Polian: Best GM's bat .550

[-X-]

Polian on one standard for judging GMs. .550 percentage in the FIRST round. I assume, the percentage is much lower in the subsequent rounds. Ya gotta figure, overall, the percentage is around 25 or 30 percent.

w
v

========================================
per rambill

Bill Polian on NFL radio last night--

"The hype leading up to the draft has no relation to reality.

Simply because you don't know how the players are going to play when they get to the NFL....for many of players, it's too big for them.

I did a study of the last 25 drafts and there has been a miss factor of 50% on first rounders....meaning that player has not helped the team that drafted him. He may have gone on to another team and had a decent career, but he didn't help the team that drafted him....and by that I mean....not that he didn't play....but he didn't do anything that contributed to winning. You grade him on his pro grade....every 1st rounder ought to play "blue" in the NFL....meaning he ought to be a guy who contributes to winning on his own. Over 50% don't do this....with about 40% actually washing out out of the league and don't help anybody.

It's an inexact science....the best GM's bat .550, the worst GM''s bat .450

There in lies the difference between success and failure in the NFL

 

[joeybittick]

Polian on one standard for judging GMs. .550 percentage in the FIRST round. I assume, the percentage is much lower in the subsequent rounds. Ya gotta figure, overall, the percentage is around 25 or 30 percent.

w
v

========================================
per rambill

Bill Polian on NFL radio last night--

"The hype leading up to the draft has no relation to reality.

Simply because you don't know how the players are going to play when they get to the NFL....for many of players, it's too big for them.

I did a study of the last 25 drafts and there has been a miss factor of 50% on first rounders....meaning that player has not helped the team that drafted him. He may have gone on to another team and had a decent career, but he didn't help the team that drafted him....and by that I mean....not that he didn't play....but he didn't do anything that contributed to winning. You grade him on his pro grade....every 1st rounder ought to play "blue" in the NFL....meaning he ought to be a guy who contributes to winning on his own. Over 50% don't do this....with about 40% actually washing out out of the league and don't help anybody.

It's an inexact science....the best GM's bat .550, the worst GM''s bat .450

There in lies the difference between success and failure in the NFL

Wow, when you figure that 1 1st round pick a year per team, there is very little separating the best GM's from the worst.

I wonder how Devaney did with his first round picks? I am getting ready to walk out the door but:

2008- Chris Long: A definite hit.

2009- Jason Smith: Looking like a miss but there is still a chance he could stick if his health permits.

2010- Sam Bradford: Too early to tell but he looks more like a hit than a miss to me, as I blame McDaniels for many of the offense's problems last year.

2011- Robert Quinn: Still too early to tell but 5 sacks and 3 blocked punts as a rookie is pretty damn good. Looking like a hit but time will tell.

So, Devaney definitely hit on one (Long), likely hit on another (Quinn), probably hit on another (Bradford), and probably missed on one (Smith). Not sure what you would call that % but 3/4 would not be bad at all.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Polian on one standard for judging GMs. .550 percentage in the FIRST round. I assume, the percentage is much lower in the subsequent rounds. Ya gotta figure, overall, the percentage is around 25 or 30 percent.

w
v

========================================
per rambill

Bill Polian on NFL radio last night--

"The hype leading up to the draft has no relation to reality.

Simply because you don't know how the players are going to play when they get to the NFL....for many of players, it's too big for them.

I did a study of the last 25 drafts and there has been a miss factor of 50% on first rounders....meaning that player has not helped the team that drafted him. He may have gone on to another team and had a decent career, but he didn't help the team that drafted him....and by that I mean....not that he didn't play....but he didn't do anything that contributed to winning. You grade him on his pro grade....every 1st rounder ought to play "blue" in the NFL....meaning he ought to be a guy who contributes to winning on his own. Over 50% don't do this....with about 40% actually washing out out of the league and don't help anybody.

It's an inexact science....the best GM's bat .550, the worst GM''s bat .450

There in lies the difference between success and failure in the NFL

Wow, when you figure that 1 1st round pick a year per team, there is very little separating the best GM's from the worst.

I wonder how Devaney did with his first round picks? I am getting ready to walk out the door but:

2008- Chris Long: A definite hit.

2009- Jason Smith: Looking like a miss but there is still a chance he could stick if his health permits.

2010- Sam Bradford: Too early to tell but he looks more like a hit than a miss to me, as I blame McDaniels for many of the offense's problems last year.

2011- Robert Quinn: Still too early to tell but 5 sacks and 3 blocked punts as a rookie is pretty damn good. Looking like a hit but time will tell.

