So Fellas, Do You Think Jerry Trades Both 1s For Mcfadden

[Zaxor]

Yes, knowing the numbers is of significant importance.

Let's assume 50 running backs were taken and 25 - or half - were busts. Then let's assume 26 cornerbacks were taken and 13 - or half - were bust.

Even though the percentages are the same, the higher number of running backs taken simply means that there were more running backs considered first rounders compared to the number of cornerbacks. The lower number of cornerbacks taken impacts the percentage in their favor, whereas the number of running backs do not - even though the percentages are the same.

Or more simply put: the greater number of running backs selected the higher the probability that they fail compared to the lower number of cornerbacks chosen.


Unless you have exact numbers, it's impossible to compare and make an accurate assessment.

It is my opinion that teams tend to reach for running backs because there are more running backs coming out of college considered first rounders than corners or defensive tackles. Moreover, it's easier to move into the starting lineup as a running back than a corner or DT and teams - now days - want instant production. Look at Marshawn Lynch and Adrian Peterson, for example. They're starting for their teams. What exactly is A. Branch for the Cardinals doing?

this took a long time and it is not enjoyable to do at all...but here are the numbers from 96-2000

taken in first round
QBs - 09
RBs - 16
TEs - 05
WRs - 20
OTs - 20
G/C - 07
LBs - 20
DTs - 09
DEs - 21
CBs - 24
K - 01

 

[Disturbed]

I wouldn't trade 2 picks for anyone when we still have some aging players in spots like OT(Flo is 32) DT(Ferg isn't getting any younger, I'm not sure how long Tank is here), and WR(Glenn is 33, TO is 33 and will be 34 in December)

We have one of the best younger backs in the league in Barber. I woudln't mind getting a guy in the 2nd or 3rd round that could spell him if we are getting rid of Jones. But giving up an extra pick that could help us just go get a RB doesn't seem worth it to me.

I agree, we need to replace some key aging players. I would prefer to do this by packaging later picks to move up in the draft (not move down as some have stated) to get impact guys. We don't need a bunch of guys, just a few good men... If we have a shot at McFadden, get him -- if not, then we should employ your logic of getting a 2nd round guy.

 

[BlueStar II]

I think McFadden could definitely add another dimension to our team, but I would not use our two #1 to select him though. As it stands now, I think we will use one of our #1 picks on a CB, and probably a WR with the other. Both of our starting WRs are on the wrong side of 30, and I "hope" that Newman's injury doesn't linger. I'm not sure, but I believe that Newman is approaching 30 himself, so it wouldn't hurt to target a CB early in the draft either.

 

[AsthmaField]

Not necessarily.

Think of it this way...

What if the Browns' pick ends up being around 15 and our pick around 25.


With those picks, on THIS team, we likely won't get a year 1 or year 2 starter. That player would likely be depth.

SOrt of like Bobby Carpenter. We all know people cry like babies cuz Carp isn't a starter (nevermind that we have A LOT of talent on the team and it's harder for 1st round picks to start, it's not like 5-6 years ago where our roster was so weak that it was easy for a rookie to start).


Would you rather have another "Bobby Carpenter" or would you rather trade those two Carpenters and get an elite starter?


That said, I like Carpenter and think he'll be a good LB for us for years to come. BUt he'll never be "Elite".


On THIS team, since we have A LOT of depth, I'd add a superstar starter. If it were 6 years ago and we need a lot of players, I'd take the multiple starters (cuz 6 years ago they'd have a MUCH better chance of starting).


Of course we'd probably only be able to get up to around 6th or 7th with those two picks but that might be good enough to get him.

That's my take exactly.

Get a few difference makers instead of a whole lot of depth and some contributors. Who do we want to put on the bench right now besides Julius Jones?

Not a whole lot of players that I could pick out to put on the bench for a young guy.

I do agree that we need a WR to groom. We need a RB (when Jones goes). Umm... I don't know.

We need a difference maker at RB or WR IMO. Too early to tell really.

 

[iceberg]

That's my take exactly.

Get a few difference makers instead of a whole lot of depth and some contributors. Who do we want to put on the bench right now besides Julius Jones?

Not a whole lot of players that I could pick out to put on the bench for a young guy.

I do agree that we need a WR to groom. We need a RB (when Jones goes). Umm... I don't know.

We need a difference maker at RB or WR IMO. Too early to tell really.

our LB squad was one of the more overloaded positions out there. we drafted one around what, 26? he's starting. he's not "carpenter depth".

people want to name a "player" that illustrates their point but the problem is, we can do that for all sides, ya know. in my list above some of the top players in the league (our own TO is a 3rd rounder you see) today are NOT top 5 picks or even 1st rounders.

you can argue odds and percentages all you want but nothing changes the fact you can find playmakers after the first few picks.

