Maybe because teams tend to draft kickers, punters, and long snappers in the 7th round?
I take it back about Ellis Brooks making the wrong decision to leave for the NFL draft early
- Thread starter Online Persona
- Start date
It is significantly north of 50% and I think you know that. We can argue the exact % that would improve their draft stock with an extra year but we know for certain that more will improve it than will decrease it. Some will improve it by more than a round or 2. We just saw Jahan Dotson jump several rounds by returning and having a big year. This goes on all throughout the country.
You ignore the talent factor. Early round picks hang around longer because they're better athletes. That's just common sense. Undrafted free agents are undrafted for a reason. I understand where you are coming from but the major factor is lack of talent.
I'm not ignoring that. It's understood. However, the greater the investment by the team, the more opportunity that player will have to make it. GMs don't just willy nilly throw away their draft picks without making sure that it wasn't going to work. They do just discard undrafted free agents without much care. The numbers bear this out.
It's no different than you not giving up on your biggest investments (of money, time, etc.) without thoroughly giving them a chance. However, if it was something that was essentially free, you have no reservations about cutting bait. That is human nature.
I think his point is that a guy who just missed getting drafted is very different than a guy who never came close to getting drafted. And yet they both get put into the same bucket for purposes of this analysis.
Not that it makes a difference, but I wonder why early round picks have a longer leash? Is it because teams are trying to save face and not admit to mistakes too readily? Or do early round picks possess more talent and have a better chance of improving? I suspect it's the latter.
From a financial standpoint, that makes no sense. A sunk cost should not factor into decision making.
10,000 d1 players. Coming back a year won't put them all in the first round. Only 224 draft picks total.
Tell us where you come up with the number that significantly over 50% improve their draft stock. For every One that improves there is one that drops. Should olu have entered the draft? Tough To improve on top 10. He has a good chance of dropping in the dtaft.
And yet it almost always does. You should take some courses on the psychology of investing amd finance. Humans are rarely rational decision makers in finance.
Also with respect to your previous question, how does one differentiate between an undrafted free agent that just missed getting drafted and one that was never close as you suggest that we do? No GM ever reveals their draft board and who just fell short of it. Teams sign a dozen or more undrafted free agents. There is no granularity in that grouping. The guy you think just missed it may never have been close and vice versa. No one has that information.
1. I already explained where I come up with it in this thread a few times. Go back and reread.
2. For every one that returns and improves, another drops. Many of those that drop are ones like Brooks that chose not to come back and improve.
3. Fashanu should have left if finances and career longevity were his top considerations. No one would have second guessed him. He prioritized the degree first and that's his peragative. Also because a mock draft listed you top 10 doesn't mean that is what would transpire. I've seen him in low 2nd round as well before he announced his return. Do you think Levis is a lock as the 1st overall pick? I've seen that in multiple mock drafts and just laugh it off.
No thanks…I’m simply saying that coming out of the draft process each year, there are some USFAs that clearly have a better than 1% chance of sticking, and others that have almost no chance. But you’re looking at them all the same.
If you’re willing to offer me 50-1 odds on any players of my choice, I’ll put in the work and tell you who has better chances of sticking when we get to May.
In his mind. That's where it came from. He's done zero math on it. It's literally his arbitrary % (that I have already whittled down from 80% to 50% by merely 3 or 4 replies).
He seems to believe that if a player, such as Brooks, returned for his 6th year and improved his bench by 3 reps and his 40 time by 0.02 that Brooks "improved his stock by returning" whether that means going from the 300th guy on draft boards to 275.
I'm of the opinion that improved draft stock is ACTUALLY getting drafted vs not having your name called.
I don't think anybody here disputes that any player returning to a college program can get stronger, faster, and add another year of tape. What I am disputing is whether those improvements make one more draftable.
He mentions Dotson, who got his speed down to a very good time, which was the only thing lowering him from years prior (when he showcased excellent hands and strong route running).
Brooks was never a mid round guy. Barring him getting 0.2 seconds faster, if not more, he didn't have NFL level instincts and tackling ability.
Why do you think we have former walk ons still bouncing around practice squads while a player like Brooks was cut very quickly and didn't get a second team? SPEED.
Doesn't it tell you something that you need 50 to 1 odds to do research on finding just 1 undrafted player making the NFL cut?
You are admitting that undrafted is a massive Longshot while in the middle of arguing that it's better than a 7th round selection who has better than 50% chance of making it at least a year or 2 according to the last 10+ years of data.
1. You don't know what is in another poster's mind and I stand by a high probability that 80% or so of players that would return an additional year would improve rather than fall in draft stock with an extra year of growth and maturation. It sure as heck isn't 50% as you seem to imply.
2. You concede that players returning will get stronger and faster but do not think that translates to a higher draft position? Why have a combine? Why do pro days at schools across the country? Some poster named lazy Dave says faster and stronger doesn't correlate to higher draft status. I suppose you also don't think game tape from a more experienced and developed player in year 4 doesn't help them over likely not quite as good of film in year 3? You conceded that the players improve year to year but apparently the NFL doesn't value better results?
I started the bargaining at 50-1, since you seem very confident that your <1% stastic applies across all UDFAs equally…I’d take 5-1 if you’re offering it…I’ll also tell you that those 7th rounders aren’t all created equally, and that some will have better chances of sticking than others.
Here is some data on it…
The Value of Undrafted Free Agents
Guest columnist Joe Mahoney looks at Day 3 draft picks vs. undrafted free agents. There are a number of reasons why players would prefer to be undrafted rather than taken in Rounds 6-7.
Using what you wrote. If it's 80, stay at 80.
Penn State football draft profiles | Ellis Brooks proves abilities at pro day ahead of NFL Draft
One of four former Penn State linebackers participating in pro day, Ellis Brooks looked to increase his draft stock after not drawing an invite to the scouting combine.
The combine is for the NFL to further explore players. Pro Days is for a school to showcase their players.
Brooks didn't get a combine invite. Why? Because he's 6'1, 226 lbs 4.77 running ILB. What was he going to fix by returning? Do you think he was magically going to gain 15 lbs and run a 4.57? Because if he couldn't, he just doesn't fit what the NFL is looking for.
Yes, he could have returned and done 25 reps at 234 lbs with a 4.75 and at 6'1 I don't think a 6th year guy improved his draft stock when another bunch of junior and senior kids become freshly eligible.
What does my user name have to do with any of this? Lol
In response to those arguing that returning for another year may equally result in improving or declining, the quotes that you pulled out of context are consistent with my estimate of 80% improving and in some cases may be part of the same paragraph where I state exactly that.Using what you wrote. If it's 80, stay at 80.
Penn State football draft profiles | Ellis Brooks proves abilities at pro day ahead of NFL Draft
One of four former Penn State linebackers participating in pro day, Ellis Brooks looked to increase his draft stock after not drawing an invite to the scouting combine.www.collegian.psu.edu
The combine is for the NFL to further explore players. Pro Days is for a school to showcase their players.
Brooks didn't get a combine invite. Why? Because he's 6'1, 226 lbs 4.77 running ILB. What was he going to fix by returning? Do you think he was magically going to gain 15 lbs and run a 4.57? Because if he couldn't, he just doesn't fit what the NFL is looking for.
Yes, he could have returned and done 25 reps at 234 lbs with a 4.75 and at 6'1 I don't think a 6th year guy improved his draft stock when another bunch of junior and senior kids become freshly eligible.
What does my user name have to do with any of this? Lol
You are the one arguing that players that return another year will almost certainly get faster and stronger but the NFL won't look more favorably on better 40 times and strength numbers or better film. I'm sorry but that just is not a logical position.
So based on this data, there were approximately 10% or so of UDFAs that received more guaranteed money than Mr. Irrelevant.Here is some data on it…
The Value of Undrafted Free Agents
Guest columnist Joe Mahoney looks at Day 3 draft picks vs. undrafted free agents. There are a number of reasons why players would prefer to be undrafted rather than taken in Rounds 6-7.www.footballoutsiders.com
But here is the key, he states that 85% of 6th and 7th rounders make the 53 man roster and make $500k more than the highest guaranteed pay for any UDFA.
Using his analysis, if you are the top 10% of UDFAs, you may get slightly more guaranteed money which comes in handy if you are only a practice squad guy. But if you are drafted, you have an 85% chance of making almost 4 times as much as the top 10% of UDFAs unless they latch on to a 53 man roster as well, which is significantly less likely.
Every player that returns or continues to play can possibly improve. If 500 borderline kids improve, do they all get drafted because they are one year better?
No. They don't.
Good thing he sat out that bowl game, or the DC Defenders may not have signed him to this deal to be on the reserve list...
They don't all make the same decisions. You are comparing the wrong groups. If 500 borderline kids come back and improve while 500 borderline kids go early to compete against those that improved from the previous year, then those who chose to leave early will collectively average a lower draft status.
