Redskins Sign Grossman

[Audi]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

Okay that's fine, but you can't compare it to Leinart then. Leinart was drafted in 2006, not 2009.

You're not making any sense.

Bill Polian said in 2009 that there are rarely any surprises in the first round of the NFL draft to those in the actual drafting process.

You're saying in any draft before 2009, specifically three years prior, there were plenty of surprises?

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by Audi

You're not making any sense.

Bill Polian said in 2009 that there are rarely any surprises in the first round of the NFL draft to those in the actual drafting process.

You're saying in any draft before 2009, specifically three years prior, there were plenty of surprises?

Your tie to Leinart made it seem like you were well.. tying it to him.

Are there surprises? Sure.. some 1st round players turn out to be huge busts

hell anyone can say are you surprised a number 4 ended up being a great player? why would you argue that? he was picked top 5

there are plenty of surprises in the 1st and plenty of teams that would've jumped on the bust had the original team not

[Audi]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

Your tie to Leinart made it seem like you were well.. tying it to him.

Are there surprises? Sure.. some 1st round players turn out to be huge busts

hell anyone can say are you surprised a number 4 ended up being a great player? why would you argue that? he was picked top 5

there are plenty of surprises in the 1st and plenty of teams that would've jumped on the bust had the original team not

As I already explained before, what Bill Polian is talking about is not how the player pans out as a success or failure in the NFL.

He's referring to the order the players are drafted in the NFL. Therefore, there is little to no reason to believe that Matt Leinart "fell" from the Top 4.

We're not talking about who busts and who doesn't. We're talking about why the Jets took Ferguson instead of Leinart. And the reason is because Leinart ranked that much lower.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by Audi

As I already explained before, what Bill Polian is talking about is not how the player pans out as a success or failure in the NFL.

He's referring to the order the players are drafted in the NFL. Therefore, there is little to no reason to believe that Matt Leinart "fell" from the Top 4.

We're not talking about who busts and who doesn't. We're talking about why the Jets took Ferguson instead of Leinart. And the reason is because Leinart ranked that much lower.

Yeah, because Casserly defied expectations and chose Mario Williams, then the Saints chose Bush, who was hyped up like no other, the Titans wanted Young, Jets took Ferguson even though their QB situation was hardly optimal(Pennington, Ramsey, Clemens) as well, Green Bay and San Fran already had a "QB of the future", Davis probably didn't care for Leinart, Millen wanted to stick with Kitna, the Bills "passed over" and the allowed the Cards to grab Leinart.

[Audi]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

Yeah, because Casserly defied expectations and chose Mario Williams, then the Saints chose Bush, who was hyped up like no other, the Titans wanted Young, Jets took Ferguson even though their QB situation was hardly optimal(Pennington, Ramsey, Clemens) as well, Green Bay and San Fran already had a "QB of the future", Davis probably didn't care for Leinart, Millen wanted to stick with Kitna, the Bills "passed over" and the allowed the Cards to grab Leinart.

Exactly. You may think that draft was a "surprise" but that's because you were probably following some mock draft on an Internet site.

"Polian recently said two things are true:

• For those who actually do the drafting, the first-round is rarely a mystery.

• It usually doesn't play out as those doing the mocking predict."

"He said the reason for that is the teams have access to data that those performing mock drafts don't often possess. For that reason, he said, some players fall down the draft board. A players' declining stock may be a draft-day surprise, but Polian said it's often because of a factor about which league personnel officials already knew."

“You have to really work hard to ignore the data. There are very few exceptions anymore. Hardly ever. They almost go off in many ways almost exactly how you have them rated.”

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by Audi

Exactly. You may think that draft was a "surprise" but that's because you were probably following some mock draft on an Internet site.

"Polian recently said two things are true:

• For those who actually do the drafting, the first-round is rarely a mystery.

• It usually doesn't play out as those doing the mocking predict."

"He said the reason for that is the teams have access to data that those performing mock drafts don't often possess. For that reason, he said, some players fall down the draft board. A players' declining stock may be a draft-day surprise, but Polian said it's often because of a factor about which league personnel officials already knew."

“You have to really work hard to ignore the data. There are very few exceptions anymore. Hardly ever. They almost go off in many ways almost exactly how you have them rated.”

I think it'd be common sense to say that those doing the drafting will be closer than the analysts. The ones doing the drafting have a better idea of the team's future, additional moves, etc that they have planned. Goes without saying imo

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by Audi

Exactly. You may think that draft was a "surprise" but that's because you were probably following some mock draft on an Internet site.

"Polian recently said two things are true:

• For those who actually do the drafting, the first-round is rarely a mystery.

• It usually doesn't play out as those doing the mocking predict."

Yes, your hyping up of GMs as omniscient gods with perfect foresight is something else. The mocks may not get freaking order right, but generally right about the general vincinity of where the players are taken.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Rams take EITHER Bradford or Suh this year. Polian isn't surprised because he probably accounted most of the ways the picks could have gone, NOT because he has some godly ESP.
The Jets could have taken Leinart, and no one would be that surprised either because he was one of those top prospects. If Leinart fell to 8, that wouldn't have been surprising either, because the Lions bombed with Harrington and may have wanted a fresh start. I'll bet he played out all of those potential scenarios and wouldn't have been the least bit surprised if ANY of them happened.

[Audi]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

Yes, your hyping up of GMs as omniscient gods with perfect foresight is something else. The mocks may not get freaking order right, but generally right about the general vincinity of where the players are taken.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Rams take EITHER Bradford or Suh this year. Polian isn't surprised because he probably accounted most of the ways the picks could have gone, NOT because he has some godly ESP.
The Jets could have taken Leinart, and no one would be that surprised either because he was one of those top prospects. If Leinart fell to 8, that wouldn't have been surprising either, because the Lions bombed with Harrington and may have wanted a fresh start. I'll bet he played out all of those potential scenarios and wouldn't have been the least bit surprised if ANY of them happened.

You're right. You and the mock drafts know better. All GMs should be required to use Mel Kiper's Big Board as a reference from now on.