Supplemental picks

FinSaint · 05-20-2012, 01:22 PM

I thought that the math equation they use to determine the supplemental picks was top secret, and therefore, it's pretty difficult to make any educated guesses based on it.

The only thing we could do is to by what the past has shown, but even then we would be working under the premise that the above mentioned math equation doesn't change to consider annual external variables.

I've read some articles about the supplemental picks, and they all pretty much say the same thing - one can make a guess as to what the end result will be, but it'll only be a guess since we don't know the details of the math equation they use to determine whether a team deserves a supplemental pick(s) or not.

But to answer your initial question, yes I do think that the Saints have lost more relative talent than they've regained through free agency, but I have no idea if that will warrant a supplemental pick(s).

|Mitch| · 05-20-2012, 02:00 PM

Originally Posted by FinSaint

I do think that the Saints have lost more relative talent than they've regained through free agency

I don't see it; Carl Nicks being #1; Grubbs comes in at a close #2 with a mediocre compared to Drew QB; and Lofton & Hawthorne make up for losing Porter/Meachem and then some...

Oh and Bunkley; I forgot about him...

FinSaint · 05-20-2012, 04:55 PM

Originally Posted by |Mitch|

I don't see it; Carl Nicks being #1; Grubbs comes in at a close #2 with a mediocre compared to Drew QB; and Lofton & Hawthorne make up for losing Porter/Meachem and then some...

Oh and Bunkley; I forgot about him...

True, but I once again refer to the fact that we don't know for sure how the math equation - they use to determine whether or not a team has lost more talent than gained through free agency and whether or not they should be compensated for it - works. So even though we might say that Nicks vs. Grubbs isn't really a big downgrade in terms of talent, the above mentioned equation might take into consideration that Nicks signed the biggest contract ever given to a guard, and because of that evaluate is as a loss of significance to the Saints.

Again I don't know, and I do like the talent the Saints have brought in as opposed to the ones who have left, but I was only speaking in relative terms when making that statement - as in what I think the equation will show.

Rugby Saint II · 05-20-2012, 03:59 PM

Originally Posted by FinSaint

I thought that the math equation they use to determine the supplemental picks was top secret, and therefore, it's pretty difficult to make any educated guesses based on it.

The only thing we could do is to by what the past has shown, but even then we would be working under the premise that the above mentioned math equation doesn't change to consider annual external variables.

I've read some articles about the supplemental picks, and they all pretty much say the same thing - one can make a guess as to what the end result will be, but it'll only be a guess since we don't know the details of the math equation they use to determine whether a team deserves a supplemental pick(s) or not.

But to answer your initial question, yes I do think that the Saints have lost more relative talent than they've regained through free agency, but I have no idea if that will warrant a supplemental pick(s).

That is way to much information for me to digest........I'll have to work on this.

05-20-2012, 02:00 PM	#2
\|Mitch\| 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Alexandria, La Posts: 11,303	Originally Posted by FinSaint I do think that the Saints have lost more relative talent than they've regained through free agency I don't see it; Carl Nicks being #1; Grubbs comes in at a close #2 with a mediocre compared to Drew QB; and Lofton & Hawthorne make up for losing Porter/Meachem and then some... Oh and Bunkley; I forgot about him... RockyMountainSaint likes this.
	Last edited by \|Mitch\|; 05-20-2012 at 02:24 PM..

05-20-2012, 04:55 PM	#3
FinSaint Site Donor 2015 Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Finland... formerly Southern Virginia Posts: 4,963	Originally Posted by \|Mitch\| I don't see it; Carl Nicks being #1; Grubbs comes in at a close #2 with a mediocre compared to Drew QB; and Lofton & Hawthorne make up for losing Porter/Meachem and then some... Oh and Bunkley; I forgot about him... True, but I once again refer to the fact that we don't know for sure how the math equation - they use to determine whether or not a team has lost more talent than gained through free agency and whether or not they should be compensated for it - works. So even though we might say that Nicks vs. Grubbs isn't really a big downgrade in terms of talent, the above mentioned equation might take into consideration that Nicks signed the biggest contract ever given to a guard, and because of that evaluate is as a loss of significance to the Saints. Again I don't know, and I do like the talent the Saints have brought in as opposed to the ones who have left, but I was only speaking in relative terms when making that statement - as in what I think the equation will show.
	"I'm not bashing people, I'm bashing their opinions because in my opinion their opinion is wrong" - Danno

05-20-2012, 03:59 PM	#4
Rugby Saint II Bounty Money $$$ Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: 5800 Airline Dr. Metairie, LA. Posts: 24,119	Originally Posted by FinSaint I thought that the math equation they use to determine the supplemental picks was top secret, and therefore, it's pretty difficult to make any educated guesses based on it. The only thing we could do is to by what the past has shown, but even then we would be working under the premise that the above mentioned math equation doesn't change to consider annual external variables. I've read some articles about the supplemental picks, and they all pretty much say the same thing - one can make a guess as to what the end result will be, but it'll only be a guess since we don't know the details of the math equation they use to determine whether a team deserves a supplemental pick(s) or not. But to answer your initial question, yes I do think that the Saints have lost more relative talent than they've regained through free agency, but I have no idea if that will warrant a supplemental pick(s). That is way to much information for me to digest........I'll have to work on this.

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/43994-supplemental-picks.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
Supplemental picks	This thread	Refback	05-19-2012 09:17 PM	6

05-20-2012, 01:22 PM	#1
FinSaint Site Donor 2015 Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Finland... formerly Southern Virginia Posts: 4,963	I thought that the math equation they use to determine the supplemental picks was top secret, and therefore, it's pretty difficult to make any educated guesses based on it. The only thing we could do is to by what the past has shown, but even then we would be working under the premise that the above mentioned math equation doesn't change to consider annual external variables. I've read some articles about the supplemental picks, and they all pretty much say the same thing - one can make a guess as to what the end result will be, but it'll only be a guess since we don't know the details of the math equation they use to determine whether a team deserves a supplemental pick(s) or not. But to answer your initial question, yes I do think that the Saints have lost more relative talent than they've regained through free agency, but I have no idea if that will warrant a supplemental pick(s).
	"I'm not bashing people, I'm bashing their opinions because in my opinion their opinion is wrong" - Danno