Is Joe Jordan Improving?

[Stotle]

I understand the point wicked is making but I am making the point that Jordan does well at waiting out picks. He may have overdrafted a few guys but he also underdrafted a few guys, so it averages out.

I'm going to disagree a bit, here. If Jordan viewed Berry at all like I did, he loves his upside but was legitimately concerned with potential injury moving forward. I believe he started considering him around Round 5, but I don't think this is a case of sweating it out believing he'd continue to drop.

More likely, Jordan wouldn't have been too disappointed had Berry come off the board in, say, Round 6. Likewise, Round 9 he determined Berry was too good to allow to slip further (Round 5 talent with only having to risk a Round 9 pick).

So the Berry pick is more of a "look who's around" than a strategic "we have him pegged for the 9th, even though he's a 5th Round talent to us."

Does that make sense?

[LookinUp]

Yeah, but it's also an indicator that Jordan liked the guys in rounds 5-8 more than he liked Berry...a guy many on this board love. That should give us some confidence that he's drafting some guys with serious potential.

[Mark Carver]

I don't know about Jordan. Since he's came on board, who has made the bigs?

Olson

Reimold

Hernandez

Wieters

Am I missing anyone?

Rowell and Beato are looking to be some pretty high profile busts, but it's still early.

Sure, it's not fair to judge him based on who's made the bigs, because it's too early and lots of guys are in the pipeline. That said, 2005 and 2006 are a pretty dissappointing at this point.

In terms of the OP - is he improving? We won't know for a long time if that's the case.

On the other hand though, look at Demacio. He had some really awful drafts. In 2000 for example, no one in the top 30 panned out. The only player to make the Show with the O's was Kurt Birkins. (Brandon Fahey didn't sign that year.)

Olson - 2005

Reimold - 2005

Hernandez - 2005

Berken - 2006

Wieters - 2007

Soon?

Snyder - 2005

Erbe - 2005

Arrietta - 2007

[Stotle]

Yeah, but it's also an indicator that Jordan liked the guys in rounds 5-8 more than he liked Berry...a guy many on this board love. That should give us some confidence that he's drafting some guys with serious potential.

Well, I think we would all hope that Jordan likes the guys he drafted higher...I mean, it's great that BAL nabbed Berry (I love him in the 9th Round) but let's not forget that as much as people are celebrating the pick there are 29 ML organizations that didn't want him before pick 9:5...

[Duke2010]

Well, I think we would all hope that Jordan likes the guys he drafted higher...I mean, it's great that BAL nabbed Berry (I love him in the 9th Round) but let's not forget that as much as people are celebrating the pick there are 29 ML organizations that didn't want him before pick 9:5...

That had nothing to do with his talent, though. All indications are that Berry should have been a round 2-3 guy, but he happened to fall due to his injury risk. The risk with Berry isn't his talent, its his shoulder, and if he proves he's healthy and if we get him signed, then the pick is certainly worth celebrating.

[Stotle]

That had nothing to do with his talent, though. All indications are that Berry should have been a round 2-3 guy, but he happened to fall due to his injury risk. The risk with Berry isn't his talent, its his shoulder, and if he proves he's healthy and if we get him signed, then the pick is certainly worth celebrating.

You're missing my point. I know how talented Berry is when healthy. I saw him twice as a starter this year, including his first start back from injury against Houston. My point was that Jordan isn't putting any sort of specialized skill on display by selecting Berry in the 9th round. Everyone knows he's great, he has injury questions (due to workload AND mechanics) and he wants Top 100 money. That's why he was around. BAL was the first of the 30 teams to say "This tough sign is worth the risk here."

It's great to celebrate drafting him -- I did the second it happened and made the decision to take Berry in our Shadow Draft as soon as I made our 8:5 pick (provided Berry was around). But that isn't a skill.

The best way I can think to describe the "skill" would be to use my misstep as an example. I drafted:

4:5 Dustin Dickerson

5:5 Ian Krol

6:5 Madison Younginer

An example of the "skill" would be someone else also running a shadow draft and going:

4:5 Max Stassi

5:5 Dustin Dickerson

6:5 Ian Krol

7:5 Madison Younginer

This second individual was better at gauging when these talents would be taken off the board. He got my picks without having to waste a 4th round selection.

Likewise, through Day 1 I had conducted 8 total Shadow Rounds (1-5 last year and 1-3 this year). The Giants made four of the exact same selections exactly one pick after I did. That means that I was very skilled at identifying the right time to select those kids -- I was able to get as much talent as possible without losing out on the player I wanted.

It's impossible to grade Jordan on that "skill" since we don't know what the other boards look like. All you can do is estimate and look for clues/info from sources that have access to those other boards. You'll see someone like BA or Law say "I was told by several sources that so-and-so was several rounds down their board." Callis, I believe, at draft time said he was a bit surprised by Townsend. Since he is in consistent contact with various individuals within the drafting organizations, that is a hint that Townsend was probably down a round or two on other boards. All boards? No way to tell. But that is the "over-draft" that some on this thread are discussing/questioning. There isn't anywhere near enough info to reach a definite conclusion, but there is enough info to at least raise the question.

Hope the rambling clarified my position a bit.

[allstar1579]

Almost sounds like you're saying that you were more skilled at picking players in this draft than Joe Jordan was.

He didn't say anything about Jordan, so why try to twist his words? He said in his shadow draft his picks were very close to the actual picks made which is what you aim for when you do what we do.

I don't understand why you would even try to make it look like he said something not even remotely close to being true.

[Lucky Jim]

I'm not twisting anything. Stotle said the he (Stotle) was very skilled at picking the players in the right round. He earlier (in this thread or another thread) stated that he felt that Jordan drafted some guys who might have been there a round or two later. I think I asked a valid question but I can see that the tag team is now out to get me. lol

There's no tag team. It just looks like you're itching for a fight - apparently your other ones have scurried off?

Do you ever think you didn't ask a valid question?

[Lucky Jim]

When I pose a question to Stotle and you and Allstar have to try and chime in without allowing him to answer, yeah, I'd call that a tag team. Again, it's there in black and white. Stotle said that he thought Jordan may have overdrafted a few guys. He also said that he thought the Giants draft had proved that his skill at drafting players in the "right" round was reinforced. I don't know how I twisted his words. I can give you the quotes if you like.

I've read the quotes.

How are we supposed to "allow him to answer"? It's a message board. He can answer whenever he wants to.

The answer to your question is right there in the post, though:

It's impossible to grade Jordan on that "skill" since we don't know what the other boards look like. All you can do is estimate and look for clues/info from sources that have access to those other boards. You'll see someone like BA or Law say "I was told by several sources that so-and-so was several rounds down their board." Callis, I believe, at draft time said he was a bit surprised by Townsend. Since he is in consistent contact with various individuals within the drafting organizations, that is a hint that Townsend was probably down a round or two on other boards. All boards? No way to tell. But that is the "over-draft" that some on this thread are discussing/questioning. There isn't anywhere near enough info to reach a definite conclusion, but there is enough info to at least raise the question.

In his example, he had evidence that he picked at the right time, because each of the players would have been off the board with the next pick. Thus, he felt that he'd timed those picks correctly.

Because the real draft doesn't allow your choices to be validated the way a shadow does, we sort-of have to trust that Jordan had an idea of when kids were going to go.

I don't actually agree that Jordan's choices were "questionable" because unorthodox - he insured that he got the players he wanted before they were gone, and playing around w/ trying to time consensus and outliers is much riskier in real life than it is in the shadowlands. Or at least it is if you have definite, substantial preferences for certain players.

That said, there's nothing in Stotle's post that claims he thinks he's "better" than Jordan at anything. It's just a silly argument, so you can get into another pissing match with he and Crawdad.

I'm not rushing to anyone's defense. I'm simply saying that your gamesmanship here is kind of cheap and kind of obvious.

[Lucky Jim]

I never said that Stotle claims he's better than Jordan. If you read my post. The question is "It ALMOST seems as though you are saying". Basically I'm saying that it could come across that way and I was asking for a clarification from Stotle if he felt that way or not. I'm willing to wait for Stotle's response. That's not a problem. In the meantime I guess I'll have to put up with the attacks from the hit team.

Passive-aggressiveness is still...aggression.

[Stotle]

Almost sounds like you're saying that you were more skilled at picking players in this draft than Joe Jordan was.

Come on, of course not. That is ridiculous and I think you know that. My post wasn't hard to follow at all. I mean, the very first example I use I say "my misstep is an example", then go on to talk about how I didn't correctly gauge round valuation for Dickerson/Krol/Younginer.

I was illustrating that I can judge how my relative player valuations were because I have the benefit of selecting someone and then seeing when they actually go. When I select someone in round 2 and they don't go to the end of round three (Glaesmann) that is a selection that could have been better. I could have gotten a second round talent and selected Glaesmann in the third. I used my examples as a way to show how you can judge whether or not someone is (generally) over-drafting if you are privy to all of the info.

I went out of my way to say that we can't fairly judge Jordan because we don't have access to other teams' boards. So for all we know San Diego had Townsend in the fourth, or KC had him in the third. Likewise, maybe Berry looks like a great pick but in reality no one was drafting him until the 11th.

At times it almost seems like you enjoy being confrontational. I'm sure you weren't intentionally trying to make it sound like I was claiming to be better than Jordan, so I guess we can leave it at that. Let me know if you would like more clarification. If you'd like more evidence that I don't think I am better than Jordan, you can see this thread. I can clarify those remarks, as well, if needed.

[allstar1579]

When I pose a question to Stotle and you and Allstar have to try and chime in without allowing him to answer, yeah, I'd call that a tag team. Again, it's there in black and white. Stotle said that he thought Jordan may have overdrafted a few guys. He also said that he thought the Giants draft had proved that his skill at drafting players in the "right" round was reinforced. I don't know how I twisted his words. I can give you the quotes if you like.

First off he is comparing a composite of 8 shadow drafts he did for the Giants, and you are trying to said he said he was better than Jordan, you pulled it out of thin air. Second, he was showing that where he thought a group of guys should be drafted was close to their actual draft round.

I completely agree with him that it SEEMS like some of these picks were taken a round early, which would lead to the same players a round later and an additional player with a higher pick. It's Jordan's call if he wants to take them to make sure he gets his guys, but overall opinion is that some of these guys may have gone another round or so later.

You are just trying to twist words like JTrea does to make a point, and all I have seen you do over the past couple weeks is come in here and argue points and disagree with what seems like everything, so I ask if you are such an expert, where are your rankings and what are your opinions. It's easy to bash someone else's work when you aren't willing to put anything out there yourself.

[allstar1579]

I never said that Stotle claims he's better than Jordan. If you read my post. The question is "It ALMOST seems as though you are saying". Basically I'm saying that it could come across that way and I was asking for a clarification from Stotle if he felt that way or not. I'm willing to wait for Stotle's response. That's not a problem. In the meantime I guess I'll have to put up with the attacks from the hit team.

im·ply (m-pl)

tr.v. im·plied, im·ply·ing, im·plies

1. To involve by logical necessity; entail: Life implies growth and death.

2. To express or indicate indirectly: His tone implied disapproval. See Synonyms at suggest. See Usage Note at infer.

3. Obsolete To entangle.

There are no attacks here, just pointing out that you are incorrectly implying that he said something he didn't.

[allstar1579]

You'd have to point out all of the posts where I have bashed you or Stotle in this forum. I'm sure you can find plenty of ammunition but I don't recall many, if any. Sorry, if I don't have the time to research this stuff like some of you do. I can watch some video or writeups of Grant Green and offer my opinion or maybe ask some questions based on that. I guess you consider that bashing. Talk about twisting words. You have twisted mine plenty in this thread. I put my opinion out there plenty. I'm willing to back it up or change it if confronted with something that shows that it's wrong. I have come in here in the last two weeks, asked a bunch of questions, applauded those who contribute so much to this forum and make it interesting, and in turn get attacked when I see something that strikes me in a funny way. I guess I should have known better. You aren't allowed to question certain people. I guess you think you and some others are above it.

I don't remember specifics off the top of my head, I just remember as you stand out as one of the posters that did it most often, I could dig, but seriously, what's the point?

No one is saying that you said something you didn't which is what twisting words would be. I am saying you basically accused him of saying he thought he was better than Jordan, and that was wrong to do. Don't get so touchy and feel like anyone is out to get you, but own up to it when you grossly misstate something.

Have any opinion you want, I can hold my own in a discussion, but don't make it personal by saying that people that work so crazy hard on this stuff are saying things they didn't, not even a little bit. It wasn't like you were saying oh, you think Townsend was overdrafted a round, and I think he went where he should, you had to come out and imply that he was saying that he could do Jordan's job better than he could because he thought Townsend would have lasted another round.

I'm sure he's got 2-3 pages of data on Townsend that is telling him he would have gone later. (I actually think I said somewhere in the boards that I thought he'd make it to the 4th a couple weeks ago).

[allstar1579]

No wonder you can't remember any off the top of your head, because anything you call bashing would look silly if you actually pointed out the quotes. I challenge you to come up with some of my so called bashing in this forum.

When did I ever say you were bashing everything? I mean do you read the posts before you snap back? If you go read it says it seems like you were always arguing/discussing and you stood out as one of the main guys to do it. There is nothing wrong with that, you just like to find out new stuff and you do that by asking questions and challenging.

Pump the brakes champ and just be careful when you are making straight out implications about people.