Quote
zn
Quote
rampage666
I don't think we can use a percentage success rate like that with any value.
1-There are only 32 offenses in the NFL.
2-There are only so many RB openings in those 32 offenses.
3-So, success is tied to opportunity.
When you get to the later rounds you have a high number of players taken
1 Round - 0
2 Round - 2
3 Round - 4
4 Round - 7
5 Round - 4
6 Round -5
7 Round - 6
So in rounds 2-3 you have 6 picks and 4-7 22 picks . So to hit your 67% success rate the 4-7 selections would need 14.74 or 15 rbs to succeed in your criteria. That's never going to happen--not enough offenses to play rookie RBs.
We should probably look at the median/mean production of the backs chosen by round in last ten drafts. I think this would allow a more fair comparison. But we need data, time, etc.
In the meantime, what if we look at the best back chosen in each round and see what the quality difference is:
2nd Round - Cook
3rd Round - Kamara
4th Round -Cohen? They all kind of are meh
5th Round-Aaron Jones
6th Round-Elijah McGuire(going off production)
7th Round-Chris Carson
I will give you that the 2nd and 3rd round backs are definitely the best. But an Aaron Jones or Chris Carson in the 5th or 7th respectfully--yes please. Kamara/Cook is a hair better than an Aaron Jones. I'll use less premium picks to take more chances to hit on those guys than using my 2nd rounders on them. Third round is the gray area for me--I'd rather take a more valuable position but I'd take a back if the quality is there.
How many 5th rounders is a 2nd rounder worth?
I don't think of it as a "value." I thought of it as an
example. (I mean, if wanted to establish a "value" as opposed to just making a point, I would look at more than just one draft.) Anyway what that example illustrates to me lines up with what seems perfectly intuitively true---that is, you want good RB production, your better bet is to look to rounds 2-3.
To sum it up? We differ on all this. I put a lot more stock in the running game and RB talent than you apparently do. I also don't share the view that you can reliably get good RB production after round 3. Yeah you can, if you luck out, but the odds go down. To me it's better to go get it and have it than to trust in lucking out after round 3.
So, good discussion.
....
I read you too fast. I didn't really address what you're saying about value.
To me value is an abstraction. Jones may have more value than the backs taken in rounds 2-3 in 2017, but I personally don't care about that in this sense--if you want a back and need a back you don't split hairs with value issues, you make sure you get one. Jones was 1 out of 22 backs picked after round 3 in 2017. To me that's just an example of the fact that odds are against finding a back like Jones after round 3. The backs I listed that year from rounds 2-3 illustrate how you have a
much safer bet picking them higher. I go with the safer bet. If my back is productive and you say "he was not great value" I would start playing the world's smallest violin and not care. Is he productive? Yes. Do I want and need a back? Yes. Then--I get a back, and I don't gamble on it.
....
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/04/2020 08:42AM by zn.
