gosaints1

Blackjack players that have any amount of success, over time, count cards, it’s a simple mechanic and your odds can easily be manipulated. Quite frequently card counters team up for even better odds. It really is a simple mechanic and even as a beginner, all you have to do is slow the dealer down. In no time you’ll be adjusting the running total in your head, as quickly as the dealer turns over cards. I don’t think there is any mechanic used in drafting that improves your odds that significantly. As far as the “crapshoot” argument goes it doesn’t surprise me that many will use that term as an excuse for poor scouting, poor coaching, poor development..., etc.

There are WAY too many variables in drafting to declare individual players inside each draft a success/failure to label the draft nothing more than “luck” or a “crapshoot”. The team drafting, that team’s active roster, team needs, player demands, injuries, environment... All of those and many many many more come into play when determining if a draft prospect is considered successful or not.

Why even have a scouting team? It’s luck, right? Why have position coaches, college players will either have it or not, right? We’ll just draft who Kiper has rated as best player available next and hope for the best. Of course those ppl are going to call it a “crapshoot”. They have guessed on some folks and failed. Like the Saints did with 2 1sts and a 5th..., then resort back to “it’s just luck, don’t blame us” as an excuse.

It’s similar to saying marriage is a “crapshoot”, right? Same thought process, we’re dealing with massive individual, and organizational (family, religion, work, etc...) dynamics. Controlling that to a 100% success rate is a fools game, not possible. You do the best you can, we all do, but ultimately the statistics show roughly a 55/45 success/fail rate, aka divorce rate, give or take, depending on who you ask. Successful draft picks are much more ambiguous wrt a very simple success/fail, binary evaluation. When it comes to evaluating draft picks I use an “on an nfl roster/not on an nfl roster” to do that evaluation without having years of history to evaluate. With years of history, it can be perspective based also. Lets take our own Drew Brees draft pick, from a San Diegan perspective his draft was one of failure, from a New Orleanian’s perspective, it’s 100% opposite. That dynamic was almost wholly influenced by injury, of course, but I don’t believe Drew Brees has a SB ring on his mantle right now without CSP and the Saints. If Tom Brady were drafted by the Saints at 168, instead of his team at 199, do you honestly think that Tom Terrific would be as successful? Not even close, imho he wouldn’t even be a household name.

If you view the draft as a crapshoot then the same can be said of veteran free agents. They don’t always work out either.

In 2020, veteran free agent failures were ubiquitous, folks like:

Mario Addison
Dante Fowler
Vic Beasely
Randall Cobb
Jimmy Graham
Austin Hooper
Teddy Bridgewater
Jadaveon Clowney

Just to name a few off the top of my head. The difference being cost and cap hits. Veteran Free Agents are expensive, and carry veteran free agent cap hits. And the change from NFL team to NFL team is equally as much an unknown as whether a college player makes the transition to the next level. The draft is not as punishing when you do miss. And everybody misses, both in drafting, and in free agency. But, I just think it’s cynical to label either a “crapshoot”.

Sorry for the novel folks, if anyone has made it this far..., lol, I’ll buy you a beer of your choice for your patience and time, should we ever cross paths.

Boston Saint

There so much illogic here it’s not even funny. Because not all guys pan out “exactly” as expected it’s a crapshoot? That’s like saying two people go out fishing. One is the father who has been an experienced fisherman all his life, the other his young son out fishing for his first time. The father gives his son a cane pole with a bobber. The father uses his normal rod and reel set-up. Now either could catch a fish in this “crapshoot”, But Would you bet on the experienced father or the untrained son eventually catching more and bigger fish that day? How about the next day? Preparation does not always guarantee success, but not preparing almost guarantees failure.

Free agency didn’t start because the draft was a crapshoot. It started because players didn’t like being under the control of one team for their entire careers and players couldn’t come to agreement with owners on what their value was worth. They used to have 12 rounds of draft and no FA and rosters were filled out fine. Fact is There is no way in hell that if the draft was a crapshoot teams would spend the millions they do on evaluation of it. At some point team A started to really study the draft and do well with it. Team B noticed and said “Hey, team A goes out and looks at these guys and they are doing well with their picks. Maybe we should try that!”. Then team C caught on etc.

The fact that Brady was a late round pick doesn’t refute this either.
Maybe NE new he was going to be that good all along but realized no one else did so they could afford to wait on him. They could have maybe never picked him and got him as an UDFA if he was a crapshoot. But apparently he was on their radar enough to have them not take that chance. Obviously because of their evaluation of him.

You think you know, but you don’t know...and you never will! Coach Jim Mora

Boston Saint

Look at it this way Guido. The NFL draft is an extension of what college programs due to go out and evaluate players. The big dogs in the power conferences, plus Norte Dame, go out and evaluate and recruit (ie “draft”) the best evaluated high schoolers they can. They hit on some, miss on others. They base their recruiting thoughts on what they see of film tapes and interviews. So, basically you are saying Alabama, Clemson, LSU, Ohio State, etc have a crapshoot to base their success on and not evaluation? I disagree.

