Edgar

Edgar Mock Six

37 posts in this topic

19 hours ago, rossihunter2 said:

obviously context helps but i think the value of these guys is such that even without context we can judge it ok

True, I just believe it leaves a lot of important details out.  Also, the thing about 'value' is that everyone values certain players differently. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, usmccharles said:

True, I just believe it leaves a lot of important details out.  Also, the thing about 'value' is that everyone values certain players differently. 

That's fair - I just meant at this point in the process people are going to have pretty clear impressions in their own head of their own values for players at each pick

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, rossihunter2 said:

That's fair - I just meant at this point in the process people are going to have pretty clear impressions in their own head of their own values for players at each pick

Also, I tried to elaborate on this one time, but I cant find the right words.  The word 'value' I think is honestly overblown, don't get me wrong, I understand the premise. 

Lets use Charles Harris for this example

If the FO thinks Harris can be the next Suggs for us and be a dominant force on this defense.  The draft 'experts' big board has him at 29 best player and we take him at 16.  Our FO is going to get killed because of how early he was drafted, but yet, we don't know what value we put on Harris.  So even though everyone thinks we over-drafted Harris, we took him to give us the same production as Suggs, therefore the 'value' to us would easily be worth it.  Does that make sense?  its been a long day

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, usmccharles said:

Also, I tried to elaborate on this one time, but I cant find the right words.  The word 'value' I think is honestly overblown, don't get me wrong, I understand the premise. 

Lets use Charles Harris for this example

If the FO thinks Harris can be the next Suggs for us and be a dominant force on this defense.  The draft 'experts' big board has him at 29 best player and we take him at 16.  Our FO is going to get killed because of how early he was drafted, but yet, we don't know what value we put on Harris.  So even though everyone thinks we over-drafted Harris, we took him to give us the same production as Suggs, therefore the 'value' to us would easily be worth it.  Does that make sense?  its been a long day

value is always subjective though - it's a term that is at its most useful up until the actual draft day as a way of working out where guys are likely to go

the provisos are this though: value is subjective in the evaluation phase - but if Charles Harris is thought to be the next Suggs then of course that's not a reach and it's good value

i think travis Frederick is the best example of what you're describing and I'm not sure there's a good answer for it 

this whole offseason process of evaluating college prospects is inherently imperfect so until a better way of predicting and talking about prospects comes about then value is probably the best way of forming criticism despite how much it relies on "feel" and subjectivity

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, rossihunter2 said:

value is always subjective though - it's a term that is at its most useful up until the actual draft day as a way of working out where guys are likely to go

the provisos are this though: value is subjective in the evaluation phase - but if Charles Harris is thought to be the next Suggs then of course that's not a reach and it's good value

i think travis Frederick is the best example of what you're describing and I'm not sure there's a good answer for it 

this whole offseason process of evaluating college prospects is inherently imperfect so until a better way of predicting and talking about prospects comes about then value is probably the best way of forming criticism despite how much it relies on "feel" and subjectivity

Yea, its also just a good way to fill the void of actual sports news. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, usmccharles said:

Yea, its also just a good way to fill the void of actual sports news. 

Part of it as well is that value is a subjective tool inside team draft-rooms - it essentially comes down to "if so-and-so and thingymajig are on the board - who do we think is the better player for our team" - it's informed but opinion-based when it comes down to it

obvioisly that is changing a little with analytics coming in but football scouting is a gut-based "think and feel" kind of business

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/20/2017 at 10:15 PM, usmccharles said:

Also, I tried to elaborate on this one time, but I cant find the right words.  The word 'value' I think is honestly overblown, don't get me wrong, I understand the premise. 

Lets use Charles Harris for this example

If the FO thinks Harris can be the next Suggs for us and be a dominant force on this defense.  The draft 'experts' big board has him at 29 best player and we take him at 16.  Our FO is going to get killed because of how early he was drafted, but yet, we don't know what value we put on Harris.  So even though everyone thinks we over-drafted Harris, we took him to give us the same production as Suggs, therefore the 'value' to us would easily be worth it.  Does that make sense?  its been a long day

Flacco is the perfect example of this

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now