The Wulf Den: Defining the Process

[Wulfman]

My view on Arkin is that the three-year rule applies. The team kept him on the active roster last year even though he was never activated on game day. I think that means they saw progress. But, this training camp will probably be his make-or-break time. If he isn't ready to seriously challenge for a starting job, he is probably history.

My thoughts exactly, Cooter.

 

[big dog cowboy]

The Wulf Den: Defining the Process​

Your best work since "Draft Reflections" Wulf. Really love your stuff.

 

[burmafrd]

Go fill out an application already.

go find some knowledge

 

[Primetime42]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Primetime42

Go fill out an application already.

go find some knowledge

Got plenty, but always looking for more from people who know what they're talking about.

Do you know of any?

 

[xwalker]

NO you have low standards. I expect that someone from such a small school gets a 4th rd pick- you seem to think that is acceptable to be a back up.

I expect a 4th rd pick to push to be a starter in 2 years. THREE at the absolute most.

If you cannot pick up enough strength under the GOD WOICIK in two years to challenge for playing time then you most likely never will.

And I would never expect a 4th rd pick to top out as a backup unless the guy he is backing up is a pro bowl or that level player. And when you look at what we have had at guard and this is a guy who HAS NEVER BEEN ACTIVATED. Think on that

Not sure why you think 4th rd picks for a guard from a small school is a throw away pick. Now if he was from say Oklahoma or such I would expect more sooner. But to get a 4th rd pick playing against such sad competition he must have flashed starter talent or he NEVER should have been picked

A 4th round pick is a 4th round pick. Small school is not the issue. Players in the 4th round have some issue that kept them from being a 1st, 2nd or 3rd round picks. It could be small school, but it could also be talent, character, non-ideal measureables, injury history, etc..

There is some data that I've seen in the past on the success rate of players in different rounds of the draft. I don't remember the exact numbers, but the success rate for a 4th round pick was well below 50%.

You can't judge a team by the success or failure of a single 4th round pick. You have to look at their success rate relative to the rest of the league over some period of time. If the league average is 20% success for 4th rounders, then you are in the money if you hit on 3 in 10 years.

Bust is a subjective term. Good teams don't focus on individual missed picks in the the later rounds. They focus on the big picture of talent acquisition. Jimmy cut two 3rd round picks and probably never gave it a second thought after the fact.

 

[rash]

Oh my goodness...what a great post!

Is this Hos in disguise?


Welcome back Hos!!!!

 

[Wulfman]

Oh my goodness...what a great post!

Is this Hos in disguise?


Welcome back Hos!!!!

Definitely not Hos, but I take that as a compliment!

 

[burmafrd]

A 4th round pick is a 4th round pick. Small school is not the issue. Players in the 4th round have some issue that kept them from being a 1st, 2nd or 3rd round picks. It could be small school, but it could also be talent, character, non-ideal measureables, injury history, etc..

There is some data that I've seen in the past on the success rate of players in different rounds of the draft. I don't remember the exact numbers, but the success rate for a 4th round pick was well below 50%.

You can't judge a team by the success or failure of a single 4th round pick. You have to look at their success rate relative to the rest of the league over some period of time. If the league average is 20% success for 4th rounders, then you are in the money if you hit on 3 in 10 years.

Bust is a subjective term. Good teams don't focus on individual missed picks in the the later rounds. They focus on the big picture of talent acquisition. Jimmy cut two 3rd round picks and probably never gave it a second thought after the fact.

You seem to not get it; a small school player is ALWAYS a bigger risk then one from a major conference that has faced top talent across from him. So to use a 4th on that is much more important than you are willing to admit

 

[Primetime42]

Quote:

Originally Posted by xwalker

A 4th round pick is a 4th round pick. Small school is not the issue. Players in the 4th round have some issue that kept them from being a 1st, 2nd or 3rd round picks. It could be small school, but it could also be talent, character, non-ideal measureables, injury history, etc..

There is some data that I've seen in the past on the success rate of players in different rounds of the draft. I don't remember the exact numbers, but the success rate for a 4th round pick was well below 50%.

You can't judge a team by the success or failure of a single 4th round pick. You have to look at their success rate relative to the rest of the league over some period of time. If the league average is 20% success for 4th rounders, then you are in the money if you hit on 3 in 10 years.

[View Full Quote] Bust is a subjective term. Good teams don't focus on individual missed picks in the the later rounds. They focus on the big picture of talent acquisition. Jimmy cut two 3rd round picks and probably never gave it a second thought after the fact.

