08-04-2015, 12:00 AM
(08-03-2015, 11:46 PM)fredtoast Wrote: How can you not grasp such a simple concept.
Because it's a ***** ******** concept. (That because Paul Alexander "coached up" a mid-round pick to be a decent starter, he's obivously a good coach)
Every team league in the league, in probably every single year the league has been in existence, has had middle round players become legitimate starters.
4th round, 5th round, 6th round. 7th round. The league is littered with starting players from these rounds. Because a position group has a a player or two that wasn't drafted in the first couple of rounds, it doesn't automatically mean their position coach is great.
Think of it this way, a team doesn't take any OL at in the first two rounds for 5 consecutive seasons, nor do they add any FA's. As a result their current starting lineup is all guys drafted between round 3-7. Can we automatically assume that their OL is very good because he coached up a bunch of later picks to be starters. Or do we need to actually look at the circumstances that lead to this, and try to gauge the performance on the field, relative to value?
And at what point does scouting come into play? What if a top-notch scouting department finds a diamond in the rough, that required little no more coaching than his higher drafted counterparts, but really only required the opportunity? Who gets credit? Ex: Who gets sole credit for Geno Atkins, Jay Hayes, or Bill Tobin? Or is it combined effort?
PS Boling started from day 1. Exactly how much coaching did he need to be a starting caliber guard?
