But that's precisely what is happening by grading now. You (or anyone grading now) is grading based on Harris being arbitrarily listed as a player worth a pick in the mid-20s and every other pick around him being arbitrarily listed as whatever their grade is. Mel Kiper, for example, doesn't know what Miami is looking for in a DE or LB. Nor does he know what traits/abilities/etc. other teams are looking for in a given position. He also doesn't have the interview results or internal testing. Because of all that, why is grading the draft based on Mel's (or some other pundit/poster/regular joe) meaningful? Why does it matter if our FO graded well on a value system put together by people who don't possess the same information as the FO, but also don't know what the team is actually looking for?
Because this is a message board where people post their opinions on all things dolphins related including how they are perceived to have done in the draft. I appreciate that you took the time to create the thread and post all of the draft grades but find it odd that you spent that time on something you feel is utter nonsense.
How can you determine whether sound logic was used without specified probabilities? The whole point of talking about biases in psychology is so that you can show the decision was consistently suboptimal in a particular direction. That is, the behavior wasn't "rational" or "optimal" given available data. Well.. if you can't derive what "rational" or "optimal" is given the data, you can't talk about whether the behavior was "biased" (at least in the way researchers in psychology use that word). And you can't calculate "rational" or "optimal" in this case unless you have specified the probability of different outcomes.
Right, but I'm not questioning anyone's opinion, I'm trying to understand the rationale for the specific opinion they have. Why do you, VManis, think grading a draft based on arbitrary values is meaningful?
So in your opinion you can't determine whether selecting a draft pick based on eye color is a sound decision because there is no specified probabilities. OK I think I'm done with this conversation.
strawman argument. If the ONLY information available was eye color, then what I said holds. If more information than eye color was available but only eye color was used, then you'd still have to prove the probabilities for rational decision-making change if you use the extra information before concluding one way or another. Like I said.. without probabilities you can't determine whether there was any bias away from rationality.
I'm throughly confused by your stance on this FinD. You started a thread citing draft grades from all over the internet. Other posters commented on those grades and provided their own grades. Often without any explanation as to how they arrived at those grades. I make a post explaining my opinion on how a grade should be derived for a draft and you attack it claiming its arbitrary to grade a draft. What was the point of this thread if not to discuss how the draft should be graded?
The bias in Outcome Bias is not in the eyes of the person making the decision, its in the eyes of the person judging the decision ie the outcome good or bad created a bias in how the original decision was perceived.
Precisely, and you have to be able to determine what is "rational" from the available data before you can conclude the decision in question was "biased". Can't do that here without specifying probabilities.
You can discuss something and still recognize that it is a silly thing. Draft grades, mock drafts, preseason power rankings, schedule predictions, are all examples of meaningless exercises we take part in during the offseason and season. I think mock drafts are a huge waste of time, especially after the first round, that does not stop me from reading, discussing, or playing mock draft online games.
Again we aren't talking about whether the original decision was biased or not. We are talking about whether the person judging the decision was influenced by the outcome in determining whether the original decision was sound. Everyone says Tom Brady was a great 6th round pick because of how he turned out but would anyone even be talking about the pick had he fizzled out? The decision process for the Pats would have been the exact same, its only the outcome that influences our judgement of that outcome. Heck Bobby Grier was supposedly Brady's biggest advocate within the Pats and he was fired shortly afterwards.
OK well I was responding to the suggestion that we could actually judge the quality of the decision to draft a specific player (so a specific case rather than a general principle) without seeing the outcome. Can't do it here for the reasons stated. To this more general point, there has to be a distinction made: was the decision "rational" vs. was it a good decision. I agree with you in principle regarding the rationality argument. You judge rationality or bias based only on the information available at the time the decision was made. But that's totally separate from whether the decision was good or not. You can be totally irrational and make a great decision (i.e the decision-making process was bad but the decision was great). In this specific case we don't have the information necessary to solve the "rationality" or "bias" problem, but we can evaluate how good the decision was once we see how things turn out.
Folks simply need to to just take them for what they are....sources of entertainment. Mock drafts, draft grades are just fun to read. They really have ZERO bearing on how a pick or an entire draft for that matter pan out. We could get all "F's" across the board from whomever and it wouldn't make me feel any different about our picks.
I didn't attack you. You were the first one to actually explain your criteria. I read your criteria and had thoughts on it. I tried to have a discussion about it. This is a discussion forum. I wasn't rude or mean or insulting. I actually respect you. I didn't make the thread for any reason other than I was just trying to have one place for all the grades around the web and to have discussion. Making the thread doesn't mean I'm endorsing anything.
The words though, all have equal value, unless you place value, like usage, then jump becomes easily the most valuable, the others, now there is an interesting choice, now it would depend on what you know about the group picking, a carpenter? librarian? work at Ronzoni? live in China? Lets assume they are drafting words to use to make a sentence about their life, carpenter is up first and thinks he nailed it by choosing hammer and they're all hi fiving over at the carpenters table, librarian goes and hands in the pick, the librarians pick book, "so far it's been "no surprises" Bob". Then the guy who lives in China walks up, "with the 3rd pick in the 2017 make a sentence about your life word draft, the Chinese fella picks spaghetti, that's spaghetti", "well we sure have a surprise now Chuck, what could the "lives in China" people be thinking about?","i'll tell you Bob, they all don't look to thrilled over at that table". So I think it would be fair to judge the 1st 2 picks as being good and the 3rd to be questionable with bicycle still on the board, now at the end of the day they may put together a surprisingly good sentence about living in China, but it's still fair to guess how you think they did. Even if your knowledge is just reading those you respect and basing it on that, it's ok to guess, now how much stock you or anyone else puts in it is another thing, but we love to guess about everything, hence gambling, lol. Personally I don't trust anyones grade on a player, if I haven't actually watched tape on a guy then I won't have much conviction either way, I respect some peoples opinion more than others, and there are posters on this board who's opinion I respect more than Kiper, Mayock and the rest. The biggest thing with those guys is "fingertip" knowledge, and to give them the credit they are due, they have vast amounts of it, hard to find players they don't have some "fingertip" knowledge on, for the TV production value that's worth. I would have drafted different players except for Tank and Asiata, but I like the players they drafted, based on my own research, I watched tape on all the picks except Ford and like the 1st 5 picks especially, I actually would have drafted Brantley or Stevie T over Godchaux, but I like Godchaux as well. I think with his body, the pro strength and conditioning program is going to work wonders, combined with technique, he's always going to be the lowest man, down there lowest man wins more often than not, which is Phillips main problem(as a general rule, I don't like 6'6" DTs). With Harris, anyone who has a 1st step like that can get work in the NFL, he also has a devastating counter to that 1st step, this = headstart, a 1st step like that pulls the T away creating a larger passrush lane, for blitzes of all types, stunts etc, and his spin move, and I have every confidence he'll add a counter to that, he's a dedicated, hard working high level athlete. His athletic gifts are in the form of fluidity and body control, he's just going to continue to grow as a passrusher imo. I feel like if it's fair that I think we did well, then it also has to in turn be fair for someone else to think the opposite, yin/yang, and in the end most likely we will all be wrong and right in our own turn and degree, after all, it's just guessing/hoping whether or not we'll be right.
