SEC has strongest 2007 NFL draft

[Blue Hen]

...a big improvement from last years 4th place draft finish.

Draftees per conference member
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

3.42 - SEC
2.91 - B10
2.80 - P10
2.67 - ACC
2.33 - B12
2.00 - BEC
1.78 - WAC
1.00 - MWC
0.67 - CUSA
0.67 - MAC
0.63 - SBC

[copycat]

maybe the SEC will suck this upcoming season like the ACC did last year!

(or so I hope)

[Blue Hen]

There seems to be a pattern. The ACC's 'off' 07 season followed the most dominant draft by any conference in the draft's history. In the 06 draft the ACC offered 4.25 draftees per conf member(51 total).

[Blue Hen]

Strongest NFL drafts ( by conference ) in the BCS era
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

1) 2006 ACC (4.25 per)

2) 2004 B10 (4.00 per)

3) 2002 SEC (3.92 per)

4) 2006 B10 (3.73 per)

5) 2001 B10 (3.73 per)

[ktffan]

Ok, I gather you've got 32 players for the ACC. By my count:

Boston College 2
Clemson 5
Florida St. 5
Georgia Tech 2
Maryland 2
Miami (FL) 5
N.C. State 3
Virginia 2
Virginia Tech 3
Wake Forest 2

I've got 31.

You've got 16 for the WAC:

Boise St. 4
Fresno St. 4
Hawaii 5
Louisiana Tech 1
Nevada 1
San Jose St. 2

I also strongly disagree with your assement about what makes a "strong" draft. In my opinion, having 10 first round picks far outweighs having 15 7th round picks. BTW, your Big Ten count for 2001 is incorrect (should be 40 by my count).


I've got 17.

[HellYeahHokie]

I also strongly disagree with your assement about what makes a "strong" draft. In my opinion, having 10 first round picks far outweighs having 15 7th round picks.


How about weighting picks by round

1st round- 7 points
2nd round- 6 points
.
.
.
.
7th round-1 point
(and if you want)Conditional picks- 0.5 points

Then compare conference strength.

This is probably a pretty easy calculation for you database manipulators.

[ktffan]

How about weighting picks by round

1st round- 7 points
2nd round- 6 points
.
.
.
.
7th round-1 point
(and if you want)Conditional picks- 0.5 points

Then compare conference strength.

This is probably a pretty easy calculation for you database manipulators.


I prefer giving point for the pick number, #1 = 255, #2 = 254, etc.

[HellYeahHokie]

I prefer giving point for the pick number, #1 = 255, #2 = 254, etc.

However, the draft numbers have more to do with the order of the teams picking, rather than by the particular value of a player. I'm not sure the difference between #10 and #20 are that great. It just depends on what a specific team needs.

Perhaps they could be put into Bin 1-10, 11-20, 21-30...etc.

No matter how its done, the results would probably be similar, and perhaps considerably different than Hen's calculations.

It would be an interesting calculation, but I'm not going to do it.

[Blue Hen]

If I'm off only 2 draftees from your numbers, that's about a 99.3 % accuracy. Not real bad for a running, pick by pick count.

[ktffan]

However, the draft numbers have more to do with the order of the teams picking, rather than by the particular value of a player. I'm not sure the difference between #10 and #20 are that great. It just depends on what a specific team needs.

Perhaps they could be put into Bin 1-10, 11-20, 21-30...etc.

No matter how its done, the results would probably be similar, and perhaps considerably different than Hen's calculations.

It would be an interesting calculation, but I'm not going to do it.


However the difference between #1 and #32 is certainly greater than the difference between #32 and #33.

And yes, calculating by value gives a different, though somewhat similar, result than by player calculations.

[Don]

...a big improvement from last years 4th place draft finish.

Draftees per conference member
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

3.42 - SEC
2.91 - B10
2.80 - P10
2.67 - ACC
2.33 - B12
2.00 - BEC
1.78 - WAC
1.00 - MWC
0.67 - CUSA
0.67 - MAC
0.63 - SBC


What are the numbers for say the past 10 years?

[Blue Hen]

Most draftees per conf member :

06
"""
1) ACC
2) B10
3) P10
4) SEC
5) B12
6) BEC

05
""""
1) P10
2) ACC
3) SEC
4) B12
5) B10
6) MWC

04
""""
1) B10
2) SEC
3) BEC
4) P10
5) ACC
6) B12

03
"""""
1) SEC
2) B10
3) B12
4) P10
5) BEC
6) INDs

02
""""
1) SEC
2) BEC
3) B10
4) P10
5) B12
6) ACC

01
"""""
1) B10
2) SEC
3) B12
4) P10
5) ACC
6) BEC

00
""""
1) SEC
2) B10
3) P10
4) ACC
5) BEC
6) B12

99
"""""
1) ACC
2) SEC
3) B12
4) P10
5) B10
6) BEC

98
"""""
1) P10
2) SEC
3) ACC
4) B10
5) B12
6) BEC

[mini_me]

However, the draft numbers have more to do with the order of the teams picking, rather than by the particular value of a player. I'm not sure the difference between #10 and #20 are that great. It just depends on what a specific team needs.

Perhaps they could be put into Bin 1-10, 11-20, 21-30...etc.

No matter how its done, the results would probably be similar, and perhaps considerably different than Hen's calculations.

It would be an interesting calculation, but I'm not going to do it.

The problem with that is that teams draft to need and that is not necessarily a reflection of talent.

The fall of Quinn's stock is an example. Putting aside the argument of "is Quinn that good" Several of the teams beyond Cleveland 1st pick weren't drafting a quarterback regardless of how bad/good said quarterback was. Miami needed both a quarterback and receiver, and they went the receiver route. After the Miami pick, no one was going to take a QB until where Quinn ultimately went.

I think the best way is to weigh the round. It eliminates a players stock being downgraded because of a lack of POSITION need.

Almost every GM in the league would agree with the view that the best PLAYER in the draft is Calvin Johnson but that wasn't a NEED for Ok land. Need plays a bigger role than TALENT.

Towards the lower half of the first round, it plays a HUGE role in whether a player is a 1st or second round draftee.

[HellYeahHokie]

I was trying to address the issue of individual team needs, versus individual talent. Rating them strictly by position puts too much empahsis on team need. However, I think we can all agree that there is a huge difference between being drafted #1 vs being drafted #32. So weighing the 32nd pick the same as the #1 pick also isn't a great system.

My thought was a comprimise, and assign weights to 10-pick bins. Therefore players ranked 1-10 would have the same value. Players ranked 11-20 the same, etc. Sure, Brady Quinn would be in the 3rd bin, but in the end, that is where he got drafted, so that has to count for something.

Ultimately, any one of these scenarios could be easily calculated with some simple database or spreadsheet analysis. So all of them could be compared. I suspect there would be little difference between the end results, when averaged over the the entire draft by conference.

[ktffan]

If I'm off only 2 draftees from your numbers, that's about a 99.3 % accuracy. Not real bad for a running, pick by pick count.

That's assuming we didn't make similar mistakes.

You are the only one I've checked my numbers against (fully). Too soon to call them good yet.

[Don]

Thank you, but I was hoping for an aggregate of the past 10 years.

[Blue Hen]

Ok, sorry. Here ya go, Don..... draft averages for past 10 drafts.

3.35 - SEC
3.18 - B10
2.99 - P10
2.82 - ACC
2.42 - B12
2.30 - BEC
1.34 - MWC ( 8 yrs )
0.99 - WAC
0.95 - CUSA

don't have the MAC & SB handy but They are about 0.50 apiece

[Don]

Ok, sorry. Here ya go, Don..... draft averages for past 10 drafts.

3.35 - SEC
3.18 - B10
2.99 - P10
2.82 - ACC
2.42 - B12
2.30 - BEC
1.34 - MWC ( 8 yrs )
0.99 - WAC
0.95 - CUSA

don't have the MAC & SB handy but They are about 0.50 apiece



Where do you find all this stuff? I'll be damned if I can find it! I have finally figured out ktffans website for games and use it regularly now but I can't find anything on draft.

[ktffan]

Where do you find all this stuff? I'll be damned if I can find it! I have finally figured out ktffans website for games and use it regularly now but I can't find anything on draft.

Don, plenty of info on draft out there. I believe Hen keeps his own info. The NFL has picks since 1982 on their main site:

http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/drafts

On their other sites, you can find a lot of useful info on the draft, and their hall of fame info is great. Of course, I'm begining to doubt information given by the NFL now, as I find conflicting info on simple stuff, but anyways.

This site is interesting, but there' are some inaccuracies (as expected) but it contains the whole draft:

http://www.drafthistory.com/

Including breakdowns by college and the like. Probably the best draft site out there. I have other links, but not with me now.



On a related subject, what I'm trying to figure out is why the NFL is reporting that Ohio State has more first round draft choices than USC when I can go to the NFL's sites and see that USC has more.

[Don]

.....
http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/drafts

http://www.drafthistory.com/
.....


Thanks! I've bookmarked them so hopefully I can find thema again when I need them. If I can't find tham I will remember who to contact!!


.....On a related subject, what I'm trying to figure out is why the NFL is reporting that Ohio State has more first round draft choices than USC when I can go to the NFL's sites and see that USC has more.

It must be that *%#& Eastcoast bias again raising its ugly head!

[Blue Hen]

I keep my own records..........year by year, and miscount sometimes. It's probably 99.5% accurate.