The Value of 2nd Round Picks

[Stiffy_18]

Stiffy that depends on the information on the past as well as the current conditions in which your decisions are being based.

If everyone had your attitude we'd be still riding horses (no we probably wouldn't have bothered because historically its easier to walk )

If you a had a bit more idea about me and my background you would realise just how laughable your conclusion is

If its as black and white as you make it out to be why are major companies world wide investing millions of dollars into data warehousing?! Why are all those companies paying shitloads of money for historical trends of other companies in their field?! Simple, they realise just how valuable that information is. They analyse past behaviour, patterns and trends to target a particular group and cater their products to their needs. If past behaviour is as irrelevant as some of you claim, companies wouldn't be heavily investing into that sort of data.

Time to get back to topic at hand

 

[Cap]

If you a had a bit more idea about me and my background you would realise just how laughable your conclusion is

If its as black and white as you make it out to be why are major companies world wide investing millions of dollars into data warehousing?! Why are all those companies paying shitloads of money for historical trends of other companies in their field?! Simple, they realise just how valuable that information is. They analyse past behaviour, patterns and trends to target a particular group and cater their products to their needs. If past behaviour is as irrelevant as some of you claim, companies wouldn't be heavily investing into that sort of data.

Time to get back to topic at hand

twas a joke young stiffy - just a joke

 

[Stiffy_18]

1998 can be explained by the changing of the draft age meaning the 98 draft drew on the same pool of players that 97 did. That one's easy.

But what's your reasoning for the other two? I ask because I can't see any reason for this other than coincidence.

One of the reasons is that a lot of talented bottom age kids have been taken the year before making the draft the following year a weaker one.

Generation of talent through the grades is not constant. It fluctuates and the past trends show that a strong draft is followed by a weak draft because the influx of talent that would have qualified for the draft they year after have already been picked up.

 

[Mong]

One of the reasons is that a lot of talented bottom age kids have been taken the year before making the draft the following year a weaker one.

Generation of talent through the grades is not constant. It fluctuates and the past trends show that a strong draft is followed by a weak draft because the influx of talent that would have qualified for the draft they year after have already been picked up.

So are you saying most drafts (i.e. not the super drafts that you are referring to here) are made up of a lot of players that were passed on the year before?

 

[Crow-mo]

Who cares about BS from the past? Lets draft like ****ing geniuses this year and leave it at that. Signed, sealed, delivered.

everytime you speak, a brain cell dies.