been taken. but that automatically gives many people a disadvantage, for they traded all of their picks past the second round (like me). many people had no chance to get a high rating, according to what u define a reach. No thats not how it works, it's a domino effect that started in the first rd. | |
|
| |
SimsZilla Moderator
Number of posts : 1636 Age : 33 Localisation : Michigan Registration date : 2007-04-21
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:13 pm | |
| | |
|
| |
footballnerd85
Number of posts : 619 Age : 29 Registration date : 2007-05-23
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:14 pm | |
| explaiin the "domino effect". look at ur example. how did that start in the first round? | |
|
| |
~Myyst~
Number of posts : 218 Registration date : 2007-04-23
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:15 pm | |
| - footballnerd85 wrote:
- explaiin the "domino effect". look at ur example. how did that start in the first round?
Easy take a look and answer this question? Where all the players selected in BLM first round selected in RL first rd? Thats how the domino effect starts. Here's an example I selected Kevin Kolb at pk 112 when in RL he was selected at 36
Last edited by on Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:19 pm; edited 1 time in total | |
|
| |
catspajamas Admin
Number of posts : 388 Age : 32 Registration date : 2007-04-22
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:16 pm | |
| thanks soxs, titans made it for me, nasty rite?? wtf are we even continuing thsi thread, its so gay, it doesnt matter what their grades are, even if panthers had the worst grade(which they dont) it wont mater because u have them on ur team anyways, so i dont see y some ppl are being pussies about some draft grades, however stupid they are | |
|
| |
SoxNats07 Admin
Number of posts : 927 Age : 30 Registration date : 2007-05-24
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:17 pm | |
| - catspajamas wrote:
- thanks soxs, titans made it for me, nasty rite?? wtf are we even continuing thsi thread, its so gay, it doesnt matter what their grades are, even if panthers had the worst grade(which they dont) it wont mater because u have them on ur team anyways, so i dont see y some ppl are being pussies about some draft grades, however stupid they are
it is nasty. who is the back on the left? the one on right is ronnie brown, but whos the other one? | |
|
| |
SimsZilla Moderator
Number of posts : 1636 Age : 33 Localisation : Michigan Registration date : 2007-04-21
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:18 pm | |
| | |
|
| |
SoxNats07 Admin
Number of posts : 927 Age : 30 Registration date : 2007-05-24
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:18 pm | |
| i thought so, but i wasnt sure. pretty cool. cheezhead is making me a sig, and he said it'll be done today. | |
|
| |
footballnerd85
Number of posts : 619 Age : 29 Registration date : 2007-05-23
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:20 pm | |
| use ur example of a fifth round WR taken in the third round. how is that started in the first round? | |
|
| |
SimsZilla Moderator
Number of posts : 1636 Age : 33 Localisation : Michigan Registration date : 2007-04-21
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:20 pm | |
| - SoxNats07 wrote:
- i thought so, but i wasnt sure. pretty cool. cheezhead is making me a sig, and he said it'll be done today.
me2 | |
|
| |
Sponsored content
| Subject: Re: The Ratings are in | |
| |
|
| |
| The Ratings are in | |
|