What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Best And Worst Analysts/Scout Thread (1 Viewer)

Gandalf

Gandalf

Footballguy
There are so many people with opinions scouting NFL prospects it is hard to know who to listen to. With that in mind, who do you think is the best at evaluating talent? Does it vary by position? Why are they good? And conversely, whose opinion do you discard and why?

 
This will be spectacular. By the end of the thread, all the analysts will suck, and as proof, people will mention one of their misses. If you aren't 100%, then you must suck!

 
In the interest of this thread, I read them all. They all know more than I do.

Favorites:

Kiper

Rang and Brugler

Zierling

 
I appreciate the analysis from Greg Cosell. Daniel Jeremiah is another one that I like.

I agree with massraider that no analyst will ever be 100% correct in their calls, and it is easy to pick apart their misses.

 
Faust said:
I appreciate the analysis from Greg Cosell. Daniel Jeremiah is another one that I like.

I agree with massraider that no analyst will ever be 100% correct in their calls, and it is easy to pick apart their misses.
Click to expand...
I agree with this, and I really don't like Kiper. I like McShay, and Cosell.

 
massraider said:
This will be spectacular. By the end of the thread, all the analysts will suck, and as proof, people will mention one of their misses. If you aren't 100%, then you must suck!
Click to expand...
Actually I think this is important. It would be great to have someone (or all of us) try to start a compilation of certain analysts picks and misses. I mean what is a good percentage of hits? 60%? 70%? 80%? Wouldn't it be nice to have data on these guys. I mean even over the past couple of years.

 
Another thing to consider is certain scouts love everyone (Gruden with QBs for example), then when that diamond in the rough emerges, they can say, I totally called it. I used to think Frank Coyle was amazing - and I think he is very detailed - but I think he is prone to the issue. He seems to like everyone. Though for Coyle I still pay attention because he puts a lot of thought into it.

 
Gandalf said:
massraider said:
This will be spectacular. By the end of the thread, all the analysts will suck, and as proof, people will mention one of their misses. If you aren't 100%, then you must suck!
Click to expand...
Actually I think this is important. It would be great to have someone (or all of us) try to start a compilation of certain analysts picks and misses. I mean what is a good percentage of hits? 60%? 70%? 80%? Wouldn't it be nice to have data on these guys. I mean even over the past couple of years.
Click to expand...
http://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2012/05/25/equally-inaccurate-an-analysis-of-mel-kiper-jr-and-todd-mcshays-draft-rankings/

As the chart above shows, Kiper and McShay have proven to be equally inefficient judges of talent over the past five years. Neither expert’s rankings were a particularly good predictor of how a player would perform compared to the rest of his class. In fact, the average errors listed above suggest that the gurus’ rankings are off by around 35 spots when compared to the player’s actual performance. In other words, a player Kiper or McShay ranked as the 15th-best player in the draft is most likely to actually have been the 40th-best based on CAV to this point in their careers. The root mean square errors (RMSE) imply that Kiper is very slightly less prone to extreme errors than his ESPN counterpart, but that difference is not significant. RMSE severely punishes large errors, so having a comparatively lower RMSE implies that one makes fewer huge errors. However, like the average errors, the RMSE for each scout is enormous.

Indeed, when looking at the lists themselves, it is clear that both Kiper and McShay have, like all draft experts, been prone to extreme hits and misses when compared to the other. In 2006, both had future busts Matt Leinart, A.J. Hawk, Vince Young, and Michael Huff ranked in their Top 10s. But McShay was wise enough to include future All-Pro center Nick Mangold in his Top 25, while Kiper instead opted for Jason Allen. The following year, McShay found more success by ranking Darrelle Revis tenth overall, but the Island himself was nowhere to be found on Kiper’s Big Board. Also that year, both Kiper and McShay smartly pegged Calvin Johnson, Adrian Peterson, and Joe Thomas as three of the four top players in the draft, but both also had JaMarcus Russell and Brady Quinn in their top sevens.
Click to expand...
 
I give points for guys that actually rank players, beyond the top two rounds.

