I hope the draft board is leaked again

[Longboysfan]

We need to mount a mission to the Star to tap into the network.

 

[lkelly]

No, teams would not enjoy it, but the fans pay for everything. It wouldn't hurt the teams other than their feeling if they received criticism. There is no strategic dis-advantage because it's a completely new set of players the following year and team needs will be different.

I disagree. I think the leaking of draft boards (unless it is done by everyone) puts those teams at a competitive disadvantage. If I'm an opposing team, I put my analytics guys on that project to figure out trends and tendencies. Will enough information they could have a field day. You can lock onto certain schools that a team favors, you can get better intel on how they prioritize positions, and you can zero in on how teams value certain traits (physical, intellectual, and character).

Not much different than one guy always showing his hand in poker even after the other guy folds.

As a fan, though, I love it when it happens. Knowing Jerry, he would probably jump at the opportunity to make a dime even if it hamstrung them in future drafts.

 

[AdamJT13]

So we got five of the top 68 players we had. Well you almost would like to hope you did in a way or you had some serious bad luck.

Based on the round-by-round breakdown of our draft board the previous times it was "leaked," the 68 players almost certainly represent the guys we had ranked in first three rounds. If that's correct, then Stephen was essentially saying that we got five guys we had ranked in the first three rounds, even though we had only three picks in those rounds.

 

[ThreeandOut]

Based on the round-by-round breakdown of our draft board the previous times it was "leaked," the 68 players almost certainly represent the guys we had ranked in first three rounds. If that's correct, then Stephen was essentially saying that we got five guys we had ranked in the first three rounds, even though we had only three picks in those rounds.

I was looking at last year's board and it looked like it went about 65 deep through 3 rounds last year. So at worst, the top 68 would get you a player with a high 4th round grade.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Could have been even shorter considering our narrow focus this year. Most of the prospects we devoted a lot of time and energy into were DBs and DLs.

This was a horrible year for OL and not very deep at QB either.

So for arguments sake, say our board were constructed like this, trying to keep round numbers just for argument's sake:

QB - 5
RB - 10
WR - 20
C - 2
OG - 5
OT - 10
DE - 20
DT - 15
OLB - 8
ILB - 5
CB - 30
S - 20

Excluding placekickers, punters and long snappers which have no shot at replacing our current players. There is your 150 and even this is stretching it a bit.

This could easily be pared down to knock out non-system fits, bad character players and those areas where we felt that drafting a player was a waste of time.

It could be trimmed down realistically to a 100 or less, all of which were in areas we knew we would address.

All in all, we picked 4 DBs, 3 DL. We should have hit on that if that is how the board stacked. The 5 of the top 68 does not necessarily mean they got an even distribution of the best players overall, they got a proportion of how they weighted their board. Just a guess of course.

McClay said on the radio the other day that they evaluate all scheme fits even if there is no need. That is why they had Dalvin Cook rated although there was no chance they would draft him.

The purpose he said was to keep historical consistency and compare apples to apples with precision from year to year.

 

[xwalker]

I disagree. I think the leaking of draft boards (unless it is done by everyone) puts those teams at a competitive disadvantage. If I'm an opposing team, I put my analytics guys on that project to figure out trends and tendencies. Will enough information they could have a field day. You can lock onto certain schools that a team favors, you can get better intel on how they prioritize positions, and you can zero in on how teams value certain traits (physical, intellectual, and character).

Not much different than one guy always showing his hand in poker even after the other guy folds.

As a fan, though, I love it when it happens. Knowing Jerry, he would probably jump at the opportunity to make a dime even if it hamstrung them in future drafts.

Other teams will get paralysis by analysis. Imagine trying to correlate all of that info for 31 teams in addition to all the info they have on players.

The Cowboys have already reduced the draft board from about 220 to 120. This done so they could better focus on players they did have on the board.

 

[Longboysfan]

Where was Anthony Brown n the mix last year????

 

[ThreeandOut]

Where was Anthony Brown n the mix last year????

They had a high 4th round grade on him, slightly ahead of Tapper as I recall.

 

[Chuck 54]

One reason you don't want your board released is the same reason you praise players you didn't draft. Sharing with the world where you rated players hurts your chances of attracting a guy who outperforms his rating when he becomes a free agent.