AsylumGuido

First of all the Patriots admittedly didn't even discuss Brady until the fourth round according to Charlie Weis. He said they took a flyer on Brady with no real expectations. They got lucky.

Once again, the draft has been labeled as a crapshoot for decades. That's not something I coined. In fact, I likened it more as the game of blackjack where a knowledgeable gambler is more likely to come out better than someone less skilled. But because of the unknowns any individual pick has a chance to turn out well or be a total bust. Higher round picks usually are those players with less unknowns and logically rate out as being more successful in the long run.

Going back to your fishing example, while the experienced father with the good gear should catch more fish than the kid with the cane pole over time, he is still likely have a bad day here or there because he doesn't know beyond all doubt where the fish are and what they want to bite. The kid may luckily drop his line right in front of the nose of a hungry lunker.

Nobody labeling the draft as a crapshoot is saying that there is no skill whatsoever involved. That would be illogical. However, it is also illogical to assume that there are no unknowns factored into the drafting process. There exists a certain degree of gamble with every selection. This is the point being made by those that came up with the label of a crapshoot. I agree that craps is far less skill related than is blackjack, but both, along with the NFL draft, are in their own ways a gamble.

“The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.” — Winston Churchill

SaintGnome

There are no draft busts, and as long as a player plays on a team they are considered a success? We're not allowed to compare quality of draft picks because - organizations? The draft is easy that's why some teams have avoided the playoffs for years? Apparently a top rated draft pick can't fail even though we see them fail all the time?

Boston Saint

I guess it’s semantics then. What one means by the rules of craps or what one means by the rules of blackjack. Both have their odds on the flip of a card or the roll of a dice. But I will say again this goes along with my earlier statement of doubting that 35% of drafted players make rosters. You casually changed the focus from drafted to rookie players to support that number. But when you say it doesn’t matter how much money you throw at it are you seriously saying that the amount of investigation (money) one does on draft choice not relevant? Is there a spectrum on how informed a person is there? Could my 7 year old nephew make as good a choice as Loomis since it’s nothing more than a blackjack hand?

You think you know, but you don’t know...and you never will! Coach Jim Mora

Boston Saint

“ First of all the Patriots admittedly didn't even discuss Brady until the fourth round according to Charlie Weis. He said they took a flyer on Brady with no real expectations. They got lucky.”

No, they didn’t get lucky. Their research told them Brady was the best pick at the time. Research.

AsylumGuido

You are "all or nothing" in your perspective. I am not. Could your 7 year old nephew make as good a choice as Loomis? Only if he had as many years of experience and all the the resources available. I haven't disputed that. However, is there any chance that Loomis, or any other person involved in making the draft selections, could draft a player that turns out to be a bust? Of course there is because of the inherent unknowns that are always in play. Is it a gamble? Of course. Is the gamble along the same odds as winning blackjack? Most likely not, but a gamble nonetheless.

As for the 35% that you can't seem to drop, I admitted that the implication of that percentage was misconveyed by others and with some research of my own actually included UDFA's. Pages ago I agreed that that number was totally invalid as far as draftees are concerned.

By labeling the draft as a "crapshoot" the pundits are simply saying there is a gamble connected with every selection. They also point out is a correlation between the round of the selection and the actual eventual success of that player, but there remains the possibility that failure may be the result regardless of the round.

“The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.” — Winston Churchill

AsylumGuido

Weis was in those draft meetings. He said that they never expected the success that Brady would eventually discover. In his own words he said "we were lucky". Yes they did research. Their research told them they had nothing to lose by taking a flyer on this kid from Michigan. They've taken the same type of flyer before and since without anywhere near the same success.

Boston Saint

Fair enough. But as a poker player myself and a knowledgeable craps shooter I can say that having an idea of what you are doing makes a difference. And to me, draft research is like looking for player tells. My 7 year old nephew knows what to do when he sees pocket aces vs 7-2 off suit. But deciding what to do with suited connectors depends on your position depends on looking at other players tendencies.

Black Jack or Craps has no outside influence of how someone else bets. You either get the card or roll or you do not. Poker makes you read how other players react under pressure bets. This is exactly what the draft evaluators try to do by your black jack comparison. There is more unknown in Omaha or Hold’em than craps of blackjack. There is where the draft research on if a player has a tell or always plays A certain hand (my personal fault) comes in handy. And this is where your idea of it not mattering how much money (i.e. research, evaluation, interviews,) you throw at it falls apart. It sure as heck does.

You think you know, but you don’t know...and you never will! Coach Jim Mora