What is the value of doing things right? Ask the NFL for a distorted view

This is what NFL personnel directors have to sift through when making draft decisions after all the data they get from the combine. Now you have to figure out if the guy will be on the field for you, not just factoring in the risk of on-field injury, but the risk that you lose playing time due to the self-inflicted injury of poor decision making.

Good luck. It sounds as if we're just parsing levels of criminality and measuring it against ability in the ultimate risk vs. reward balancing act.

rom USA Today:
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/story/2012-04-20/NFL-draft-criminal-study/54433122/1

The study was done by Hamilton student Kendall Weir as his senior thesis for an economics degree and is being overseen by Wu. It included every player (around 1,200) taken in the 2005-2009 NFL drafts and their results at the scouting combine. Then it divided players into four groups based on comparable results and tracked their performance through the 2011-12 season. The four groups:

1.) Players with no suspensions or legal problems in college;

2.) Players suspended one game or more for violating team or university rules;

3.) Players arrested and charged with a crime;

4.) Players arrested, but not charged.

If you wanted the biggest bang for your buck and this were a multiple-choice quiz, the best answer would be No. 4.

Players in that group are usually drafted in the same spot as comparable players in the No. 1 group, yet wind up averaging two more starts per season. Suspended players dropped the farthest in the draft, 25 spots on average. They also fared the worst in performance terms when compared to the "clean" players, averaging two fewer starts per season, as well as having shorter careers. Players in the arrested-and-charged group tended to perform exactly the same as the clean group, but ended up being drafted 15 spots lower.

OBTW: Charles Manson is still on the board. I'm not sure what his most recent 40 time clocked in at.

 

The conclusions of this study are somewhat disturbing, not as disturbing as the Manson .gif, but,
"if you're on the fence about a player and worried about his criminal record, the data says take a chance" seems to me to be a recipe to eventually having your team owner testifying as a character witness at a murder trial.

Wait, that already happened right?

Put that in your "PR-nightmare scenario calculator" and smoke it. If there's no penalty....the behavior continues. If it is incentivized, which this study portraying the "convicts as draft bargains" implies, you get more of it.

The choir-boys are being over-valued relative to the convicts. Ain't that a kick in the head?

 

So good luck to those hoping for the cultural landscape to improve and shame on those who want to turn a blind eye and act like it doesn't matter. It does.

The NFL wants to pay lip-service to these issues as they occur rather than doing anything to prevent them from occurring in the first place. It's not so much what you say that matters, it's what you do. And in many of these matters, the NFL does more harm than good.  

What the hell, what time is kick-off?

from thebiglead.com
http://thebiglead.com/2012/04/21/nfl-draft-study-on-character-issues-does-not-add-up/

A research study from Hamilton College claims that drafting players who have had legal incidents pays off.

“So if you’re on the fence about a player and worried about his criminal record,” said Stephen Wu, an economics professor at Hamilton College in Clinton, N.Y., “the data says take a chance.”

Not so fast. I know the words “regression analysis” make journalists’ eyes gloss over, but I went and found a draft of this study. I’ll go through it in a moment. Before we get to the numbers, though, take a look at this paragraph and consider whether the best teams are the ones employing this smart strategy.

Of the teams mentioned above, Arizona used 27 percent of its picks during the five-year span on players in the last three groups. Cincinnati, which has become a sort of “Boys Town East” for troubled free agents as well as draftees, was second at 25 percent, with San Francisco and Chicago tied for third at 20 percent. At the other end of the spectrum, Seattle drafted no players with character issues, followed by Atlanta (2 percent), Baltimore (3) and Green Bay (6).

On to Day 2:

from Yahoo Sports:
Randy Gregory, slew of defenders lead list of best available Day 2 players | Shutdown Corner - Yahoo Sports:

Even with Jameis Winston, Marcus Peters and Shane Ray going in the first 23 picks, it's clear that teams valued character seriously on Thursday.

Our top 10 best-remaining players include a few players who were taken off teams' boards — either for Round 1 consideration or altogether — with serious red flags for their off-field indiscretions. Here's our list: 

Nebraska DE-OLB Randy Gregory — Electric edge rusher who has had trouble keeping on weight and likely projects best to a 3-4 defense. He could be special if he keeps out of trouble and proves to his next team that's he's accountable and trustworthy.

Virginia DE-OLB Eli Harold — Thin-legged edge rusher with good burst off the ball and a frame that could handle more bulk in time. He brings energy to the field and would be an ideal 3-4 outside rusher.

Alabama FS Landon Collins — Athletically gifted, bulked up safety who can't play in space as well as he can up near the line of scrimmage. Those limitations likely are the reason he slid out of Round 1, but he could be a good player if used correctly.

Florida State DT Eddie Goldman — Bull-strong nose tackle or 1-technique who can play with force and leverage and should fit into most schemes. Goldman never will be a big sack producer, but he can block out the sun with his mass and be a factor stopping the run.

Arizona State WR Jaelen Strong — Linear "X" receiver with strong hands and good route-running and high-point ability. Similar to Jordan Matthews a year ago, Strong could end up being a Day 1 starter in the NFL and productive in the right system.

LSU CB Jalen Collins — Long-armed, super athletic press corner with some character concerns and limited experience (10 college starts).

UCLA LB Eric Kendricks — Excitable, playmaking linebacker who overcomes his size deficiencies with high effort and outstanding instincts. But Kendricks must be covered up and can't shed blocks against powerful offensive linemen that well.

Mississippi CB Senquez Golson — Undersized playmaker who has great ball skills and terrific confidence. A true game-changer if he can play in a scheme where he's not asked to match up, one on one, against massive receivers.

ex-Missouri WR Dorial Green-Beckham — Athletically blessed, mercurial, unreliable receiver with rare gifts and top-10 ability. His short, occasionally brilliant and often frustrating career at Mizzou showed both his potential as a receiver and his need to mature greatly.

Indiana RB Tevin Coleman — Straight-line home-run hitter who has great toughness and workhorse traits and can thrive in the right system. Behind a bad offensive line and with few playmakers around him, Coleman was a weekly wonder for the Hoosiers.

Gregory (positive drug test prior to the scouting combine), Jalen Collins (multiple failed drug tests in college) and Green-Beckham (kicked out of Mizzou following domestic abuse allegations) all had first-round physical traits and rare measurables for their respective positions. But their character issues knocked them down into a range where teams are more comfortable rolling the dice on players.

'via Blog this'