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

bradentonian

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 27371
Offline
#15 : March 24, 2007, 09:38:02 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.

Yeah, but you have to hit on some of those late picks ; that's one of the only real edges a team can get in the salary cap era.  For instance, in the 7th round of 04, SD picked up Shane Olivea 3 picks after Mark Jones.  That would have saved us the need to use a 2nd rounder on True last year.  The next year, Dallas picked Jay Ratliff 3 picks after Razzano, and he's a guy that could rotate at UT.  That same year NE picked Matt Cassell 5 picks after we took Warren, and they're confident enough in him that they aren't worried about their backup situation.  St Louis got their backup QB (Fitzpatrick) several picks later.  SD's backup at both Guard spots (Mruczkowski) was also picked in that area.

I'm not saying that any one team should be digging up all these diamonds in the rough, but that you just can't blow them off, either.  Those compensatory 7th rounders are a prime opportunity to get a very cheap player, and if you can develop them into a contributor it gives you an edge under the salary cap and also in future drafts.  Unfortunately, our late-draft track record has been pretty grim.  Whether that's bad coaching, bad scouting, bad decision-making, or just bad luck, I couldn't tell you.  But I hope the trend doesn't continue.


bouconagain

*
Pro Bowler
*****
Posts : 1087
Offline
#16 : March 24, 2007, 10:12:03 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.

Yeah, but you have to hit on some of those late picks ; that's one of the only real edges a team can get in the salary cap era.  For instance, in the 7th round of 04, SD picked up Shane Olivea 3 picks after Mark Jones.  That would have saved us the need to use a 2nd rounder on True last year.  The next year, Dallas picked Jay Ratliff 3 picks after Razzano, and he's a guy that could rotate at UT.  That same year NE picked Matt Cassell 5 picks after we took Warren, and they're confident enough in him that they aren't worried about their backup situation.  St Louis got their backup QB (Fitzpatrick) several picks later.  SD's backup at both Guard spots (Mruczkowski) was also picked in that area.

I'm not saying that any one team should be digging up all these diamonds in the rough, but that you just can't blow them off, either.  Those compensatory 7th rounders are a prime opportunity to get a very cheap player, and if you can develop them into a contributor it gives you an edge under the salary cap and also in future drafts.  Unfortunately, our late-draft track record has been pretty grim.  Whether that's bad coaching, bad scouting, bad decision-making, or just bad luck, I couldn't tell you.  But I hope the trend doesn't continue.

That's cherry-picking, though.  That's like saying that you should expect a Tom Brady in the 6th.  Or a McCardell.  Or even a Brad Johnson.  And that you're failing by not consistently hitting on those guys in the later rounds.

The hallmark of good or bad drafting is not how you do in the later rounds - it's whether you're misfiring in the money rounds.  Just looking at it logically proves it: you can't afford to miss in the first three rounds, but you CAN afford to miss in the later rounds.  Why?  Because, by definition, the 6th or 7th round pick was passed on by 31 other teams 6 or 7 times by the time some team strikes gold.  That's luck, that's not skillful drafting.

I don't like to bad-mouth local radio because, hey, they're trying to sell advertising space, and sex and controversy sells but the FCC frowns on the sex, but it's pretty asinine to drop numbers like those quoted above when (1) that's across the board for all teams, (2) given the average 3.5 - 3.8 year shelf life for the average nfl player, 3.5 - 3.8 years down the road they're going to be gone and (3) you're counting sub-5th picks not panning out as some sort of indictment on bad drafting.

The point is that you're going to get a lot more Gradkowskis in the 6th than you are Brady.  And that's not even fair, because Gradkowski had at least 2+ good games, which is really more than you can expect from a 6th round QB.  So, yes, I get your argument that you get the edge with drafting wisely in the late rounds, but by definition, no other team (including you) thought enough of that guy to pick him even a round earlier.

bradentonian

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 27371
Offline
#17 : March 24, 2007, 10:20:44 PM

That's cherry-picking, though. That's like saying that you should expect a Tom Brady in the 6th. Or a McCardell. Or even a Brad Johnson. And that you're failing by not consistently hitting on those guys in the later rounds.

The hallmark of good or bad drafting is not how you do in the later rounds - it's whether you're misfiring in the money rounds. Just looking at it logically proves it: you can't afford to miss in the first three rounds, but you CAN afford to miss in the later rounds. Why? Because, by definition, the 6th or 7th round pick was passed on by 31 other teams 6 or 7 times by the time some team strikes gold. That's luck, that's not skillful drafting.

I don't like to bad-mouth local radio because, hey, they're trying to sell advertising space, and sex and controversy sells but the FCC frowns on the sex, but it's pretty asinine to drop numbers like those quoted above when (1) that's across the board for all teams, (2) given the average 3.5 - 3.8 year shelf life for the average nfl player, 3.5 - 3.8 years down the road they're going to be gone and (3) you're counting sub-5th picks not panning out as some sort of indictment on bad drafting.

The point is that you're going to get a lot more Gradkowskis in the 6th than you are Brady. And that's not even fair, because Gradkowski had at least 2+ good games, which is really more than you can expect from a 6th round QB. So, yes, I get your argument that you get the edge with drafting wisely in the late rounds, but by definition, no other team (including you) thought enough of that guy to pick him even a round earlier.

I think you misinterpreted my point.  By no means was I implying that you could miss on day 1; I thought that was kind of an "understood".  Maybe this will be easier:  You'll be a bad team if you consistantly miss on day one.  If you consistantly miss on day 2, it's hard to be a very good team.  You have to hit on SOME of those late round picks, or you end up burning high picks on low-value positions, or having to spend the money in FA.  Look at the top teams and I'm sure you'll find some key guys that were late-rounders or UDFAs.


bouconagain

*
Pro Bowler
*****
Posts : 1087
Offline
#18 : March 24, 2007, 10:37:41 PM

That's cherry-picking, though. That's like saying that you should expect a Tom Brady in the 6th. Or a McCardell. Or even a Brad Johnson. And that you're failing by not consistently hitting on those guys in the later rounds.

The hallmark of good or bad drafting is not how you do in the later rounds - it's whether you're misfiring in the money rounds. Just looking at it logically proves it: you can't afford to miss in the first three rounds, but you CAN afford to miss in the later rounds. Why? Because, by definition, the 6th or 7th round pick was passed on by 31 other teams 6 or 7 times by the time some team strikes gold. That's luck, that's not skillful drafting.

I don't like to bad-mouth local radio because, hey, they're trying to sell advertising space, and sex and controversy sells but the FCC frowns on the sex, but it's pretty asinine to drop numbers like those quoted above when (1) that's across the board for all teams, (2) given the average 3.5 - 3.8 year shelf life for the average nfl player, 3.5 - 3.8 years down the road they're going to be gone and (3) you're counting sub-5th picks not panning out as some sort of indictment on bad drafting.

The point is that you're going to get a lot more Gradkowskis in the 6th than you are Brady. And that's not even fair, because Gradkowski had at least 2+ good games, which is really more than you can expect from a 6th round QB. So, yes, I get your argument that you get the edge with drafting wisely in the late rounds, but by definition, no other team (including you) thought enough of that guy to pick him even a round earlier.

I think you misinterpreted my point.  By no means was I implying that you could miss on day 1; I thought that was kind of an "understood".  Maybe this will be easier:  You'll be a bad team if you consistantly miss on day one.  If you consistantly miss on day 2, it's hard to be a very good team.  You have to hit on SOME of those late round picks, or you end up burning high picks on low-value positions, or having to spend the money in FA.  Look at the top teams and I'm sure you'll find some key guys that were late-rounders or UDFAs.

No, I picked up on your point A-OK.  Great, we agree on the importance of day one picks.  Awesome!  Glad we're pals.

The 6th and 7th round picks are typically camp fodder.  Sometimes they work out - particularly at guard, change of pace back, kicker/punter, special teams, you get it.  But 90% of the time, they're either not going to make the team or are going to be 3.5 years in the NFL and then out.  I mean, by definition, if you've got Peyton Manning staying in the league for 10+ years, you've got to have a flame-out in year one to keep that low average.  And do you think it's more likely for a 7th round pick to be in the league for one year or a 1st round pick?  Come on, you know the answer, champ.

So my point is simply that to dog about the number of Bucs that are no longer in the NFL is missing the boat, since this is including day two picks that are not going to be key contributors on any team, regardless of who picked them.  Are there exceptions to the rule?  Yep, and you named a handful of them.  And I bet between the two of us football gurus, we might think of enough starting-caliber 7th round picks to field an NFL team.  But that doesn't mean that the Bucs should be slammed for missing on 6th/7th round picks when 99% of the time none of those guys are going to be on an NFL roster a summer from now.

bradentonian

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 27371
Offline
#19 : March 24, 2007, 10:47:00 PM

The 6th and 7th round picks are typically camp fodder.  Sometimes they work out - particularly at guard, change of pace back, kicker/punter, special teams, you get it.  But 90% of the time, they're either not going to make the team or are going to be 3.5 years in the NFL and then out.  I mean, by definition, if you've got Peyton Manning staying in the league for 10+ years, you've got to have a flame-out in year one to keep that low average.  And do you think it's more likely for a 7th round pick to be in the league for one year or a 1st round pick?  Come on, you know the answer, champ.

