Pre-Draft thoughts from Diana Russini

[PNW_PantherMan]

6 hours ago, Waldo said:

 

I started watching this and I'm about half done. He starts at the beginning of the concepts and keeps building upon it. I almost walked but then he kept expanding. I can't tell where he is going yet but it's well done to the half way point. 

He did another great video on the draft a while ago.  highly recommend.

 

[PNW_PantherMan]

6 hours ago, Waldo said:

 

I started watching this and I'm about half done. He starts at the beginning of the concepts and keeps building upon it. I almost walked but then he kept expanding. I can't tell where he is going yet but it's well done to the half way point. 

Just finished it, and this was a great video.  The other one I linked has some similar findings in it.  Fitterer definitely subscribed to some of this, but he couldn't evaluate talent.  It doesn't matter how many at bats you get if you strike out 100% of the time.

Edited 2 hours ago by PNW_PantherMan

[Waldo]

5 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

Just finished it, and this was a great video.  The other one I linked has some similar findings in it.  Fitterer definitely subscribed to some of this, but he couldn't evaluate talent.  It doesn't matter how many at bats you get if you strike out 100% of the time.

My biggest take is the big picture approach and recognizing the known pitfalls. Look at the money, look at the value but realize the situation. I was impressed too.

Fritts was part of thr trade back school for sure. He just had no positives as a GM. I can't remember one.

[frankw]

6 minutes ago, Waldo said:

Fritts was part of thr trade back school for sure. He just had no positives as a GM. I can't remember one.

When Scott Fitterer got behind a microphone and gushed over Ian Thomas I knew we were cooked.

[PNW_PantherMan]

29 minutes ago, Waldo said:

My biggest take is the big picture approach and recognizing the known pitfalls. Look at the money, look at the value but realize the situation. I was impressed too.

Fritts was part of thr trade back school for sure. He just had no positives as a GM. I can't remember one.

Well trading out and up (today's 2nd for tomorrow's 1st) is way better than trading down.  It's just that's how you get fired as a GM, because you're going to suck until you get to make those selections and they have time to hit their strides.

It's the mismatch of incentive that causes the bad decisions that overly prioritize today at the expense of tomorrow.  You have to win now or you're gone.  No 80 year old billionaire has the patience for a 5 year plan.

[Shocker]

Gotta remember Tepper hired from within with Morgan.  He is probably meddling again.  Lord help us.

[Waldo]

1 hour ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

He did another great video on the draft a while ago.  highly recommend.

 

Finally got to finish that great video backup with facts.

[Waldo]

1 hour ago, frankw said:

When Scott Fitterer got behind a microphone and gushed over Ian Thomas I knew we were cooked.

It's amazing how bad he was at everything.

[Waldo]

1 hour ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

Well trading out and up (today's 2nd for tomorrow's 1st) is way better than trading down.  It's just that's how you get fired as a GM, because you're going to suck until you get to make those selections and they have time to hit their strides.

It's the mismatch of incentive that causes the bad decisions that overly prioritize today at the expense of tomorrow.  You have to win now or you're gone.  No 80 year old billionaire has the patience for a 5 year plan.

Trading up is very risky from a cost to production view point. Sitting isn't the best value but it doesn't have a negative present bias that trading back does even if value is better. I always looked at performance but never really leaned into cost because of the rookie scale. I'm rethinking that now. I have belived the NFL had an issue with future value wherenI couldn't understand why know one is taking advantage of that. Selling a 2nd this year to have a 1st from last years second just seemed like a win with a 1 year payment to get it rolling but that present bias is that strong.

The 52% chance the player picked would be better than the next player at that position is wild. 

[PNW_PantherMan]

1 minute ago, Waldo said:

Trading up is very risky from a cost to production view point. Sitting isn't the best value but it doesn't have a negative present bias that trading back does even if value is better. I always looked at performance but never really leaned into cost because of the rookie scale. I'm rethinking that now. I have belived the NFL had an issue with future value wherenI couldn't understand why know one is taking advantage of that. Selling a 2nd this year to have a 1st from last years second just seemed like a win with a 1 year payment to get it rolling but that present bias is that strong.

The 52% chance the player picked would be better than the next player at that position is wild. 

Yeah it's insane.  Also with the late 1st being technically the highest surplus value, that means that the best run teams are getting the highest surplus value picks every year.  So while they might not be picking in the top 10 and landing the Abdul Carters, they are picking in the last 10 and landing cheap pro bowlers.

[Waldo]

6 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

Yeah it's insane.  Also with the late 1st being technically the highest surplus value, that means that the best run teams are getting the highest surplus value picks every year.  So while they might not be picking in the top 10 and landing the Abdul Carters, they are picking in the last 10 and landing cheap pro bowlers.

It is insane. I love he made fun of the value chart and then proved where it was close and where it wasn't. Nice little glass of cold water before a draft and the craziness that kicks off before the long dead space and entrinchment.