Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Some things to consider... (Grudenistas and Dungy humpers will love this) « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3

psymun

*
Starter
****
Posts : 987
Offline
: March 24, 2007, 08:19:18 PM

I'm sorry, but these are the facts.

I am a strong Gruden supporter, and I wouldn't normally bring up statistics that would give the Grudenistas a reason to continue to complain (Karen). But this stat alarmed me...

I was re-reading my insider magazine where Jim Flynn mentioned a lot of the Facts and Myths about Jon Gruden and it got me thinking... How many draft picks have the Buccaneers used on each side of the ball? (Kickers excluded).

Since 2003 (I excluded 2002 on purpose, but it doesn't make a difference either way), Gruden has had 11 first day picks. Of those, he has used 8 on offense, and 3 on defense. As a whole, he has had a total of 35 draft picks. He has used 22 on offense and 13 on defense. That means that 72% of our 1st day picks have been used on the offensive side of the ball, and 62% of our picks as a whole have been used on the offensive side of the ball.

To put this into perspective, over the same time period, the New England Patriots have used 7 first day picks on offense and 6 on defense as well as 17 total picks on both offense and defense. Okay, Okay, I know the Patriots have done a better job scouting also, but the fact still remains.

For those of you that were wondering... Dungy used 9 first day picks on offense and 8 first day picks on defense, and 23 total picks on offense and 24 total picks on defense... Pretty even huh?

Now take a look at this...

For some reason, while in Oakland... Gruden used 5 first day picks on offense, and 5 first day picks on defense BUT used 11 total picks on offense and 16 total picks on defense... and if I remember correctly, he had a pretty good team over there...


bouconagain

*
Pro Bowler
*****
Posts : 1108
Offline
#1 : March 24, 2007, 08:20:56 PM

You've got to think the fact that the Bucs have, oh, never had offensive playmakers and the Raiders, oh, have never not had offensive playmakers probably plays a bit into those particular draft strategies.

psymun

*
Starter
****
Posts : 987
Offline
#2 : March 24, 2007, 08:25:54 PM

You've got to think the fact that the Bucs have, oh, never had offensive playmakers and the Raiders, oh, have never not had offensive playmakers probably plays a bit into those particular draft strategies.

So do we blame that on coaching or scouting?


bouconagain

*
Pro Bowler
*****
Posts : 1108
Offline
#3 : March 24, 2007, 08:30:08 PM

Nope, I don't find the Gruden/Dungy debate particularly interesting or relevant, no more than the was-it-Wyche-who-drafted-them debate interesting/relevant.  The bigger point I was so eloquently making is that a guy brought in to **CENSORED**e up an anemic offense will likely draft more on that side, since that was the reason he was brought in.

Nature

**
Rookie

Posts : 87
Offline
#4 : March 24, 2007, 08:32:53 PM

Because in 02 our D was set far as talent. We probably would have picked some players on D in the 1st round but we did not. We gave the Jets 2 first rounders,gave Oakland a first rounder. Hum, 3 1st rounders could have went on D and probably would have paid big dividend. But Rich McKay hes a bonehead he would give 2 1st rounders for a posseision reciever in Keyshawn.




psymun

*
Starter
****
Posts : 987
Offline
#5 : March 24, 2007, 08:33:07 PM

Nope, I don't find the Gruden/Dungy debate particularly interesting or relevant, no more than the was-it-Wyche-who-drafted-them debate interesting/relevant. The bigger point I was so eloquently making is that a guy brought in to **CENSORED**e up an anemic offense will likely draft more on that side, since that was the reason he was brought in.

So then we agree that Gruden has neglected the defense come draft time in order to make the offense better?


bouconagain

*
Pro Bowler
*****
Posts : 1108
Offline
#6 : March 24, 2007, 08:37:41 PM

Nope, I don't find the Gruden/Dungy debate particularly interesting or relevant, no more than the was-it-Wyche-who-drafted-them debate interesting/relevant. The bigger point I was so eloquently making is that a guy brought in to **CENSORED**e up an anemic offense will likely draft more on that side, since that was the reason he was brought in.

So then we agree that Gruden has neglected the defense come draft time in order to make the offense better?

And, like, who in the hell could argue with that?  Of course that's what's happened.