So, Devaney definitely hit on one (Long), likely hit on another (Quinn), probably hit on another (Bradford), and probably missed on one (Smith). Not sure what you would call that % but 3/4 would not be bad at all.

3/4 is 75%

 

[joeybittick]

Polian on one standard for judging GMs. .550 percentage in the FIRST round. I assume, the percentage is much lower in the subsequent rounds. Ya gotta figure, overall, the percentage is around 25 or 30 percent.

w
v

========================================
per rambill

Bill Polian on NFL radio last night--

"The hype leading up to the draft has no relation to reality.

Simply because you don't know how the players are going to play when they get to the NFL....for many of players, it's too big for them.

I did a study of the last 25 drafts and there has been a miss factor of 50% on first rounders....meaning that player has not helped the team that drafted him. He may have gone on to another team and had a decent career, but he didn't help the team that drafted him....and by that I mean....not that he didn't play....but he didn't do anything that contributed to winning. You grade him on his pro grade....every 1st rounder ought to play "blue" in the NFL....meaning he ought to be a guy who contributes to winning on his own. Over 50% don't do this....with about 40% actually washing out out of the league and don't help anybody.

It's an inexact science....the best GM's bat .550, the worst GM''s bat .450

There in lies the difference between success and failure in the NFL

Wow, when you figure that 1 1st round pick a year per team, there is very little separating the best GM's from the worst.

I wonder how Devaney did with his first round picks? I am getting ready to walk out the door but:

2008- Chris Long: A definite hit.

2009- Jason Smith: Looking like a miss but there is still a chance he could stick if his health permits.

2010- Sam Bradford: Too early to tell but he looks more like a hit than a miss to me, as I blame McDaniels for many of the offense's problems last year.

2011- Robert Quinn: Still too early to tell but 5 sacks and 3 blocked punts as a rookie is pretty damn good. Looking like a hit but time will tell.

So, Devaney definitely hit on one (Long), likely hit on another (Quinn), probably hit on another (Bradford), and probably missed on one (Smith). Not sure what you would call that % but 3/4 would not be bad at all.

3/4 is 75%

:ahahah: :ahahah:

I meant that considering that it is too early to tell on 2 of the picks, it is hard to put that into a percentage of hit or miss.

 

[-X-]

:ahahah: :ahahah:

I meant that considering that it is too early to tell on 2 of the picks, it is hard to put that into a percentage of hit or miss.

Pshhh. That's easy.

 

[bluecoconuts]

So, Devaney definitely hit on one (Long), likely hit on another (Quinn), probably hit on another (Bradford), and probably missed on one (Smith). Not sure what you would call that % but 3/4 would not be bad at all.

3/4 is 75%

:ahahah: :ahahah:

I meant that considering that it is too early to tell on 2 of the picks, it is hard to put that into a percentage of hit or miss.

25-75% :ww: :sly:


But I get what you're saying, just giving you a hard time.

 

[Stranger]

So, if the best GM's are only 1/10th better than the worst GMs (meaning that on every 10 players selected the best GMs hit one-more player than the worst GMs), the draft essentially becomes a game of volume (ie how many picks you can get). Hence, if Les is in the best GM category, he'll win on 5.5 players from the 2012 draft. If you compare that to let's say the Raiders, who only had 5 picks, and argue that their new GM (Reggie McKenzie) is in the bad GM category, then the Raiders will only win on 2.25 players from the 2012 draft. That's a pretty big differences between the number of players one accumulates in a given draft year.

PS. Did I figure that correctly?

 

[Ram Quixote]

So, if the best GM's are only 1/10th better than the worst GMs (meaning that on every 10 players selected the best GMs hit one-more player than the worst GMs), the draft essentially becomes a game of volume (ie how many picks you can get). Hence, if Les is in the best GM category, he'll win on 5.5 players from the 2012 draft. If you compare that to let's say the Raiders, who only had 5 picks, and argue that their new GM (Reggie McKenzie) is in the bad GM category, then the Raiders will only win on 2.25 players from the 2012 draft. That's a pretty big differences between the number of players one accumulates in a given draft year.

PS. Did I figure that correctly?

Your numbers are correct. But that 55% is only regarding 1st round picks. So the volume game is going to take another couple of drafts to see where Snead falls/rises.

 

[steferfootball]

:ahahah: :ahahah:

I meant that considering that it is too early to tell on 2 of the picks, it is hard to put that into a percentage of hit or miss.

Pshhh. That's easy.

That is a solid formula, but incorrect application. We use that for determining whether or not free agent acquisitions will work out or not. (Turns out the trigonometric functions of the FO's calculator was broken during the Drew Bennett signing).

This is the formula you seek: