Since 2012, Colts are 6th best team at........

[TKnight24]

 

From USA Today, take it how you wish  

 

 

[Everyone]

Trash article, also lists Luck as least valuable.....

[Superman]

This uses PFR's "Approximate Value" metric, comparing it to a player's draft position, to determine the player's "value" in relation to where they were drafted.

 

It's a stupid methodology. Any process that places greater value on David Parry than Andrew Luck needs to be aborted, post-haste. 

[cbear]

Sometimes, it is as it actually appears.  In this case buffoonery at it's finest.

[NewColtsFan]

 

Our greatest score comes from 2014 where we have two total players left from that draft.

 

Granted,  they're both starters,  Mewhort and Moncrief,   but that gives us a score more than twice of any other score the last 5 years?!?

 

Huh?!?

 

I think Superman's quip said it best for all of us..........

 

USA Today is normally better than that.....     it's a head scratcher....          

[ChineseColtsFan]

A good piece for some exercises of critical thinking. From some data, plus a methodology, you get some conclusion. But this whole process may show either the conclusion is right or the methodology is problematic, or the data are not complete.

[Albaby]

This has got to be the dumbest article I've seen all year.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Trash!

[shakedownstreet]

5 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Trash!

 

thanks for reminding that it is trash day :-)

[lollygagger8]

Dang, I thought the answer was going to by Euchre. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 hours ago, shakedownstreet said:

 

thanks for reminding that it is trash day :-)

Mine was yesterday so I figured regarding this article that was the appropriate word LOL.

[jameszeigler834]

16 hours ago, TKnight24 said:

 

From USA Today, take it how you wish  

 

 

We are not the 6 best drafting team the last five years 6 worst maybe and luck being called the least valuable pick is the worst example of stupid that I have ever heard.

[PeterBowman]

[Steamboat_Shaun]

17 hours ago, Superman said:

This uses PFR's "Approximate Value" metric, comparing it to a player's draft position, to determine the player's "value" in relation to where they were drafted.

 

It's a stupid methodology. Any process that places greater value on David Parry than Andrew Luck needs to be aborted, post-haste. 

 

What's funny is that if I were trying to sell to Colts fans that they've drafted 6th best in 5 years, I'd definitely be using the '12 draft and the Luck pick to strengthen my argument, as opposed to whatever it is they're doing in this article.

[shakedownstreet]

[Valpo2004]

21 hours ago, Superman said:

This uses PFR's "Approximate Value" metric, comparing it to a player's draft position, to determine the player's "value" in relation to where they were drafted.

 

It's a stupid methodology. Any process that places greater value on David Parry than Andrew Luck needs to be aborted, post-haste. 

 

Seems to me that the methodology is flawed because it rewards you far too greatly for getting something out of a lower round pick.

 

Edit:  I looked a bit at the table at what they assigned the values to and I can only conclude that it's a severely flawed system and does not seem to make a great deal of sense.  

[Superman]

1 hour ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

Seems to me that the methodology is flawed because it rewards you far too greatly for getting something out of a lower round pick.

 

Edit:  I looked a bit at the table at what they assigned the values to and I can only conclude that it's a severely flawed system and does not seem to make a great deal of sense.  

 

PFR's AV metric is heavily dependent on starts, snaps, and any level of production (a tackle is a tackle, whether it's at the line of scrimmage or 5 yards past the first down marker; I think they give more weight to a tackle for loss). It's not grading a player's performance in any meaningful way. So if you have a late round player who gets a lot of starts/snaps, his "value" is going to be high, using this methodology. And that just leaves out a lot of common sense analysis, like the fact that your Pro Bowl level starting QB is many times more valuable than a replacement level (at best) DT/NT.