Change to Nick Foles Gives Rams Average Offseason Grade/Wagoner

[RAGRam]

I hope you're feeling better this morning.

Not necessary as you laid out your parameters very well and I'll trust your math.

What I liked:
Excellent time period because it takes into account the new O-line drafting paradigm.

I like your reasoning for cutting it off at 2010 so as to take a longer/better look at their performances.

Your math. Fantastic job of computing the statistical chances of drafting two starters.

What I liked less (and this also includes some of my own OP):
6 years of data is not as big a pool as I would have liked. As you mentioned yourself.

Didn't differentiate between T, G, and C. The data in our (the ROD) last conversation differentiated between Ts (which are usually picked much earlier than Gs and Cs) and Gs and Cs which I believe were lumped together.

Didn't attempt to further refine your equation to answer this part of my original post: "and an even greater chance of being only a marginal starter." Of course this complaint is totally unfair as you didn't claim to address that and I'm not asking for much am I?

Comments:
I actually think, despite my "liked less" comments (the last two of which my OP didn't address either) that your analysis was more accurate for our discussion than my OP with regards to the possibility of having drafted two starters. While the pool of data was much smaller, your data pool only included the drafting paradigms that are relevant to today's NFL and didn't include the less relevant data of the distant past.

This comment by you, "if one player becomes a starter it clearly reduces the probability of another of the three taking up the remaining spot", would in large part have been made moot had you differentiated between the different positions. That of course would have been an extremely time consuming task as you would have actually had to look at each player's history to see at which position he actually would up starting in the majority of those 40 games and you also would have had to make a subjective call as to whether a player drafted as a T (Saffold) who wasn't able to be a reliable starter at that position (a T bust) but did become a reliable starter at another position (G) was a bust or not. While he might turn out to be a great G, you still haven't filled that hole at T. Tough call. If Pryor makes it as a WR is he still a bust even though you don't have that franchise QB you dreamed of (and drafted for)?

Actually, I don't see the "completely different conclusion" you observed. All of your probability percentages were pretty darn close to the ones in my OP. I think it's just a little more reflective of today's NFL and thus a little more accurate despite the much smaller data pool.

Havenstein - approximately 33% (yours 27%) chance of being a total bust and an even greater chance of being only a marginal starter.
Brown - approximately 40% (yours 33%) chance of being a total bust and an even greater chance of being only a marginal starter.
Donnal - approximately 50% (yours 57%)chance of being a total bust and an even greater chance of being only a marginal starter.
Wichmann - approximately 80-90% (yours 12%)chance of being a bust and an even greater chance of being only a marginal starter.

Overall though, great job Rag!!!!!

Thanks for the feedback, most of my faults are through laziness, which has been my main problem all my life .

 

[FrantikRam]

The ironic thing here is that the only thing the Rams could have done differently to change this conversation is either not drafted Gurley and went OL in the 1st, or signed a free agent or two.

At the end of the day, free agents are nearly all overpaid, and with a bevy of young talent needing re-signed soon, this outcome is the best we possibly could have hoped for. That's why I'd give our offseason an A.

It's easy to say that we should have addressed the OL years ago....if we had then there'd be other positions that are weaker than they are, and our roster as a whole might even be worse off. So what this really comes down to is whether you liked the Gurley pick or not....with our FO saying he was the top player on their draft board, I have a hard time seeing how any fan could not be happy with that pick. Could he get injured again? Sure. But he's a Ram now. The OL situation is what it is....two rookies starting does not guarantee a good or back OL....the Bears recently started two rookies and fielded a prolific offense. It can be done.

 

[Alan]

FrantikRam with some further observations:
The ironic thing here is that the only thing the Rams could have done differently to change this conversation is either not drafted Gurley and went OL in the 1st, or signed a free agent or two.

At the end of the day, free agents are nearly all overpaid, and with a bevy of young talent needing re-signed soon, this outcome is the best we possibly could have hoped for. That's why I'd give our offseason an A.

