Posts: 19,769
Threads: 635
Reputation:
86220
Joined: Oct 2016
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
(09-02-2022, 03:16 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Interesting.
I remember when they Bengals used to bring up the fact that they had one of the highest percentages of drafted players still in the league and many here would say it was meaningless bullshit.
Wonder if they will say the same now that the numbers have flipped.
Posts: 379
Threads: 11
Reputation:
2605
Joined: Jul 2015
Location: The dude abides in Cbus
(09-02-2022, 03:16 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
They've had some big misses but they're aiming small overall it seems with 60 percent appearing to be a relatively solid on roster retention rate.
Being a Bengals fan is like being in love with a narcissist. It's a brutal, emotionally abusive relationship but I never leave and just keep making excuses for them.
Posts: 4,418
Threads: 44
Reputation:
13853
Joined: May 2015
(09-02-2022, 03:24 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Interesting.
I remember when they Bengals used to bring up the fact that they had one of the highest percentages of drafted players still in the league and many here would say it was meaningless bullshit.
Wonder if they will say the same now that the numbers have flipped.
Well it looks like it was BS if I am reading this right.
They have the highest % out of the NFL now but they have a talented roster and just played in the SB. When they were bragging about having the highest % still in the league they sucked so maybe it is a BS stat.
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
(09-02-2022, 03:29 PM)Savagehenry54 Wrote: They've had some big misses but they're aiming small overall it seems with 60 percent appearing to be a relatively solid on roster retention rate.
That is a valid point.
It doesn't help a team that the rest of the league is getting value out of some of their picks. The Bengals are getting about as much retention of their own picks (60%) as the top teams in the league.
But overall I think it does say something about the quality of you scouting when you draft more NFL talent than the other teams in the league.
Posts: 6,236
Threads: 440
Reputation:
45527
Joined: May 2015
(09-02-2022, 03:30 PM)Clark W Griswold Wrote: Well it looks like it was BS if I am reading this right.
They have the highest % out of the NFL now but they have a talented roster and just played in the SB. When they were bragging about having the highest % still in the league they sucked so maybe it is a BS stat.
When did they suck when they said that? Because when they were saying that the Bengals were in a window where they went to the playoffs 6 straight years in a row and had a couple SB caliber teams.
Some of you buy WAAAAY to much into the media narrative that this franchise has been shitty for a decade plus now. The Bengals went through a rebuild for a couple years but they have been pretty consistently average to above average since 2005.
The boys are just talkin' ball, babyyyy
Posts: 14,961
Threads: 2,158
Reputation:
83950
Joined: May 2015
The big glaring miss during that time period was of course Billy Price, who isn't playing anywhere. 2 of those out-of-league players retired due to injuries. 4 of them were on rosters as of last weekend so they weren't complete busts. 1 is on a Canadian league team
Winning makes believers of us all
They didn't win and we don't beleive
Posts: 13,612
Threads: 133
Reputation:
91221
Joined: May 2015
I wouldnt read to much into this you can find stretches where every team drafts poorly.
During the stretch the OP's tweet indicated 2018 and 2019 were exceptionally bad draft classes for the Bengals but 2020 is technically extremely rare because every single player has been on the 53 man roster for 3 years in a row.
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
We got two top quality starters out of the 2018 draft (Bates, Hubbard). That is actually not that bad at all.
Posts: 19,769
Threads: 635
Reputation:
86220
Joined: Oct 2016
(09-02-2022, 04:07 PM)Synric Wrote: I wouldnt read to much into this you can find stretches where every team drafts poorly.
During the stretch the OP's tweet indicated 2018 and 2019 were exceptionally bad draft classes for the Bengals but 2020 is technically extremely rare because every single player has been on the 53 man roster for 3 years in a row.
Interestingly...the Raiders have a bunch of high round picks not on their roster.
So a 1st Round pick busts...they get another chance or 2 generally.
A 7th Round pick plays poor...they're out of the league.
Generally our high picks have been good.
Posts: 19,769
Threads: 635
Reputation:
86220
Joined: Oct 2016
(09-02-2022, 04:12 PM)fredtoast Wrote: We got two top quality starters out of the 2018 draft (Bates, Hubbard). That is actually not that bad at all.
And I think that's kind of the line for a draft. Get 2 good starters and it was a fine draft.
3 you did VERY well.
Posts: 19,769
Threads: 635
Reputation:
86220
Joined: Oct 2016
The one thing that is hard to quantify though is: Like when the Bengals were bad in the 90's...probably a lot of draft picks were on the roster. And a decent bit started. But, they were bad players in some cases.
So this can be a misleading stat. But, it does show scouting also in a way.
Most of the teams on this list are bad. With the Bengals, they basically flipped over the roster when Zac came in. So that entails replacing drafted players if that was your model before that.
Posts: 19,724
Threads: 144
Reputation:
163102
Joined: May 2015
Location: Covington, Ky
(09-02-2022, 03:16 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Nothing like a little, solid positivity right before the start of the season...
"The measure of a man's intelligence can be seen in the length of his argument."
1
Posts: 38,941
Threads: 922
Reputation:
132519
Joined: May 2015
It appears the Jags job is to make other teams better
1
Posts: 17,294
Threads: 239
Reputation:
137147
Joined: Oct 2015
(09-02-2022, 05:28 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It appears the Jags job is to make other teams better
That's an interesting one because on one hand the Jags are terrible and your comment is true, but on the other hand the rest of the top-5 are the Ravens, Bucs, Patriots, and Saints. Not really sure what conclusion you can draw from that.
____________________________________________________________
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
(09-02-2022, 05:36 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: That's an interesting one because on one hand the Jags are terrible and your comment is true, but on the other hand the rest of the top-5 are the Ravens, Bucs, Patriots, and Saints. Not really sure what conclusion you can draw from that.
I would think that the better the team's roster is the more likely they would release a guy who could play for another team. And in addition to the 4 good teams in the top 5 that you mention, the Raiders, Bills and Niners are also playoff teams.
Maybe one of the reasons the Jags are so bad is that they are making bad decisions about who thye release.
Posts: 10,877
Threads: 1,346
Reputation:
40098
Joined: May 2015
Location: Robbing Grandmas Of The Covid Vaccine In Northern Kentucky-Greater Cincinnati
(09-02-2022, 05:36 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: That's an interesting one because on one hand the Jags are terrible and your comment is true, but on the other hand the rest of the top-5 are the Ravens, Bucs, Patriots, and Saints. Not really sure what conclusion you can draw from that.
That they draft so well that they can't afford to pay the players what they'll demand so they trade them or let them walk?
That could be way off but it's just a thought.
Posts: 7,776
Threads: 216
Reputation:
40927
Joined: May 2015
Location: Cave
Also keep in mind there are variables that these stats are missing, I don't know how meaningful these variables are for each team nevertheless because it changes due to FA signings.
There is a strong correlation between NFL longevity and position group. RB, as an example, use to have shortest careers in NFL. Now it appears to be WRs which is around 2.2 years. https://www.si.com/nfl/2016/03/01/nfl-careers-shortened-two-years-data-analysis
RBs use to average 3.3 with the league average as 4.99 years. SO position group is a factor, and teams draft by BPA and needs (position group). Some teams need players that are higher risk of injury and less longevity. For those wondering, kickers have the highest longevity but several kickers and punters are UDFA signings.
Posts: 13,612
Threads: 133
Reputation:
91221
Joined: May 2015
(09-02-2022, 05:28 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It appears the Jags job is to make other teams better
Jordan Palmer mentioned that Jacksonville was a bad environment for developing players in a podcast once.
Posts: 38,941
Threads: 922
Reputation:
132519
Joined: May 2015
(09-02-2022, 05:48 PM)Synric Wrote: Jordan Palmer mentioned that Jacksonville was a bad environment for developing players in a podcast once.
They did give us Reggie Nelson
BTW, tough loss last night...
|
![[Image: Screenshot-2022-02-02-154836.png]](https://i.ibb.co/db2LNsj/Screenshot-2022-02-02-154836.png)
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
![[Image: 9c9oza.jpg]](https://i.imgflip.com/9c9oza.jpg)
![[Image: 7LNf.gif]](https://i.gifer.com/7LNf.gif)
![[Image: CavkUzl.gif]](https://i.imgur.com/CavkUzl.gif)
![[Image: maXCb2f.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/maXCb2f.jpg)
