MOCK 4 (DrafTek version 1)
One of the most interesting toys for draftniks is DrafTek's online simulator, which allows one to mimic the real draft.
I'm not entirely happy with their consensus Simulations lately; I just don't think an OG such as Herman Johnson is an appropriate choice for us no matter whether we have a need in that area or not. So, there are problems with the simulations even though they've taken steps to remedy these problems with the 'appropriateness' of selections.
Despite the rough edges, simulations replicate many aspects of the draft -- such as how competition affects availability of crucial positions in the 3-4 defense -- that aren't present in any other MOCKs. Those other MOCKs are merely a single individual's opinion of who every team should take, and necessarily suffer problems because of this.
The final and saving grace for the DrafTek simulations is that you can 'tweak' the inputs and see who it selects under the new criteria. You can also "grab or lockout" players (as I did with Herman Johnson) when there are problems with appropriateness or there's a player you think is undervalued and needs to be selected early.
Finally, my previous MOCKs using the DrafTek's Big Board didn't use the simulator itself but merely selected off their Big Board. It was less cumbersome that way and also allowed me to look at the choices rather than having the computer do that for me, but the supply & demand characteristics of a real draft weren't present.
And now the MOCK. (note: I'll be learning of these choices, for the most part, as you learn of them, too)
#12) - Rey Maualuga (ILB) - [REACH: -6, PRIORITY: 3]
#18) - Evander Hood (DE34) - [REACH: -14, PRIORITY: 2]
#48) - Josh Freeman (QB) - [VALUE: +20. PRIORITY: 4]
#79) - Kevin Barnes (CB) - [VALUE: +9. PRIORITY: 4]
#84) - Rashad Jennings (RB-F) - [VALUE: +1, PRIORITY: 5]
#114) - Roy Miller (DT34) - [REACH: -41, PRIORITY: 3]
#149) - Cameron Morrah (TE) - [VALUE: +1, PRIORITY: 4]
#185) - Johnny Knox (WR-S) - [VALUE: +9, PRIORITY: 4]
#225) - Anthony Parker (OG) - [REACH: -6, PRIORITY: 4]
#235) - Jamarca Sanford (SS) - [REACH: -5, PRIORITY: 3]
Just a few quick comments -- I played with the settings in order to get less redundancy for some positions. For instance, I didn't want both an OG and an OC so I simply eliminated OC. This is hardly what we'll do in the draft but we may take one or the other, but I didn't have that choice in the simulation. I don't find that the priority settings mimic the richness of the actual decision making process so I was attempting to overcompensate for this flaw by eliminating some positions from consideration.
What's noticeable to me but won't be to others is how often player we would have chosen were taken shortly before our pick. And, in some cases, there are players we would have deemed worthy of a reach, but the simulation's Big Board BPA values had them placed too low. We can argue with this, and I can even go back a "grab" these players in the respective round, but I like the discipline that's being imposed.
Finally, what would be very useful for the sake of comparing simulations -- both your own and other member's -- is to record what as priority values you've used. I've shown the priorities next to the picks but they're quite arguable and the record is incomplete (for instance, I skipped WR-F but included WR-S). Priority settings may need to be twitched in order to arrive at desirable MOCKs so the best way of doing this may be try out settings and see which work best, a sort of backwards way of producing the proper priority settings.
I'll save further comments for the comments section.
This is a Fan-Created Comment on MileHighReport.com. The opinion here is not necessarily shared by the editorial staff of MHR
0 recs |
14 comments
Comments
below
Their Big Board of Best Player Available (BPA) rankings puts a value on each player, e.g. Curry is #1, #2 Crabtree, etc. Therefore Mauluga is the 18th best player, since he’s a reach of -6 but he’s taken at the #12 pick.
You can see that Freeman was a value of +20, i.e., still on the board well after the point where he was ranked on BPA.
by Colinski on Apr 23, 2009 4:08 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not so hard to figure out, thanks..so if
we are reaching 41 pts for Roy Miller, why not take him at 149 then, and Johnny Knox at 114 when reaching for Knox might be better?
by bfree2bronc on Apr 23, 2009 5:16 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because DT34 was prioritized as such a great need.