You seem to not get it; a small school player is ALWAYS a bigger risk then one from a major conference that has faced top talent across from him. So to use a 4th on that is much more important than you are willing to admit

If all we're basing them on is the level of competition, then sure. Bit there's many other factors to consider which have been discussed ad nauseum on this board regarding Arkin. They felt the risk was worth it. You win some, you lose some. That's how the draft works.

 

[Mr_Bill]

A 4th round pick is a 4th round pick. Small school is not the issue. Players in the 4th round have some issue that kept them from being a 1st, 2nd or 3rd round picks. It could be small school, but it could also be talent, character, non-ideal measureables, injury history, etc..

There is some data that I've seen in the past on the success rate of players in different rounds of the draft. I don't remember the exact numbers, but the success rate for a 4th round pick was well below 50%.

You can't judge a team by the success or failure of a single 4th round pick. You have to look at their success rate relative to the rest of the league over some period of time. If the league average is 20% success for 4th rounders, then you are in the money if you hit on 3 in 10 years.

Bust is a subjective term. Good teams don't focus on individual missed picks in the the later rounds. They focus on the big picture of talent acquisition. Jimmy cut two 3rd round picks and probably never gave it a second thought after the fact.

It is not uncommon that fans have unrealistic expectations about the success of draft picks.

I did some research on the 4th round of the 2011 draft. I took each player selected in that round and obtained his games started from http://www.pro-football-reference.com/. I then defined a starter as a player who has started at least 8 games in a season. With that standard, I found that only 8 of those 34 players had been a starter in either 2011 or 2012. That is less than one in four. The total games started by all 34 players in 2012 was 115 games. That average to less than 3.4 games per player. I further noticed that most of the games started came from the first seven players in that round -- Arkin was 13th. Those seven players accounted for 64 starts in 2012. That means that the remaining 27 players started only 51 games last season -- less than two games per draft pick.

None of this actually addresses the quality of any of those players. However, PRO-FOOTBALL-REFERENCE does provide what they call an Approximate Value (AV) for each player for each season. [I do not know how they derive this value, or whether it is valid or not, but, at least it is a reference for comparison.] Very good players receive double-digit values. All-time-great players sometimes are awarded scores in the 20s. For comparison, our offensive-line starters received the following AVs for 2012: Smith - 7; Livings - 7; Cook - 6; Bernadeau - 6; Free - 8. Arkin was at 0 for both of his seasons. There were only 4 players out of the 34 who scored 5 or above for 2012: K.J. Wright (2-SEA) - 9; Clint Boling (4-CIN) - 7; Sam Acho (6-ARI) - 9; Cecil Shorts (17-JAX) - 7. I should point out that 3 players scored 5 or better in 2011, but did not in 2012, perhaps because of injury. Still, that is not a high record of accomplishment for that round.

Of course, none of this (or anything else) indicates that Arkin was even an acceptable draft pick ... to this point.

 

[junk]

I don't think McSurdy's skill set fits a 3-4 defense, unless he is playing defensive end.

I meant 4-3.

Where do people come up with this stuff?

McSurdy was a 4-3 MLB in college. I don't think he has any role as a 4-3 end.

His issue isn't his position. It is that he had marginal speed to begin with and is coming off a torn Achilles.

 

[junk]

I'm not the biggest Jerry or Garrett defender, but I have seen for myself that this team's draft success has a great deal to do with the involvement - or lack thereof - of the head coach.

Some of the best have come under Johnson, Parcells, and Garrett while the worst came under Switzer, Campo, and Phillips.

Which is completely understandable when you look at the Cowboys front office structure. There isn't a GM in place that knows anything about putting together a football team. You are forced to rely on the coach.

 

[jobberone]

Which is completely understandable when you look at the Cowboys front office structure. There isn't a GM in place that knows anything about putting together a football team. You are forced to rely on the coach.

Are you really going to go from thread to thread singing this same ole song?

 

[Verdict]

You're a tough man to please if you expect day three draft picks from small schools to be starting in less than three years. Either that or unreasonable.

I think expecting him to start right off the bat might be unreasonable expectations but expecting him to be able to at least contribute meaningful snaps with the injury problems we had last year should be expected based on his draft position.

 

[Verdict]

Where do people come up with this stuff?

McSurdy was a 4-3 MLB in college. I don't think he has any role as a 4-3 end.

