Sleet
"busy" during Raider losses
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2009
- Messages
- 123,678
- Reaction score
- 93,556
I put zero value on consensus mock drafts. You’re disparaging Arif’s work. And misunderstanding it. Mocks try to fit talent to team needs.You put way too much value on the consensus mock drafts. Unfortunately we will rarely get any insight into the person the player is. That seems to be a huge thing with Pete and SpyGate.
Arif separately compiles final big boards the week of the draft—(1) forecasters like Jeremiah and McShay who build then adjust their boards based on what they here and (2) evaluators like Bugler who base their boards on what they see on tape with (or without) feedback from coaches and prospects. Arif then combines and weights those two boards using advanced math for (3) a consensus ranking and publishes all three.
Arif’s board has outpaced all but each year’s best prognostications. It is not just that individual forecasters and evaluators have good and bad years, they just aren’t that good—miss too often, for example, like Kiper on Sanders. GM/HC have proven consistently better at spotting talent, even as bad as the Raiders’ GM/HC have been.
In addition, when Arif’s board is off, history has shown that (a) reaches more than likely bust and (b) value is good but often exaggerated. It is better to stay out of the deep red than be in the green. Each pick being near or above consensus is where you want to be.
Arif’s board has proven to be a terrific tool or baseline for judging value and comparing drafts between teams. It is far better than post-draft, subjective grading based on individual opinions (draftnicks act like they were right and the GM is wrong) that are normally biased (higher grades for teams they like).
As for individual insight into players by teams and how much individual GM/HC weight them, forecasters try to and evaluators like Bugler incorporate some of that, but never as much as any GM/HC, if at all. That is where judging value and opining as to why a GM/HC passed on a prospect or reached for one based on a proven objective big board comes in.
Last edited: