Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: How about #20 plus a 5th rnd pick for #4?
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
nephillymike
Something I always suspected, this guy's analysis shows the high inflation of top picks in the trade chart used by NFL teams when you use Games Started as a guide.

To get from #20 to #4 based on GS, we would have to simply give up our 5th round pick. Personally, I would put some added emphasis on games started in PB years, but even with that, it would be a much friendlier move up the draft board.

WARNING. NOT FOR THOSE ALLERGIC TO STATISTICS

http://myslu.stlawu.edu/~msch/sports/Schuc...S_NFL_Draft.pdf
BirdsWinBaby
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Feb 16 2015, 11:37 PM) *
Something I always suspected, this guy's analysis shows the high inflation of top picks in the trade chart used by NFL teams when you use Games Started as a guide.

To get from #20 to #4 based on GS, we would have to simply give up our 5th round pick. Personally, I would put some added emphasis on games started in PB years, but even with that, it would be a much friendlier move up the draft board.

WARNING. NOT FOR THOSE ALLERGIC TO STATISTICS

http://myslu.stlawu.edu/~msch/sports/Schuc...S_NFL_Draft.pdf


you didnt mention Foles but is that who you are referring to? (Foles/5th/#20 = #4) its a fun exercise and completely ridiculous. however it gives me a chance to rant about GS which has been eating at me for years

personally i have always had a problem with some people valuing players because they are 'starters'

this or that draft was AWESOME because it produced 7 'starters'...yadda yadda yadda

i used to hear it a lot when AR was coach...mostly from Eskin. just because a guy like LiToast or Bradley Fletcher or Riley Cooper or Freddie Mitchell 'starts' for your team it doesnt always mean the player is good....in many cases it simply indicates that your FO sucks at picking players

i guess the idea is that even if in an emergency you bring a guy in to start a game or two but it evens out because if he sucks he wont start for long

unless your FO REALLY blows at picking players so everybody sucks or (as often happens) the coach or GM has a vested interest in seeing their highly picked bust eventually pan out so they insist on starting the guy game after game

GS is dependent upon far too many factors to make it a meaningful stat. the pro bowl is often just as much a joke but thats a different rant
JeeQ
I could be wrong since I can't see into the mind of every NFL scout... but the only one who seems to be completely sold on Mariota is Chip Kelly

Google the word "Mariota" and the first ten articles are: Eagles, Eagles, Eagles, Eagles, Eagles....
nephillymike
QUOTE (BirdsWinBaby @ Feb 17 2015, 10:48 AM) *
you didnt mention Foles but is that who you are referring to? (Foles/5th/#20 = #4) its a fun exercise and completely ridiculous. however it gives me a chance to rant about GS which has been eating at me for years

personally i have always had a problem with some people valuing players because they are 'starters'

this or that draft was AWESOME because it produced 7 'starters'...yadda yadda yadda

i used to hear it a lot when AR was coach...mostly from Eskin. just because a guy like LiToast or Bradley Fletcher or Riley Cooper or Freddie Mitchell 'starts' for your team it doesnt always mean the player is good....in many cases it simply indicates that your FO sucks at picking players

i guess the idea is that even if in an emergency you bring a guy in to start a game or two but it evens out because if he sucks he wont start for long

unless your FO REALLY blows at picking players so everybody sucks or (as often happens) the coach or GM has a vested interest in seeing their highly picked bust eventually pan out so they insist on starting the guy game after game

GS is dependent upon far too many factors to make it a meaningful stat. the pro bowl is often just as much a joke but thats a different rant



No need to add Foles. It's a mid 5th round pick + 20 to move up to #4. They are saying that the #4 pick gets you as many starts in his career as the #20 pick and a mid 5th rounder combined. Interesting, I think.

Like I said, I would maybe increase GS by a 50% premium for each Pro Bowl selection (based on thr voting, not all the replacements b/c of injury and SB players). Could maybe even add a further premium of another 25% for All-Pro. But even with that, I suspect that it would equate to maybe a 3rd round pick only to move up from 20 to 4.

Looked at another way, this research reveals what a crap shoot the draft is and what ridiculous premiums are paid to move up. Using this research, a team would be wise to trade down and trade down often. It would seem to be a no brainer.

I should send this research paper to the Bucs, Titans, Jets, Skins and Rams!!
HOUSEoPAIN
Latest media speculation involves the Jets trading the #6 pick in exchange for Foles, and our first and second round picks for 2015 and 2016. No need to repeat my opinion on the matter, but this might certainly be appealing to both Kelly and Bowles.

Of course, this plan only works for us if Mariota is still available at #6. He could be, and obviously the deal would only be made with the Jets on the clock; the troll in me chuckles at the idea of the Raiders or the Redskins drafting Mariota 4th or 5th to hold him hostage, knowing Chip will give up anything to grab him.
samaroo
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Feb 19 2015, 04:25 AM) *
Latest media speculation involves the Jets trading the #6 pick in exchange for Foles, and our first and second round picks for 2015 and 2016. No need to repeat my opinion on the matter, but this might certainly be appealing to both Kelly and Bowles.

Of course, this plan only works for us if Mariota is still available at #6. He could be, and obviously the deal would only be made with the Jets on the clock; the troll in me chuckles at the idea of the Raiders or the Redskins drafting Mariota 4th or 5th to hold him hostage, knowing Chip will give up anything to grab him.


You read that the Jets want Foles + 2015 1st + 2015 2nd + 2016 1st + 2016 2nd for their #6? That seems a little steep. Where'd you read that?

Am I wrong in that, Mikey Numbers? Is that the going rate for that trade?
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (samaroo @ Feb 18 2015, 06:32 PM) *
You read that the Jets want Foles + 2015 1st + 2015 2nd + 2016 1st + 2016 2nd for their #6? That seems a little steep. Where'd you read that?


Media speculation, the NY Daily News. It's nothing official, but likely based off of some rumor or buzz here or there.
nephillymike
QUOTE (samaroo @ Feb 18 2015, 06:32 PM) *
You read that the Jets want Foles + 2015 1st + 2015 2nd + 2016 1st + 2016 2nd for their #6? That seems a little steep. Where'd you read that?

Am I wrong in that, Mikey Numbers? Is that the going rate for that trade?


I heard that too on 97.5. I thought it was the Eagles writer who mentioned it.

As far as trade value, that would be the worst trade robbery ever:

#20 = 850
#52 = 380
Subtotal = 1230
Assume our 1st and 2nd round picks in 2016 would be the same = 1230

Total given up excl. Foles = 2460
Pt. Value of #6 pick = 1600

Premium = 860 pts which is equal to the value of our 20th this year + Nick Foles.

So basically it is saying that we would be giving an extra 20th pick + our starting QB as a premium.

Way way too high.
samaroo
Okay, that's what I thought. It seemed really high.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.