PDA

View Full Version : Grading a Team's Mock "In General"


Jimmy
06-03-2008, 04:06 PM
just out of curiosity, when ranking teams draft's, why do the majority of people give 80+% of teams a C+ or above? Generally, you'll only see 6 or 7 grades below a B- in most expert's evaluations... However, this makes absolutely no sense to me... Why do 95% of experts say that 80% of the league had an "above average draft" or a "B" on the grading scale?

Its more then safe to say that these experts all have the same grading scale

A- Outstanding
B- Above Average
C- Average
D- Below Average
F- Fail

Should grades not be spread out evenly throughout the A-F Spectrum? Why are 80-90% of grades given in the B Range?

Paranoidmoonduck
06-03-2008, 04:35 PM
Because there are only two real measures of the success of a draft directly after it has happened: (1) Did the team get decent value with their picks based on your expectations of where players were slotted and (2) Did you yourself like the players they got. Neither of these are very reliable for deciding how good these players will actually be.

So unless some team makes some major value reaches (remember the terrible grades Buffalo got a few years back when they took Whitner and McCargo in the first round?) or the guy doing to grades hated every player a team picked up for whatever reason, most drafts don't really deserve to be rated as below average.

Primetime21
06-03-2008, 07:30 PM
Because there are only two real measures of the success of a draft directly after it has happened: (1) Did the team get decent value with their picks based on your expectations of where players were slotted and (2) Did you yourself like the players they got. Neither of these are very reliable for deciding how good these players will actually be.

So unless some team makes some major value reaches (remember the terrible grades Buffalo got a few years back when they took Whitner and McCargo in the first round?) or the guy doing to grades hated every player a team picked up for whatever reason, most drafts don't really deserve to be rated as below average.

If a team fails to meet a certain need then the team is also marked down.

umphrey
06-03-2008, 08:18 PM
All "expert" draft graders are extremely conservative in grading a draft because in most cases the GMs did more research than they did and any draft could very easily go either way, thus they don't want to give out a low grade unless they are very sure about it so they don't look stupid in retrospect.

OzTitan
06-03-2008, 08:40 PM
The only reason grades are done is because fans/readers are so eager for talking points and discussion they make it worthwhile from a viewership/traffic point of view. They serve no purpose other than to generate attention for the source, really. They don't seem logical because they're not logical at all. They're the football media world's equivalent of "top 10 articles" in lifestyle magazines.

LonghornsLegend
06-03-2008, 10:18 PM
Almost all early grades are given roughly the same grade in the general area because more times then none, if you are grading a draft before players have even played a down anybody can make a case as to why it was a good draft...Pull up some articles about how fast some guy is, and then how good this guy fits, its just easy to make every pick make sense before guys end up playing.


I think higher grades should go to teams who got highly rated players at good value, that also fit needs, it also helps when teams are aggressive for a guy they want, and use the trading back method to stockpile more picks when nobody worth value is there.

JT Jag
06-07-2008, 11:31 AM
Draft grades matter not until 3+ years after the fact.

megansett56BC
06-10-2008, 12:47 PM
Draft grades matter not until 3+ years after the fact.

True, but all the better to have a benchmark when you're looking at it down the road. You can't say a class exceeded, met, or fell below expectations if there's nothing down when it happened.

luee
06-11-2008, 09:14 AM
Draft grades matter not until 3+ years after the fact.

That has changed with FA. Your draft choices had better contribute before the three years are up or you are just training them for the next team that signs them. A team that has done well in drafting NFL ready players is the Giants. Last year 5 rookies were starters at some time and 7 of the 8 saw considerable playing time.

TitanHope
06-11-2008, 09:56 PM
Some do their ranking with whole numbers, or letters in this case. The rankings go:

A+ :Perfect
A :Amazing
A- :Great
B+ :Good
B :OK
B- :Solid, but unspectacular
C+ :Mediocre
C :Poor
C- :Bad
D+ :Lousy
D - :Awful
D- :Horrible
F :Laughable

A "B" grade is common because many teams grade out as that. You have to have an awesome draft to have an "A" on those scales, and a horrible draft to have a "C" grade. But in reality, a "B" is actually an 8 out of 13. The superlatives are just off of my head randomly. I agree with you. The simple "A, B, C, D, E" rankings are too vague, and don't leave much room for difference. Anyone who's passed Statistics and Physics know that accuracy and precision are strived for, and the close you get the better.

Oh, and as others said, it's really too early to give Draft grades. So writers try to make grades, despite not having important information on a player's pro success, and voila, the readers have ambiguous grades. Thankfully, Scott writes up an article to support his reasonings for the certain grades, so the reader is able to decide on his own if one team's B+ draft is superior to another's who has the same ranking.

Scott Wright
06-13-2008, 01:08 AM
I always get a lot of e-mails asking why I hand out so many grades in the "B" range and the answer is simple: There is usually a lot to like about most drafts.

For me it's not that I'm trying to hedge my bets by handing out a middle of the road grade, it's just very rare for a team to make 7-10 bad picks.

Even in the case of Tennessee, who got my lowest grade this year, there was still a positive or two (Jason Jones, Lavelle Hawkins) and in most instances there are at least five positives compared to maybe one or two moves that I am critical of.

djp
06-13-2008, 01:41 AM
I agree with Scott for the most part. These NFL GMs know what they are doing and are generally very good at their jobs.

It is extremely difficult to have a terrible draft.

OzTitan
06-13-2008, 01:58 AM
Not really, terrible drafts happen with some regularity. It's just extremely difficult to say a class is terrible right after it was formed because almost every class has some sort of potential positive, or positives. The vast majority of players reaching this level will have upside and therefore every class has some upside at this point in time, how much is based on personal opinion. Ultimately though a class could end up fulfilling little or none of that upside, it's just there is no real way to predict that without seemingly excessively negative. If a team picked 7 players Scott thought were trash, then maybe he pulls out the F's, but as he said, even his worst rated class in the Titans had two players he quite liked, and really, if a class produces two top end players, it's a pretty successful class so it's hard to be too harsh before the fact.

Scott Wright
06-13-2008, 02:22 AM
Not really, terrible drafts happen with some regularity. It's just extremely difficult to say a class is terrible right after it was formed because almost every class has some sort of potential positive, or positives. The vast majority of players reaching this level will have upside and therefore every class has some upside at this point in time, how much is based on personal opinion. Ultimately though a class could end up fulfilling little or none of that upside, it's just there is no real way to predict that without seemingly excessively negative. If a team picked 7 players Scott thought were trash, then maybe he pulls out the F's, but as he said, even his worst rated class in the Titans had two players he quite liked, and really, if a class produces two top end players, it's a pretty successful class so it's hard to be too harsh before the fact.

Oh, no question. If I were to come back and re-grade this draft a few years from now there would undoubtedly be a lot more "D's" and "F's", but when trying to judge a draft before the guys have even played a down (which I think we all agree is probably unfair) there are always going to be a fair share of potential bright spots.

xooberon
06-13-2008, 03:14 AM
scott have you ever considered re-grading past drafts? could be some interesting content for the site during the offseason maybe.

Scott Wright
06-13-2008, 05:30 AM
scott have you ever considered re-grading past drafts? could be some interesting content for the site during the offseason maybe.

I have thought about it and that's something I might incorporate next year in the second part of the offseason, after I finish up the current reviews.

For the rest of this summer I will be working on some exciting stuff for the site so my time is basically booked.

Addict
06-13-2008, 07:32 AM
I have thought about it and that's something I might incorporate next year in the second part of the offseason, after I finish up the current reviews.

For the rest of this summer I will be working on some exciting stuff for the site so my time is basically booked.

wow more goodness! Awesome.

xooberon
06-13-2008, 12:51 PM
I have thought about it and that's something I might incorporate next year in the second part of the offseason, after I finish up the current reviews.

For the rest of this summer I will be working on some exciting stuff for the site so my time is basically booked.


awesome!!!