His issue isn't his position. It is that he had marginal speed to begin with and is coming off a torn Achilles.

I was saying I don't think he has the speed to play linebacker in the 4-3. If that is the case, then the only other place he could make the roster is at defensive end. I have already said I don't think he will make the roster at any position.

 

[Verdict]

The fact that Arkin was from a small school should not inflate nor deflate the expectations that a 4th round pick should carry with it. The expectations should not be as high as they would be for a first round pick, but it is not a throw away pick either. So far Arkin has been a wasted pick, whether you want to call him a bust or not. Maybe he will contribute this year in a significant way and justify his draft status. We can always hope. But I think doubting that he will is a reasonable viewpoint.

 

[jobberone]

I was saying I don't think he has the speed to play linebacker in the 4-3. If that is the case, then the only other place he could make the roster is at defensive end. I have already said I don't think he will make the roster at any position.

His 40 puts him near mid-range about the same as Te'o. His short shuttle would be near the top at 4.28 for ILBs. His 3 cone is mid range as well. I'd have to see him in coverage to get a feel for him as there is so much more that goes into pass coverage and being a football player. I would have concerns about him being isolated on some TEs but of course that goes for a lot of MLBs. Which is why OLBs and safeties generally try to match up with TEs. Having said that, I'm not confident he fits Kiffin's scheme at all though. But that's true of a lot of Mikes in this league.

 

[Eskimo]

Just so everyone knows a bit about him:

6-1 2/8
245 pounds
40: 4.75 (pro day), 4.82 (Combine)
vert; 31 inches
BJ: 9-4
Bench: 26 reps
ss: 4.28
3cone: 7.26

Some have said he may have tried to bulk up for the Combine and is now running faster after losing a bit of weight even though he has torn his Achilles.

The thing that makes me wonder if they are going to keep him on the 53-man roster is they are trying him at FB. That to me suggests they are going to keep him and just tyring to find ways to get more snaps out of him. If he excels as a blocker at FB then they don't need to keep Vickers and don't have to keep a blocking TE who excels as a lead blocker out of the backfield.

His college background was one of success. He had 130 tackles, 3.5 sacks, 1 INT, 2 fumbles forced and 1 fumble recovered his Sr. year and was named an All-American and Big Sky Conference Defensive Player of the Year.

I think people got down on him mostly because of a bad 40 at the Combine but he ran much better at his Pro Day.

He apparently played some FB and TE in high school but wasn't particularly good at it according to himself in an interview he gave at his Pro Day.

Here is a short article I found about him before the draft:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1027032-2012-nfl-draft-montanas-dirty-player-is-nfl-material

Here is a short write up from Broaddus in the spring:

http://www.dallascowboys.com/news/a...Achilles/a498b106-cbe0-4755-9dd4-c4e7601eab1b

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

A 4th round pick is a 4th round pick. Small school is not the issue. Players in the 4th round have some issue that kept them from being a 1st, 2nd or 3rd round picks. It could be small school, but it could also be talent, character, non-ideal measureables, injury history, etc..

There is some data that I've seen in the past on the success rate of players in different rounds of the draft. I don't remember the exact numbers, but the success rate for a 4th round pick was well below 50%.

You can't judge a team by the success or failure of a single 4th round pick. You have to look at their success rate relative to the rest of the league over some period of time. If the league average is 20% success for 4th rounders, then you are in the money if you hit on 3 in 10 years.

Bust is a subjective term. Good teams don't focus on individual missed picks in the the later rounds. They focus on the big picture of talent acquisition. Jimmy cut two 3rd round picks and probably never gave it a second thought after the fact.

The bust rate around pick 100 is ~70%. The definition of bust is not starting at least a year and/or less than 48 games played.

http://datascopeanalytics.com/what-we-think/2012/05/01/the-chance-of-a-bust-in-the-nfl-draft

A couple of interesting notes from the graph. First, picking at the end of the second round only gives your team a 50% chance of finding a starter. Going towards the end of the round 3, your chance of finding a starter falls to ~30%. Using this criteria and our draft value chart from last week, let’s evaluate a couple of the trades from Friday.

 

[jobberone]

The bust rate around pick 100 is ~70%. The definition of bust is not starting at least a year and/or less than 48 games played.



http://datascopeanalytics.com/what-we-think/2012/05/01/the-chance-of-a-bust-in-the-nfl-draft

Very interesting graph. Thanks for posting.