I (obviously) disagree.  I think it's wrong to dismiss those picks so lightly.  Of course I don't expect to find a Brady in round 6, that would be crazy.  But as you said, you can find some contributors there.  Your examples (guard, change of pace back) fit what I was talking about.  Because we haven't been able to hit on our late-round OL guys, we spent a 1st last year and might spend a 2nd this year.  Wouldn't it be nicer to be free to use those picks on higher-value spots like DE?  Same with change of pace back, where the PR boys have speculated the Bucs might spend a 3rd this year.  So not only do you waste higher picks on the lower-value spots, but you are also tying up a disproportionate amount of cap space.  Surely I don't expect to hit on every one, or even half of them, but our track record has been just miserable.


bouconagain

*
Pro Bowler
*****
Posts : 1087
Offline
#20 : March 24, 2007, 10:57:27 PM

The 6th and 7th round picks are typically camp fodder.  Sometimes they work out - particularly at guard, change of pace back, kicker/punter, special teams, you get it.  But 90% of the time, they're either not going to make the team or are going to be 3.5 years in the NFL and then out.  I mean, by definition, if you've got Peyton Manning staying in the league for 10+ years, you've got to have a flame-out in year one to keep that low average.  And do you think it's more likely for a 7th round pick to be in the league for one year or a 1st round pick?  Come on, you know the answer, champ.

I (obviously) disagree.  I think it's wrong to dismiss those picks so lightly.  Of course I don't expect to find a Brady in round 6, that would be crazy.  But as you said, you can find some contributors there.  Your examples (guard, change of pace back) fit what I was talking about.  Because we haven't been able to hit on our late-round OL guys, we spent a 1st last year and might spend a 2nd this year.  Wouldn't it be nicer to be free to use those picks on higher-value spots like DE?  Same with change of pace back, where the PR boys have speculated the Bucs might spend a 3rd this year.  So not only do you waste higher picks on the lower-value spots, but you are also tying up a disproportionate amount of cap space.  Surely I don't expect to hit on every one, or even half of them, but our track record has been just miserable.


There are two different points here, though.  The first is the thing I was responding to, which is lumping 6/7 rounders in with the rest of the draft, and **CENSORED**ing about the fact that a lot of these guys aren't in the league (20 of the last 40 bucs picks or whatever).  My response to that is that you're by definition taking a flyer on these guys in the 6/7 round, by virtue of the fact that everyone else has (repeatedly) passed on them.

The second thing - that you seem to be saying now - is that role players (special teams, change of pace backs) can be found in the 6/7 round.  Well, yeah.  Hopefully no team picks those type of guys higher than the later rounds, because the value just isn't there.  But where the apples-to-oranges thing comes in is where you're talking about a skill player not panning out in the later rounds, because you took a flyer that didn't work.  And my point is simply that you're not going to find your starting-caliber non-special teams player in the later rounds unless you completely get lucky, a la Brady or McCardell or the 30 other examples in the past decade that have proven my point wrong.  But there are a lot more TE Fingers (though he was taken two rounds earlier than he should have been) than those guys.

bradentonian

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 27371
Offline
#21 : March 24, 2007, 11:22:21 PM

There are two different points here, though. The first is the thing I was responding to, which is lumping 6/7 rounders in with the rest of the draft, and **CENSORED**ing about the fact that a lot of these guys aren't in the league (20 of the last 40 bucs picks or whatever). My response to that is that you're by definition taking a flyer on these guys in the 6/7 round, by virtue of the fact that everyone else has (repeatedly) passed on them.

I understand that most 6th/7th rounders are OOF relatively quickly.  My point is that we've had a lot of those picks, and weren't able to capitalize.  As you mentioned, there have been times where (due to comp picks) we had multiple shots, and still no luck.

