Quote
max
Cause what you'll find is a baseline established by someone looking for conformation bias.
No that;s how that works. (Oh and remember, if c-bias is rampant, it includes you too. There's such a thing as being biased in the direction of expecting disappointment. No one is in a position to say they are the only objective one in a discussion---if people are genuinely interested in being objective, the first thing they do is foster balanced discussion. Individuals can't be that objective...groups that are into fair discussion can be, if they approach it right.)
In terms of establishing a baseline, it;s simple.
A person or two gets an article describing the normal hit rate for the 2nd round.
I;ve already quoted one.
And a person or 2 looks at good drafting teams and sees their percentages in the 2nd round.
Basically you get more than one take on it and then sort through them. But the baseline doesn't solve things, it just sets basic parameters. So for example is 2 busts in the 2nd round outrageously bad, normal, average? After that people can then argue about whether a particular player is a hit.
An example---I will do Green Bay, which drafts well. It's just one example to add to the discussion.
I will go back in time so there;s no question about whether a player was a hit.
So...Green Bay, 2nd round, 2005-2010. I will count as hits (without doing the qualitative judgments part yet) as anyone who is a starter, whether lost through free agency or not, or a significant role player (someone who sticks around and gets consistent snaps over a few years). If someone is gone before 4 years and doesn't become a starter, you have to count him as a miss...a guy who couldn't catch on.
In that time frame GB had 9 2nd round picks.
I would count Jennings, Cooledge, Nelson, and Collins as hits. Also Neal. He's not spectacular but he's still playing for them. Brandon Jackson barely qualifies but he did contribute for 4 years before going to Cleveland and disappearing.
The misses are Patrick Lee, Brian Brohm, and Terrence Murphy.
So the hit rate for Green Bay in the 2nd round across that period---a team everyone agrees drafts very well--is 66.7%.I already quoted on NFL GM saying expect a hit rate of around 56%.
SO FAR, this leads me to saying that 60% is decent or average and that when you get toward 70% it's getting to be at least as good as Green Bay.
So I will do another team. Pittsburgh. I will randomly pick 2006-2012 as the period.
In that period the Steelers had 5 2nd round picks.
I count Woodley, Gilbert, and even Worilds as hits (Worilds is primarily a back up but does get 37 starts in 5 years so he meets the low minimal qualifications.)
I would count Adams and Sweed as misses.
That then would be the minimal 60%.Now if people want to work on the baseline expectations---which remember are not stellar, they are just normal average---then they can do some teams just like I did, or quote another article, and so on.
And of course, again, none of this is qualitative so debating where Joyner stands is still open to discussion. Qualitative discussion is different.
All establishing a baseline does is get rid of the idea that because a team blows 1 2nd round pick, their drafting is awful. Turns out expecting 100% or even 80% even in the 2nd round is just wildly ungrounded and invalid.
,,,
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/11/2016 07:07AM by zn.