It's easy to say that we should have addressed the OL years ago....if we had then there'd be other positions that are weaker than they are, and our roster as a whole might even be worse off. So what this really comes down to is whether you liked the Gurley pick or not....with our FO saying he was the top player on their draft board, I have a hard time seeing how any fan could not be happy with that pick. Could he get injured again? Sure. But he's a Ram now. The OL situation is what it is....two rookies starting does not guarantee a good or back OL....the Bears recently started two rookies and fielded a prolific offense. It can be done.

Can't argue with any of that and your off season grade of A is reasonable if you're grading on a curve (so to speak). If we look back at this off season 5 years from now we all might give it an A...or an F but your first sentence is key to my B- grade armed only with what I know today.

While I agree with your general contention about FAs, how relieved would we all be if we used that $6M in CAP space to pick up Mathis/Iupati/Hudson/Franklin to plug in at G? If we had already done that what would your your grade be for our off season? A+? It's kind of hard to go much higher that an A isn't it? My grade would probably go from B- to the B+/A- range.

Although giving any grade based almost totally on suppositions is the height of folly. But it was fun was it not?

 

[DaveFan'51]

In the "Old Days" I would have used Wagoners Reports to line the bottom of my Bird Cage, So I could watch them be shit on day after day!! Now I just Click on "Delete!!"

 

[FrantikRam]

Can't argue with any of that and your off season grade of A is reasonable if you're grading on a curve (so to speak). If we look back at this off season 5 years from now we all might give it an A...or an F but your first sentence is key to my B- grade armed only with what I know today.

While I agree with your general contention about FAs, how relieved would we all be if we used that $6M in CAP space to pick up Mathis/Iupati/Hudson/Franklin to plug in at G? If we had already done that what would your your grade be for our off season? A+? It's kind of hard to go much higher that an A isn't it? My grade would probably go from B- to the B+/A- range.

Although giving any grade based almost totally on suppositions is the height of folly. But it was fun was it not?

It is fun and it's fun to have differing perspectives. If you don't grade on a curve, the teams with the worst draft picks and most cap space would almost always have the best offseasons.

Personally I've been so let down by the recent FA OL signings, of all ages, that I am glad we went young. Will it lose us a game or possibly several? It's possible. But it'll be fun to watch these young guys grow this year.

We all hope this is our year....hard to see that with the OL in it's current state, I'll grant you that. At this point it's all hope that the OL turns out to play well so that this offense and progress instead of regress.

 

[Alan]

DaveFan'51 giving us the sad news:
In the "Old Days" I would have used Wagoners Reports to line the bottom of my Bird Cage, So I could watch them be crap on day after day!! Now I just Click on "Delete!!"

You have my condolences on the death of your bird.

 

[Rmfnlt]

You have my condolences on the death of your bird.

Rumor has it it was suffocated by newspapers during the 2009 season.

 

[RamzFanz]

At the end of the day, free agents are nearly all overpaid, and with a bevy of young talent needing re-signed soon, this outcome is the best we possibly could have hoped for. That's why I'd give our offseason an A.

Point well made. They are already trying to resign players. They need the cash.

 

[LACHAMP46]

Look at Robinson, his rookie year was rough and he is #2 pick overall, will he develop into something good, yes very likely, but he didn't start there. Even if the guys drafted this year turn out fine they are rookies this year they are going to take time to develop and learn. Relying on them, any of them, to produce at even an average level year 1 is a low percentage shot.

Hoping that that the experienced college players hit the ground running....Much faster than G-Rob. But solid point.

The OL situation is what it is....two rookies starting does not guarantee a good or back OL....the Bears recently started two rookies and fielded a prolific offense. It can be done.

Agreed....Hope drasconis sees this.....

Personally I've been so let down by the recent FA OL signings, of all ages, that I am glad we went young.

Exactly this...Wells started decent then fizzled...Long too...It seems as if once we lost that guard...forget his name...Dahl maybe...once he started playing poorly, it all fell apart...I think the new blood was much needed.