Which means no points for Mayock, McShay, and now Kiper, who I don't think is publishing the extensive rankings he has previously, as he is no longer publishing his draft guide.

The Draft Scout guys, Scott Wright, Tony Pauline, Lance Zierling (Sideline View) etc. are actually ranking players that real draft fans are interested.

Also shout out to NFL Draft Bible, they concentrate on small school guys. Thankless job.

 
massraider said:
Gandalf said:
massraider said:
This will be spectacular. By the end of the thread, all the analysts will suck, and as proof, people will mention one of their misses. If you aren't 100%, then you must suck!
Click to expand...
Actually I think this is important. It would be great to have someone (or all of us) try to start a compilation of certain analysts picks and misses. I mean what is a good percentage of hits? 60%? 70%? 80%? Wouldn't it be nice to have data on these guys. I mean even over the past couple of years.
Click to expand...
http://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2012/05/25/equally-inaccurate-an-analysis-of-mel-kiper-jr-and-todd-mcshays-draft-rankings/



As the chart above shows, Kiper and McShay have proven to be equally inefficient judges of talent over the past five years. Neither experts rankings were a particularly good predictor of how a player would perform compared to the rest of his class. In fact, the average errors listed above suggest that the gurus rankings are off by around 35 spots when compared to the players actual performance. In other words, a player Kiper or McShay ranked as the 15th-best player in the draft is most likely to actually have been the 40th-best based on CAV to this point in their careers. The root mean square errors (RMSE) imply that Kiper is very slightly less prone to extreme errors than his ESPN counterpart, but that difference is not significant. RMSE severely punishes large errors, so having a comparatively lower RMSE implies that one makes fewer huge errors. However, like the average errors, the RMSE for each scout is enormous.

Indeed, when looking at the lists themselves, it is clear that both Kiper and McShay have, like all draft experts, been prone to extreme hits and misses when compared to the other. In 2006, both had future busts Matt Leinart, A.J. Hawk, Vince Young, and Michael Huff ranked in their Top 10s. But McShay was wise enough to include future All-Pro center Nick Mangold in his Top 25, while Kiper instead opted for Jason Allen. The following year, McShay found more success by ranking Darrelle Revis tenth overall, but the Island himself was nowhere to be found on Kipers Big Board. Also that year, both Kiper and McShay smartly pegged Calvin Johnson, Adrian Peterson, and Joe Thomas as three of the four top players in the draft, but both also had JaMarcus Russell and Brady Quinn in their top sevens.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Strong work! This is exactly the sort of thing I was hoping for. Wish we had this for others as well.

 
You know what would actually be just as interesting? Is seeing who moved who up their board first. There's a lot of sniping about this draftnik and that draftnik moving a guy up his board after everyone else does.

 
massraider said:
You know what would actually be just as interesting? Is seeing who moved who up their board first. There's a lot of sniping about this draftnik and that draftnik moving a guy up his board after everyone else does.
Click to expand...
And perhaps equally important, when. Every year when the combine comes around people gets moved on the basis of the workout that most say doesn't matter (it's all about the tape).

Personally I would like to know who is influenced most by the workout warriors and whether these movements actually predict success or not.

 
Merrill Hoge is going to the top of the "worst" list with his latest nonsensical vomit that he would rather have Sams over Clowney! I think he's just stirring the pot and can't be taken seriously.

 
Warpig said:
Merrill Hoge is going to the top of the "worst" list with his latest nonsensical vomit that he would rather have Sams over Clowney! I think he's just stirring the pot and can't be taken seriously.
Click to expand...
no way Hoge tops the worst list. that is reserved for skip baseless.

 
http://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2012/05/25/equally-inaccurate-an-analysis-of-mel-kiper-jr-and-todd-mcshays-draft-rankings/
Quote


As the chart above shows, Kiper and McShay have proven to be equally inefficient judges of talent over the past five years. Neither experts rankings were a particularly good predictor of how a player would perform compared to the rest of his class. In fact, the average errors listed above suggest that the gurus rankings are off by around 35 spots when compared to the players actual performance. In other words, a player Kiper or McShay ranked as the 15th-best player in the draft is most likely to actually have been the 40th-best based on CAV to this point in their careers. The root mean square errors (RMSE) imply that Kiper is very slightly less prone to extreme errors than his ESPN counterpart, but that difference is not significant. RMSE severely punishes large errors, so having a comparatively lower RMSE implies that one makes fewer huge errors. However, like the average errors, the RMSE for each scout is enormous.
Indeed, when looking at the lists themselves, it is clear that both Kiper and McShay have, like all draft experts, been prone to extreme hits and misses when compared to the other. In 2006, both had future busts Matt Leinart, A.J. Hawk, Vince Young, and Michael Huff ranked in their Top 10s. But McShay was wise enough to include future All-Pro center Nick Mangold in his Top 25, while Kiper instead opted for Jason Allen. The following year, McShay found more success by ranking Darrelle Revis tenth overall, but the Island himself was nowhere to be found on Kipers Big Board. Also that year, both Kiper and McShay smartly pegged Calvin Johnson, Adrian Peterson, and Joe Thomas as three of the four top players in the draft, but both also had JaMarcus Russell and Brady Quinn in their top sevens.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry but this is unbelievably stupid.

They're criticizing them for having Lenart, Hawk, and Huff in their top 10's? Well guess where they went in the draft - 10, 6, and 7 respectively.

And Jamarcus Russell went #1 overall.

What dumb analysis. :yucky:

Having said that...Kiper is pretty good but McShay is terrible.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Andy Dufresne said:
http://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2012/05/25/equally-inaccurate-an-analysis-of-mel-kiper-jr-and-todd-mcshays-draft-rankings/

Quote

As the chart above shows, Kiper and McShay have proven to be equally inefficient judges of talent over the past five years. Neither experts rankings were a particularly good predictor of how a player would perform compared to the rest of his class. In fact, the average errors listed above suggest that the gurus rankings are off by around 35 spots when compared to the players actual performance. In other words, a player Kiper or McShay ranked as the 15th-best player in the draft is most likely to actually have been the 40th-best based on CAV to this point in their careers. The root mean square errors (RMSE) imply that Kiper is very slightly less prone to extreme errors than his ESPN counterpart, but that difference is not significant. RMSE severely punishes large errors, so having a comparatively lower RMSE implies that one makes fewer huge errors. However, like the average errors, the RMSE for each scout is enormous.

Indeed, when looking at the lists themselves, it is clear that both Kiper and McShay have, like all draft experts, been prone to extreme hits and misses when compared to the other. In 2006, both had future busts Matt Leinart, A.J. Hawk, Vince Young, and Michael Huff ranked in their Top 10s. But McShay was wise enough to include future All-Pro center Nick Mangold in his Top 25, while Kiper instead opted for Jason Allen. The following year, McShay found more success by ranking Darrelle Revis tenth overall, but the Island himself was nowhere to be found on Kipers Big Board. Also that year, both Kiper and McShay smartly pegged Calvin Johnson, Adrian Peterson, and Joe Thomas as three of the four top players in the draft, but both also had JaMarcus Russell and Brady Quinn in their top sevens.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry but this is unbelievably stupid. They're criticizing them for having Lenart, Hawk, and Huff in their top 10's? Well guess where they went in the draft - 10, 6, and 7 respectively.

And Jamarcus Russell went #1 overall.

What dumb analysis. :yucky:

Having said that...Kiper is pretty good but McShay is terrible.
Click to expand...
Okay I see what you are saying but would not a good analyst be able to predict busts - even if they are highly touted? This could be why Manziel is such an interesting topic this year. People are actually split on him.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Gandalf said:
Okay I see what you are saying but would not a good analyst be able to predict busts? Even if they are highly touted. This could be why Manziel is such an interesting topic this year. People are actually split on him.
Click to expand...
If they did, they'd be successful scouts and/or general managers. Kiper doesn't really predict who is/isn't going to succeed or bust but rather predicts who is/isn't going to be a top draft pick.

The whole mock draft/analyst thing has gotten out of hand anyway. The thing that Kiper brought and still brings to the NFL was the ability to get to know the players before they were part of a team. It moved fans from being a watcher of a particular team to being a watcher of the NFL as a whole.

To expect the talking heads to be accurate about what player goes where is nonsensical. You're expecting them to predict the future. If they could actually do that they wouldn't be analyzing the NFL draft.

I forget where I read it but even though Kiper isn't any better or worse than anyone else at predicting what player goes where, he's generally pretty good at predicting who is/isn't going to be a 1st rounder.

 
Merril Hoge just said that he'd take Michael Sam in the fifth or sixth round before Jadeveon Clowney in the first.

So there ya go on him.

 
Andy Dufresne said:
Gandalf said:
Okay I see what you are saying but would not a good analyst be able to predict busts? Even if they are highly touted. This could be why Manziel is such an interesting topic this year. People are actually split on him.
Click to expand...
If they did, they'd be successful scouts and/or general managers. Kiper doesn't really predict who is/isn't going to succeed or bust but rather predicts who is/isn't going to be a top draft pick.The whole mock draft/analyst thing has gotten out of hand anyway. The thing that Kiper brought and still brings to the NFL was the ability to get to know the players before they were part of a team. It moved fans from being a watcher of a particular team to being a watcher of the NFL as a whole.

To expect the talking heads to be accurate about what player goes where is nonsensical. You're expecting them to predict the future. If they could actually do that they wouldn't be analyzing the NFL draft.

I forget where I read it but even though Kiper isn't any better or worse than anyone else at predicting what player goes where, he's generally pretty good at predicting who is/isn't going to be a 1st rounder.
Click to expand...
Again can see what you are saying about kipper not forecasting nfl futures per say. At the same time those two things are closely correlated I would imagine. And kiper does have a top 25 board. I dunno. So you are saying kipper estimates only where people are going to be drafted without discussing how they will perform in the nfl?

 
Gandalf said:
Again can see what you are saying about kipper not forecasting nfl futures per say. At the same time those two things are closely correlated I would imagine. And kiper does have a top 25 board. I dunno. So you are saying kipper estimates only where people are going to be drafted without discussing how they will perform in the nfl?
Click to expand...
No differently than anyone else, including NFL teams. He's not generally way off on where guys end up in the draft.

 
I also like Kiper over McShay. I also feel that Bayless and Hoge are not much use to me. I really like Cosell, but I haven't seen anyone mention Waldman, Bloom or Bramel. Those are some of the ones I trust the most.

But definitely read a bunch, and trust your gut when to avoid some of the most hyped guys. Definitely some overhyped guys are a product of the echochamber.

 
A few more on NFL.com that I follow who can fall either into the "hit or miss" category:

Gil Brandt

Bucky Brooks

Charles Davis

Brian Baldinger

Mike Huguenin

Charley Casserly

Tony Pauline is reasonably plugged in and some of his rankings and viewpoints sometimes are quite a bit different than the consensus.

 
The now deceased Joel Buchsbaum was far and away the best draft pundit. He was the guy that was read by actual league executives, guys like Bellichick, Ron Wolf, Parcells, etc...

Buchsbaum was actually offered NFL jobs but turned them down because he wanted to publish his own material. His guidebooks are scary accurate. The aforementioned real GM types sought out his information. Veteran followers of the draft process know exactly what I'm talking about.

Most of the newer guys are hucksters who use the internet to drive how they rank players. Aggregately I'm largely unimpressed with their analysis, however Greg Cosell is typically very good and I do like Mayock.

I like Kiper as a person. Many years ago when he ran his own show out of his house, I listened to a spot on the radio, called the number, and talked to Mel for about 20 minutes. He was personable and thankful, and I'm happy he's flourished because he built the industry from a commercial perspective. It's great to see a good guy get paid for doing what he loves. His insights, on the other hand, are not better than average.

Mayock and Casserly are good to listen to but I wouldn't buy their material. Bloom is usually a solid read.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
On top of list of scouts are Brugler, Jeremiah and Mayock. At the bottom are Casserly, Rang, McShay, Cosell and Kiper.

 
Actually, I think this is a great topic. One that's been done before. Aside from the criticism of what we're doing here, I always think it's good to evaluate the information you're getting.

I've been a fifteen year subscriber here and this site is top notch. For NFL stuff, the recent Pro Football Focus sub I got I've found has renewed my passion for fantasy and the NFL as it took what game I have up a notch.

Sadly, I've paid less attention to the draft in recent years as I'm getting lazy.

I used to purchase the Buschbaum book every year. I liked it. Nawrocki I didn't think was as good and then that book was gone. However, the Pro Football Weekly draft mag was terrible. It was usually way off. However, the section where they would quote NFL contacts in front offices would be my first read. It came from the top of the information food chain although you never knew how much smokescreening existed in it.

Most bookstore draft mags aren't worth more than something to read in the throne room. I'm sure you guys are of the same opinion.

I bought Frank Coyle's books a few years and he put out a lot of material but I found it to be largely disorganized.

Some of the podcasts I've seen recently with Fred Savage, formerly of the Ravens and Browns have been helpful. I know he got axed but the Ravens have long been known to have a top front office. He's running the Senior Bowl nowadays. You can watch some of the material at NFL.com.

I don't know much about the guy, but the Davis dude at NFL.com mocked the Panthers taking the Auburn running back at 1.28 and I nearly threw my computer up against the wall. Being a Panthers fan, sure, a better RB would be nice, but it showed a fundamental disconnect from our salary cap situation, team structure, and overall needs. Really? I can't believe he got paid by the top NFL website in existence to write that. Puke. I wanted my ten minutes back.

Casserly is obviously astute having been a GM (however bad he messed up the inaugural #1 Carr pick.)

I'd really like to see PFF do some more college work.

As far as my rookie fantasy drafts are concerned, I always try and get guys who are at least at some level rumored to be the top, elite talent at a position. In my main dynasty league, I was able to get Lacy, Michael, and Lattimore this past year (we keep 72 players league wide every year and our rookie draft includes discarded vets). I hit on Lacy obviously. But, I liked his elite quality more than Bernard's. PFF showed Lacy's run skills to be vastly superior to Bernard's although Bernard's receiving skills are among the best in the league. Assuming Lacy stays away from injury, a reason why he dropped, I feel like I made the right choice.

I'll always give a guy a chance in my evaluation if he's worked in a NFL front office. I'd rather listen to them than a talking media head any day.

I probably haven't added much to this thread as I've fallen off my early FF pace. However, I'd add that this thread can be very valuable if you guys give it a chance. Top info rules.

Oh, I also will add that I really love Hardstad and Hammond when it comes to dynasty and I wish they'd have a blog. The 400 page dynasty thread is nice but hard to follow and the dynasty coverage here is good but I'd like more.

Kudos to you Hardstad and Hammond!

 
Best/worst is tough, identifying blind spots is beneficial though. Ie love the guys on Walter football during the season with their game recaps but they get the mute button cone January as they become parrots.

 
Gandalf said:
massraider said:
This will be spectacular. By the end of the thread, all the analysts will suck, and as proof, people will mention one of their misses. If you aren't 100%, then you must suck!
Click to expand...
Actually I think this is important. It would be great to have someone (or all of us) try to start a compilation of certain analysts picks and misses. I mean what is a good percentage of hits? 60%? 70%? 80%? Wouldn't it be nice to have data on these guys. I mean even over the past couple of years.
Click to expand...
The bigger question is how you determine their hits and misses. What criteria?

How do you treat a pick on Trent Richardson? Hakeem Nicks?

 
Ack88 said:
The now deceased Joel Buchsbaum was far and away the best draft pundit. He was the guy that was read by actual league executives, guys like Bellichick, Ron Wolf, Parcells, etc...

Buchsbaum was actually offered NFL jobs but turned them down because he wanted to publish his own material. His guidebooks are scary accurate. The aforementioned real GM types sought out his information. Veteran followers of the draft process know exactly what I'm talking about.

Most of the newer guys are hucksters who use the internet to drive how they rank players. Aggregately I'm largely unimpressed with their analysis, however Greg Cosell is typically very good and I do like Mayock.