Those inputs are customizable, but in Colinski’s sim above DT34 was a priority 3 need (very high) indicating a willingness to reach pretty deep if needed. The ODS saw the unfilled need sitting there, did it’s match and made the reach. There was no guarentee at the time (at pick 114) at the Roy Miller would still be there at 149 and the priority (need) justified the reach.
by NedBronco on Apr 23, 2009 7:59 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
do. not. like.
i just threw up in my mouth a little bit
by lolcopter on Apr 23, 2009 3:52 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
try one of your own
I haven’t liked the great majority of the Consensus simulations, especially of late. I don’t know if that means that the players we want are not going to be there when we pick or if it’s something else. There are a lot of competitors for 3-4 appropriate players so there’s reason to be concerned.
Complaints about their Big Board values are common, but take a look and see where you actually disagree — if you do. Saying you don’t like the simulation can be meaningless, it’s like saying that the players you wanted were selected by another team.
I like the fact that there’s discipline to the picks. You can’t simply cherry pick from a list of names and expect that the ones you want would be there in reality. These are wishlists, and they’re nearly meaningless. DrafTek’s simulations are far from perfect but at least they’re simulations rather than recitations of players you like.
by Colinski on Apr 23, 2009 4:18 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ditto on the discipline of the ODS.
That’s the biggest reason I use it. Helps set more realistic expectations.
I think you’ll get some better drafts for the Broncos if you give yourself more latitude in the priorities and to make a couple of grabs yourself.
Thanks for the work!
by NedBronco on Apr 23, 2009 8:01 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Colinski
Out of you simulations, I like the Mock 3 the best.
Johnny Knox is a guy I saw some film on recently, intriguing prospect. I wanted to ask you, do you see Everette Brown and/or Tyson Jackson both going Top 10. I hear that the Chiefs are strongly considering Jackson at 3! which I can’t believe and Brown getting snatched up before 10.
I think with 12 McDaniels will be sitting like this:
1. Raji – if he is there, they sprint to the podium
2. B. Orakpo
3. T.Jackson – might be gone as well
4. E. Brown – I wouldn’t mind at all, I like him
5. M. Jenkins – Too good to pass up, they will take him over Rey I think
6. R. Maualuga – I think they hoping to get him at 18
Then at 18 – any one from the list up top or a potential slider then Moreno… A. Maybin is the wildcard.
What do you think?
Moreno in '09!
by Steve O' on Apr 23, 2009 4:11 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I like the prioritization.
Some interesting speculation today that Curry could fall to the Broncos. I’d be shocked if that happened, but I understand the rationale. If he was available (by some miracle), I’d put him #2 on this list.
by NedBronco on Apr 23, 2009 8:05 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
re: various
I see Tyson Jackson and Brown/or Maybin as likely to be gone by our pick. Oddly, their consensus simulation (revision 39) has us getting T Jackson, so I don’t know what happened in my simulation, since I did have DE34 as the highest rated priority.
I think we’ll ultimately get a menu of choices that has either Brown or Maybin. Jenkins looks to be available at #12 but I’m having my doubts about taking a CB/S at #12. I like him it’s just that it seems like we should have our pick of a top flight DL at that spot but we don’t. And later CBs may give us close to his value and cost a lot less. However, it’s a minor concern.
You’ve pretty much nailed all the choices, Steve O’. I’d love to see one DL at least in the top 2 choices and 2 DLs would probably be ideal but unrealistic. I think a Moreno choice could happen if the stars align. The real fear is that something strange happens and some of the players we thought would be gone are still there, such as Smith, Oher, Maclin, etc. I wonder if a trade scenario could happen then. It’s not terrible because there is some slack but it could limit our choices.
My guess is that our choices are between; T. Jackson, Brown/or Maybin, Jenkins, Maualuga and Moreno. We should get our first two from that group of five.
by Colinski on Apr 23, 2009 4:54 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Nice work Colinski
Appreciate your effort
My Dad told me about the 4 seasons:
Pre-season
Regular-season
Post-season
Off-season
by KaptainKirk on Apr 23, 2009 5:01 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I Like The Previous Version Better.
But thanks for sharing!
"The mystic chords of fandom, stretching from every trade and signing to every active account and guest all over this broadband, will yet swell the chorus of union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature". ~ Abraham Lincoln-ish
"The tree of victory must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of quarterbacks and coaches". ~ Thomas Jefferson-ish
by ejruiz on Apr 23, 2009 10:48 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

by 



























