Post Mortem: Seahawks v Cardinals

[D-train]

over the last five seasons the Hawks have had the tenth best drafts

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat- ... -2010-2019

best factual breakdown I've seen. The Seahawks are actually #1 over 10 years, thanks to the Russell Wilson/Bobby Wagner mega haul. And if you say "oh yeah, well what if you took them out?" I get to say "oh yeah, well what if Malik McDowell would've been an All-Pro?"

JS' first picks always leave me screaming at the TV saying "WHO!!???" or "WHY DRAFT A RB/MLB???!!" but we all seem to agree on that. Oh the WHOLE though, they've done a good to great job on the draft.

I get your point on taking out the 2012 draft but in I would love another example of an ALL Pro Edge rusher that had 7.5 Career sacks or less in his college CAREER.

[Donn Beach]

best factual breakdown I've seen. The Seahawks are actually #1 over 10 years, thanks to the Russell Wilson/Bobby Wagner mega haul. And if you say "oh yeah, well what if you took them out?" I get to say "oh yeah, well what if Malik McDowell would've been an All-Pro?"

Best over 10 years according to whom? They had 2 very good and one great draft followed by 7 mediocre to bad drafts. See a trend there? Most enquiring minds would ask wtf happened?

JS' first picks always leave me screaming at the TV saying "WHO!!???" or "WHY DRAFT A RB/MLB???!!" but we all seem to agree on that. Oh the WHOLE though, they've done a good to great job on the draft.

No. It seems clear that the scouting took a hit after 2012. Scott McCloughan departed in 2013. Coincidence?

according to the performance of every player taken in the draft by every team. That is what you missing, its relative to how all the other teams draft, not what you decide is a mediocre draft. And in that respect, they do pretty well, better than their draft position. In terms of the two very good drafts, that is simple, they got lucky. They really are the victim of their own success, fans expect them to hitting on drafts at an unsustainable rate

[Sibelius Hindemith]

It was 3 years in a row of finding HoFers mostly in the middle rounds. Then in 2013 the bottom drops out and they lose the ability to find the gems. Weird.

No, 2019 wasn't good at 74%, but when Marquis Blair, L.J. Collier, and Travis Homer all become starters, it will start looking much better, right?

Wrong.

[SeattleAddict]

Jesus, you act like they should manage to find HOFers in every draft in the later rounds. Sometimes those just don't exist. I just looked thru every draft pick in the 5th-7th rounds from 2013-2019 and had a hard time finding ANY players that became stars. Stefon Diggs and Jay Ajayi in the 5th round were the closest... EXCEPT Chris Carson was a 7th round pick and is possibly one of the top 5 RBs in the game.

[Sibelius Hindemith]

My point was that their ability to draft seemed to take a steep dive following the 2012 season.

[SeattleAddict]

over the last five seasons the Hawks have had the tenth best drafts

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat- ... -2010-2019

best factual breakdown I've seen. The Seahawks are actually #1 over 10 years, thanks to the Russell Wilson/Bobby Wagner mega haul. And if you say "oh yeah, well what if you took them out?" I get to say "oh yeah, well what if Malik McDowell would've been an All-Pro?"

JS' first picks always leave me screaming at the TV saying "WHO!!???" or "WHY DRAFT A RB/MLB???!!" but we all seem to agree on that. Oh the WHOLE though, they've done a good to great job on the draft.

I get your point on taking out the 2012 draft but in I would love another example of an ALL Pro Edge rusher that had 7.5 Career sacks or less in his college CAREER.

McDowell was a 300 lb run-stuffing DT, not an edge rusher. 7.5 sacks isn't too bad for an interior lineman.

[SeattleAddict]

My point was that their ability to draft seemed to take a steep dive following the 2012 season.

well, when you have one of the greatest drafts in the history of the NFL, you're bound to regress a bit. MY point is that it hasn't been that steep, especially considering where they drafted.

Remember their first picks were #62, 45, 63, 31, 35, 27, 29 and 27 those years. It's not like they had pick of the litter.

[Sibelius Hindemith]

236% to 77% is quite a bit of regression. Its like they had a vision of exactly what kind of player they needed for their system for 3 years then just totally lost it.

[57reasons]

It's way too early to judge the last two, but here's my thoughts....

So two elite players in DK and Carson, quality players in Lewis and Clark, a really good punter, and a bunch of unknowns (either rookies or been injured).

My thought is, given the division, and wanting to win the West, they should get an A+ for drafting Lewis and Clark !!

[Donn Beach]

236% to 77% is quite a bit of regression. Its like they had a vision of exactly what kind of player they needed for their system for 3 years then just totally lost it.

It was a crazy outlier, I don't believe because they crazy hit on a draft and then follow it up with some mediocre ones it means they got stupid, it means regression to the mean. The process involves a lot of luck, you are not going to find a GM that can out perform the competition consistently in the first place.

What i see with JS and Pete is a systematic approach, like running a system in Las Vegas, sometimes it hits, sometimes it doesn't. But over the long haul it is supposed to give you better than average return. The Hawks being placed tenth over the last five years indicates that

fivethirtyeight arguing that GMs can't beat the draft on a consistent basis. Any real separation is probably mostly attributed to luck

All of this means that the NFL draft’s mechanism for sorting players is largely an efficient system, in the sense that none of its individual actors have the ability to “beat the market” in the long run. Some do see short-term deviations from the mean, but those prove unsustainable over larger samples. The implication is that much of what each team gets from its draft picks — the very entryway to the league for almost every NFL player — is determined by pure chance.

This doesn’t have to be a knock on the NFL’s talent evaluators. The author Michael Mauboussin has written about what he calls the “Paradox of Skill,” a counterintuitive theory that states that as the aggregate skill level of a market’s participants increases, the proportion of outcomes attributable to luck also increases. Put another way, the smaller the variation in skill between competitors, the more opportunity for randomness to be a differentiating factor. By this reading, NFL general managers are the victims of their own obsessive pre-draft preparations — their skill level has increased so much that only the effects of chance remain.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no ... the-draft/