I like Kiper as a person. Many years ago when he ran his own show out of his house, I listened to a spot on the radio, called the number, and talked to Mel for about 20 minutes. He was personable and thankful, and I'm happy he's flourished because he built the industry from a commercial perspective. It's great to see a good guy get paid for doing what he loves. His insights, on the other hand, are not better than average.

Mayock and Casserly are good to listen to but I wouldn't buy their material. Bloom is usually a solid read.
Click to expand...
I own about 15 yrs worth of Buschbaum's draft guides. Up to this moment his work was the only I've ever paid for. I spent a couple NFL drafts sitting in the press section with Tony Pauline and Adam Caplan when they were somewhat of a team getting started, both good guys. My problem with grading analysts is that so much of a prospect's ranking and eventual production has to do with what's between the ears, how his background and upbringing affects him, what motivates him, etc. Anyone can learn to see physical/athletic traits that can qualify a player to compete on the NFL level. But who has that kind of pertinent background insight besides NFL execs that are paid to look into those things? While they may leak some details, most info of that nature is kept private for their own profit. Analysts are essentially no different than the above average FBG, they just spend more time looking at film. I'll listen to comments from Mayock and that's about it, then make my own judgement on a player.

 
Faust said:
I appreciate the analysis from Greg Cosell. Daniel Jeremiah is another one that I like.

I agree with massraider that no analyst will ever be 100% correct in their calls, and it is easy to pick apart their misses.
Click to expand...
They came immediately to mind for me, along with Mayock, I respect his knowledge of positional skill sets, schemes, etc. Maybe Gil Brandt for his general historical perspective, and former GM Pat Kirwan can be insightful, I find both kind of hit and miss at times.

Don't know if he has a podcast, but I really appreciate Frank Coyle's scouting guides, have gotten them for years.

* Forgot about Casserly, knows his stuff. Bucky Brooks can be pretty good, but also hit and miss for me.

Not to be a homer, but look forward to Bloom's top 100, though I think by his own admission he devalues defense so I try to account for that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
az_prof said:
Personally, I like EBF and Bloom. Prove to me that the talking heads are any better than our two guys.
Click to expand...
Xue, Brewtown and tdmills also have provided some pretty good insight.

This board is great for intelligent prospect talk. Some of these threads go back several years. I spent an entire week catching up on prospect analysis and discussion here in the Shark Pool.

Good Stuff!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Biabreakable said:
Raiderfan32904 said:
Warpig said:
Merrill Hoge is going to the top of the "worst" list with his latest nonsensical vomit that he would rather have Sams over Clowney! I think he's just stirring the pot and can't be taken seriously.
Click to expand...
no way Hoge tops the worst list. that is reserved for skip baseless.
Click to expand...
:lol: Hoge has had way too many concussions what is Baseless excuse?
Click to expand...
I think Skip is mainly schtick. It wouldn't surprise me if him and the other loudmouth on his show flip a a coin as to which side they take on some subjects.

Hoge actually seems to believe what comes out of his mouth.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I was all excited to start reading Buschbaum only to find out he died! I guess PFW is putting out a 2014 guide with Nolan Nawrocki. Anyone know if he is a Buschbaum protégé?

 
Sigmund Bloom said:
So many good evaluators out there, and as you get more familiar with their work, you start to see which positions they are best at projecting and which might be their weaknesses.

I have made a list of my favorite draftniks on twitter

In particular I want to call attention to a few not mentioned yet in this thread:

- Josh Norris (Rotoworld)

- Eric Stoner (Draft Mecca)

- Andrew Parsons (Draft Mecca)

- Josh Liskiewitz (GM Jr)
Click to expand...
I have been a fan of Stoners work for quite awhile. I also like Josh Norris's work quite a bit as well as yourself. I am not familiar with Liskiewitz at all, thanks for the suggestion.

I mostly follow the CBS guys Brugler and Rang, but most of the people mentioned in the thread have some connections and insight into what NFL teams are talking about. So that is useful information. Of course there is some smoke screen disinformation included with that as well.

As far as the criticisms of Kiper, Mayock, McShay. I think it is important to recognize that they are trying to predict what the NFL teams will do moreso than what they think NFL teams should do. So draftniks who are focused more on who are the best players (talent) irregardless of what NFL teams might do is more useful for dynasty evaluation than I think the NFL talking heads are.