 

[silverblue]

you always have to take some Oline and linebackers(if you play 3-4) since between O-line and LBs, that is almost half of your roster and you have to keep that stocked. Yes, you will get lucky and draft a superstar in a lower round every once in a while, but it is much easier to stock up in the draft and then get proven stars in free agency. Just my opinion of course, but look at NE's personnel success using this strategy somewhat.

 

[dthahn]

Yes, knowing the numbers is of significant importance.

Let's assume 50 running backs were taken and 25 - or half - were busts. Then let's assume 26 cornerbacks were taken and 13 - or half - were bust.

Even though the percentages are the same, the higher number of running backs taken simply means that there were more running backs considered first rounders compared to the number of cornerbacks. The lower number of cornerbacks taken impacts the percentage in their favor, whereas the number of running backs do not - even though the percentages are the same.

Or more simply put: the greater number of running backs selected the higher the probability that they fail compared to the lower number of cornerbacks chosen.


Unless you have exact numbers, it's impossible to compare and make an accurate assessment.

It is my opinion that teams tend to reach for running backs because there are more running backs coming out of college considered first rounders than corners or defensive tackles. Moreover, it's easier to move into the starting lineup as a running back than a corner or DT and teams - now days - want instant production. Look at Marshawn Lynch and Adrian Peterson, for example. They're starting for their teams. What exactly is A. Branch for the Cardinals doing?

Boy, you need some serious help in remedial math. 50% is 50%. The total number is completely irrelevant. If you flip a coin 26 times versus 50 times, the probability of getting heads (or not a bust) stays at 50%!!!!

 

[Rack]

I think McFadden must have urinated in iceberg's wheaties at some point.

 

[InmanRoshi]

I think Glenn Dorsey has leapfrogged McFadden as the #1 pick. That's what I'm seeing on a few draft sites, and I don't disagree. He probably would have been a Top 8 pick if he came out last year, and he's been the most dominant player I've seen in college football this year.

I wish they would ease up on McFadden's workload a little bit. These 29 and 33 carry games are getting a little ridiculous. But anyone who says McFadden isn't a special back ... you were probably saying Adrian Peterson wasn't all that great. Schedule an appointment to Lenscrafters. Soon.

 

[Apollo Creed]

Funny to see guys become so adament about their feelings towards certain players, coaches, etc - and their posts are no longer objective, but agenda driven foolishness.

 

[baj1dallas]

Is McFadden worth 2 #1 picks???

McFadden is a Vince Young type player. Makes his teammates better. Unfortunately he can't make his quarterback not be a gutless ****bag.

 

[Rack]

McFadden is a Vince Young type player. Makes his teammates better. Unfortunately he can't make his quarterback not be a gutless ****bag.

 

[Rack]

I think Glenn Dorsey has leapfrogged McFadden as the #1 pick. That's what I'm seeing on a few draft sites, and I don't disagree. He probably would have been a Top 8 pick if he came out last year, and he's been the most dominant player I've seen in college football this year.

I wish they would ease up on McFadden's workload a little bit. These 29 and 33 carry games are getting a little ridiculous. But anyone who says McFadden isn't a special back ... you were probably saying Adrian Peterson wasn't all that great. Schedule an appointment to Lenscrafters. Soon.

Agreed.

My only issue with AP was his durability. The only problem I've seen from McFadden is he tends to cramp up a bit, but that'll happen when the coach gives you the ball 30+ times a game which is inexcuseable cuz they have other capable RBs.

 

[iceberg]

I think McFadden must have urinated in iceberg's wheaties at some point.

i think some people read but then comprehend what they want.

i've said time and again i'd LOVE to have mcfadden.

i just hate all the blow by blow stories that are built by people who have NO IDEA what will happen over the next few months to build up a scenario where ONLY mcfadden will do.

so - to be clear: I WOULD LOVE MCFADDEN ON THIS TEAM. clear? got it?
BUT NOT AT TWO #1 draft picks and possibly more. the price is too high when there is absolutely no guarantee he won't be a bo jackson or something.

every year there's a "can't miss" player and ever few years after that you have a lot of misses.

why people think i hate mcfadden when i've been pretty damn clear it's all the MCFADDEN OR BUST talk i think is far too premature to have people get *this* serious about it.

you know, so serious you can't read something that could be interpreted bad about him (like not worth 2 1's and more) to be I HATE MCFADDEN.

cause that's NOT what i said but the MOB will hear that.