Granted, there's been sort of a goofy situation with the whole not-having-four-premium-picks-in-the-first-two-drafts hoohah, but sure, they've definitely drafted offense over defense.

I just don't think that's an indictment of Gruden or the scouts.  What would be a more interesting comparison (for those that are into this sort of thing) is matching up the whiffs on high offensive picks in the Dungy/McKay years (how's it hanging, Green and Anthony?) vs. the whiffs on high defensive picks in the Gruden/McKay/Allen years.

psymun

*
Starter
****
Posts : 987
Offline
#7 : March 24, 2007, 08:39:04 PM

Because in 02 our D was set far as talent. We probably would have picked some players on D in the 1st round but we did not. We gave the Jets 2 first rounders,gave Oakland a first rounder. Hum, 3 1st rounders could have went on D and probably would have paid big dividend. But Rich McKay hes a bonehead he would give 2 1st rounders for a posseision reciever in Keyshawn.

You see, I was blinded by that fact as well at one point. But the thing is... Those 1st rounders that could have gone toward the D were all used to upgrade the offense, trading 2 to get Keyshawn and trading 2 firsts a second and a 3rd to get Gruden... That's 7 first day picks that should have upgraded the offense... so if you want to use that excuse we can just add that to my point... that's a total of 15 first day picks used to upgrade the offense...


Nature

**
Rookie

Posts : 87
Offline
#8 : March 24, 2007, 08:43:32 PM

Credit that to McKay




calicojack

*
Starter
****
Posts : 835
Offline
#9 : March 24, 2007, 08:51:11 PM

Credit that to McKay

1 McKay, 1 Glazers.

The Dream Team

bradentonian

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 27904
Online
#10 : March 24, 2007, 09:08:50 PM

I don't see why anyone should complain about the 2 picks for Keyshawn anymore than they should complain about the fortune we gave up for Gruden.  Both achieved their purpose: winning the Superbowl.  As stated above, Gruden was brought in and charged with building an offense to rival the mighty defense.  The problem has been that even after throwing more and more picks ot the offense, it really hasn't been any better.  And in the meantime, the neglected defense is falling apart.  Hopefully we spend the majority of this year's picks on the D, and the offense finally comes together, and we'll be in good shape.




Guest
#11 : March 24, 2007, 09:10:05 PM

I heard a stat a few days ago on Sirius and i wish i could remember the exact #'s but it went something like 20 of the 40+ draft picks that Gruden has made as Buc coach are no longer in the league.  

Maybe SR/JF can confirm that disturbing stat.

shall555

****
Starter

Posts : 737
Offline
#12 : March 24, 2007, 09:16:05 PM

I heard a stat a few days ago on Sirius and i wish i could remember the exact #'s but it went something like 20 of the 40+ draft picks that Gruden has made as Buc coach are no longer in the league. 

Maybe SR/JF can confirm that disturbing stat.

A majority of those were 7th rounders. Some years we had as many as (4) 7th round picks.

bouconagain

*
Pro Bowler
*****
Posts : 1108
Offline
#13 : March 24, 2007, 09:17:27 PM

I heard a stat a few days ago on Sirius and i wish i could remember the exact #'s but it went something like 20 of the 40+ draft picks that Gruden has made as Buc coach are no longer in the league. 

Maybe SR/JF can confirm that disturbing stat.

eh, the only disturbing picks I can think of are the Marquises, given their 3rd round position.  Is anyone crying over Lockett or the four seventh round picks we had the one year as compensatory? 

Team by team, I'd think the retention rate is pretty low on picks in the 6th/7th.  Plus, with the shelf-life of the average NFL player being 3-4 years, you're going to expect guys from 3-4 years ago to no longer be in the league.

karen anderson

*
Practice Squad

Posts : 0
Offline
#14 : March 24, 2007, 09:20:35 PM

I heard a stat a few days ago on Sirius and i wish i could remember the exact #'s but it went something like 20 of the 40+ draft picks that Gruden has made as Buc coach are no longer in the league.  

Maybe SR/JF can confirm that disturbing stat.
I heard that as well.
Page: 1 2 3
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Some things to consider... (Grudenistas and Dungy humpers will love this) « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools