Monday, March 22, 2010

A cross between a tree and an Argentinian

-- And the Draft merry go round spins again, kind of, as Browns GM Mike Holmgren has let it be known that he intends to pick up a QB in the third round region. Not sure what kind of talent will be left at that time, but likely possibilities might be Zac Robinson or Tony Pike, who've been moving up a number of draft boards lately. And so we move on, as the other day I suggested that the world of medicine could help you make draft picks? How? One word; Triage. Descended from two words, tree, a big thing made of wood; and argie bargy, a derogatory British name for someone of Argentinian descent. Of course I jest. Triage actually comes from the French verb Trier, meaning to separate, sort or select, and is the name given to the almost universal practice in Medicine of evaluating and prioritising patients for treatment and/or transport, usually in emergency situations such as disaster zones. The purpose is to ensure that limited resources are used in the most successful and efficient manner possible. Time wasted dealing with someone with a broken finger could be better spent on someone who has a life threatening chest injury. And additionally it has to be understood that sometimes, unfortunately, certain cases have to be marked off as a lost cause for anything except pain relief. Typically the very basics of Triage come down to grouping people into one of the following three categories: - Those who are likely to live regardless of treatment - Those who are likely to die regardless of treatment - Those for whom immediate treatment might make a positive difference And personally, I think these three categories can be useful when looking at your draft needs (at last, a link). The simple solution is to look at each position group that you have and prioritise them by fitting each into one of the three categories above. I think an example or two might be useful here. WR - Dallas Cowboys. This is a clear case of the first group. They could go out and snap up a superb WR with their first pick, but there's little point. Regardless of whether they pick another WR or not, their current group will remain in healthy shape next season. Picking another WR serves them no advantage and overlooks other positions where they might be able to make a difference. Probably one of the clearest arguments for not taking the Best Player Available. Other examples are; RB-Panthers, O Line-Colts, DB-Jets. DB - Lions. This a clear example of category two. No offense to Detroit, but the Lions secondary play was hideous last year. And a new DB would do them no favours. They lack talent desperately across the safety and corner positions, partly because they struggle to get pressure up front. If they could sort out their D-line with the addition of Ndamukong Suh or Gerald McCoy, then the situation might just improve enough for next year. Further examples include; LB-Rams, WR-Redskins, QB-Raiders. And finally, LB-49ers. This is a good example of Category three. Patrick Willis is the undisputed king of this unit, and Scott McKillop is coming along nicely, while Manny Lawson is useful off the edge. But Takeo Spikes is getting older and their are questions about the rest of the group. The addition of one or two extra pieces in the draft could make a big difference. Other notable examples include; DB-Saints, WR-Dolphins, RB-Eagles. So there you have it, a possible medical remedy for your positional woes. Still not as good as Aspirin though. Have a great day everybody.

No comments: