OSFL 2009 Draft Discussion

[Lintyfresh85]

So it's that time of year again... the OSFL draft!!!

We've got about a week till it starts and I'm already getting excited!

Obviously we have two monster prospects sitting at the top of the board with Roy Parrish and Eric Poliska. After that though... who knows?

I think this class will turn out to be pretty even talent wise, but I'm kind of dreading picking at #9. There will be a lot of guys with similar ratings available to me, and quite frankly I have a lot of holes to fill.

So what do you guys think about the crop of talent, and what type of draft day success do you think you'll have?

[Plastic]

Because of the draft mishap from last year I only have a second rounder and late round picks, I will be going the Dan Snyder route and dishing out $ to FA's this year to improve. LOL!

[Jistic]

Please keep your comments general in this thread. Otherwise we negate the point of having scouts if we all start talking about what our guy thinks about so and so.

I've been guilty of it. But I think we should try to keep our comments as generalizations.

[Lintyfresh85]

Good point.

Lets try and keep ratings out of the discussion as much as possible.

[Pat]

I think just about every interview came back "very overrated" or "hard to read".

Damnit.

[Lintyfresh85]

Glad you're not the only one...

I think out of the 60 guys my scout looked at about 55 came back "very overrated".

Yuck.

[Acid]

I had varied interviews, a bit of everything. Most were Hard To Read though.

[Plastic]

when it says hard to read, does that just mean your scout sucks? That was the majority of my interview results as well.

[liquidcrash]

I don't really understand the interview results either. I know the ratings bars get a lot more exact when you interview people (which is why I do it), but the "Overrated/Hard To Read" throws me off. I'll see players who have great ratings come up Very Overrated, and guys who look absolutely terrible show as "underrated," with no major change in their ratings from before I interviewed.

[Jistic]

This comes up every year, but I think it has to do with what your scout feels as compared to the consensus. How much do you trust your scout?

[Pat]

This is like the 2007 NBA Draft. If you don't have #1 or #2, it really doesn't matter if you are #3 or #15.

With that said, I am picking at #11, and there is really only six guys I want at that spot. If all of those six have been taken, I will probably be looking to move down. I'll keep my fingers crossed.

[aholbert]

This comes up every year, but I think it has to do with what your scout feels as compared to the consensus. How much do you trust your scout?

I dont trust mine at all when it comes to D.

[tarcone]

I dont trust mine with WRs.
Or maybe im hoorible at picking them. I dont know but every WR I pick Busts or is just bad.

Otherwise, Yes I do trust him.

[Jistic]

I trust mine when it comes to QB's. Guys been dead on so far.

[Guest]

I don't really understand the interview results either. I know the ratings bars get a lot more exact when you interview people (which is why I do it), but the "Overrated/Hard To Read" throws me off. I'll see players who have great ratings come up Very Overrated, and guys who look absolutely terrible show as "underrated," with no major change in their ratings from before I interviewed.

Bars are the LEAST important factor when assessing rookies, and they don't change significantly in the interview. Don't try to tie the two things together. Here's what the tags mean:

OVERRATED="I don't think he's as good as these bars."
UNDERRATED="I think he's better than these bars."

The better your scout at young talent and the particular position, the more likely he is to be accurate. The better scouts are accurate with their assessment a good 85-90% of the time, and it appears that even mediocre ones are right roughly 2/3 of the time.

Approximately 1/3 of all rookies are better than their initial future potential (underrated/very underrated). Approximately 1/4 are pretty much as thought (as scouted). Approximately 40-45% are worse than their initial future potential (overrated/very overrated).

The worse your scout, the more likely you'll get a "hard to read" response.