 
JamesTheScot said:
Gandalf said:
massraider said:
This will be spectacular. By the end of the thread, all the analysts will suck, and as proof, people will mention one of their misses. If you aren't 100%, then you must suck!
Click to expand...
Actually I think this is important. It would be great to have someone (or all of us) try to start a compilation of certain analysts picks and misses. I mean what is a good percentage of hits? 60%? 70%? 80%? Wouldn't it be nice to have data on these guys. I mean even over the past couple of years.
Click to expand...
The bigger question is how you determine their hits and misses. What criteria?

How do you treat a pick on Trent Richardson? Hakeem Nicks?
Click to expand...
True. I pretty much would give people a free pass in TRich. However on the flip side, I would give mad props to anyone who said, you know, I am not drafting this guy.

 
Sigmund Bloom said:
So many good evaluators out there, and as you get more familiar with their work, you start to see which positions they are best at projecting and which might be their weaknesses.

I have made a list of my favorite draftniks on twitter

In particular I want to call attention to a few not mentioned yet in this thread:

- Josh Norris (Rotoworld)

- Eric Stoner (Draft Mecca)

- Andrew Parsons (Draft Mecca)

- Josh Liskiewitz (GM Jr)
Click to expand...
These guys at Draft Mecca have not even ranked their RBs yet?? What are they waiting for? Everybody else's opinion??

Experts would have them ranked!!

http://www.draftmecca.com/players.php?position=rb

 
OrangeJulius said:
Sigmund Bloom said:
So many good evaluators out there, and as you get more familiar with their work, you start to see which positions they are best at projecting and which might be their weaknesses.

I have made a list of my favorite draftniks on twitter

In particular I want to call attention to a few not mentioned yet in this thread:

- Josh Norris (Rotoworld)

- Eric Stoner (Draft Mecca)

- Andrew Parsons (Draft Mecca)

- Josh Liskiewitz (GM Jr)
Click to expand...
These guys at Draft Mecca have not even ranked their RBs yet?? What are they waiting for? Everybody else's opinion??Experts would have them ranked!!

http://www.draftmecca.com/players.php?position=rb
Click to expand...
would you rather they put out rankings they are not prepared to post? Unfamiliar with Liskiewitz, but the other three are solid. Norris rankings are often puzzling though, great evaluator, but translating to paper seems off for him.
 
Gandalf said:
JamesTheScot said:
Gandalf said:
massraider said:
This will be spectacular. By the end of the thread, all the analysts will suck, and as proof, people will mention one of their misses. If you aren't 100%, then you must suck!
Click to expand...
Actually I think this is important. It would be great to have someone (or all of us) try to start a compilation of certain analysts picks and misses. I mean what is a good percentage of hits? 60%? 70%? 80%? Wouldn't it be nice to have data on these guys. I mean even over the past couple of years.
Click to expand...
The bigger question is how you determine their hits and misses. What criteria?

How do you treat a pick on Trent Richardson? Hakeem Nicks?
Click to expand...
True. I pretty much would give people a free pass in TRich. However on the flip side, I would give mad props to anyone who said, you know, I am not drafting this guy.
Click to expand...
I would not give mad props as No One who is consistently good at ranking players and prognosticating could have/should have predicted a Trent bust. Trent was a lock 1.1 and lock to succeed.

I guess there are no locks, huh....

He could still be a feature NFL back in Indy. I would bet on his success.

I wouldn't want to start believing off-the-wall draft opinions. Stick with playing the odds and betting on talent.

Talent usually prevails....

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hot Sauce Guy
“System QB” and “Game Manager” - are these really negative traits?
Replies
32
Views
757
IHEARTFF
I
Joe Bryant
An Apology - Building And Creating A Better Shark Pool
3 4 5
Replies
200
Views
5K
Dan Lambskin
Dan Lambskin
Scoresman
  • Poll Poll
Shark Pool Player Rankings Contest - Interest Check
Replies
48
Views
818
Scoresman
Scoresman

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top