The second thing - that you seem to be saying now - is that role players (special teams, change of pace backs) can be found in the 6/7 round. Well, yeah. Hopefully no team picks those type of guys higher than the later rounds, because the value just isn't there. But where the apples-to-oranges thing comes in is where you're talking about a skill player not panning out in the later rounds, because you took a flyer that didn't work. And my point is simply that you're not going to find your starting-caliber non-special teams player in the later rounds unless you completely get lucky, a la Brady or McCardell or the 30 other examples in the past decade that have proven my point wrong. But there are a lot more TE Fingers (though he was taken two rounds earlier than he should have been) than those guys.
 
And we're not doing well here, either.  Because we couldn't get them with all those extra late rounders, we now have a 1st round guard, a 3rd round backup QB, a 1st round 3rd string WR.  Those picks (and their salaries) would have been better served getting us premium value players.  I don't know why you keep bringing up names like Brady; I never said I expected a premium position to be filled so late.  But the fact is we aren't even doing a good job of coming up with role players.




Guest
#22 : March 24, 2007, 11:25:30 PM

I never said I expected a premium position to be filled so late. But the fact is we aren't even doing a good job of coming up with role players.

'Nuff said!!!!

bouconagain

*
Pro Bowler
*****
Posts : 1087
Offline
#23 : March 24, 2007, 11:30:35 PM

There are two different points here, though. The first is the thing I was responding to, which is lumping 6/7 rounders in with the rest of the draft, and **CENSORED**ing about the fact that a lot of these guys aren't in the league (20 of the last 40 bucs picks or whatever). My response to that is that you're by definition taking a flyer on these guys in the 6/7 round, by virtue of the fact that everyone else has (repeatedly) passed on them.

I understand that most 6th/7th rounders are OOF relatively quickly.  My point is that we've had a lot of those picks, and weren't able to capitalize.  As you mentioned, there have been times where (due to comp picks) we had multiple shots, and still no luck.

The second thing - that you seem to be saying now - is that role players (special teams, change of pace backs) can be found in the 6/7 round. Well, yeah. Hopefully no team picks those type of guys higher than the later rounds, because the value just isn't there. But where the apples-to-oranges thing comes in is where you're talking about a skill player not panning out in the later rounds, because you took a flyer that didn't work. And my point is simply that you're not going to find your starting-caliber non-special teams player in the later rounds unless you completely get lucky, a la Brady or McCardell or the 30 other examples in the past decade that have proven my point wrong. But there are a lot more TE Fingers (though he was taken two rounds earlier than he should have been) than those guys.
 
And we're not doing well here, either.  Because we couldn't get them with all those extra late rounders, we now have a 1st round guard, a 3rd round backup QB, a 1st round 3rd string WR.  Those picks (and their salaries) would have been better served getting us premium value players.  I don't know why you keep bringing up names like Brady; I never said I expected a premium position to be filled so late.  But the fact is we aren't even doing a good job of coming up with role players.

Alright, maybe I'm misinterpreting you.  Maybe you've changed your position two times.  Maybe posterity will judge.

My posts in this thread were responding to radio station **CENSORED**ing that a large percentage of Bucs' draft picks are now out of the league.  My sole point was that this included a large chunk of picks that would be out of the league anyway (for the reasons stated above, which, for the love of everything holy, don't make me type again).  So to try to take point one and point two and try to make point three: that the Bucs draft poorly, well, that's just stupid.  Evaluate the first day picks.  Hell, evaluate the 4/5 round (though you're getting into league-wide dangerous territory).  Just don't pretend that any team is going to consistently hit in the later rounds, because that's ignoring football reality.  It's really very simple: I'm not making up the 3.5 year average tenure, and since every starter is going to be in the league 6+ years, we're talking about a lot of one-year flyer players.  In fact, since that's the reality, you're much better off if those are in the later rounds than early on.

Anyway, I thought your responses were that you'd better connect with those players in the 6/7 round and that you're missing out or a poor drafter if you're not connecting.  And my response to that is that if your goal is to pick up guards or role players or special teams, then sure, I'd agree that you're wasting picks if you screw those up.  Because it's tough to flame out on special teams.  But if instead you're saying that you should be hitting on your third quarterback or fourth receiver or what have you, I'd just reiterate that these are crapshoots for skill positions, and though you didn't mention Brady, your first post indicated to me that you were talking about these type of players, not the ordinary not-flashy-we're-on-the-team-but-you-don't-notice-us guys.  So the point is I'm either apologizing or repeating that I think you're a toolbox for your suggestion.  Take your pick, amigo.

bradentonian

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 27371
Offline
#24 : March 24, 2007, 11:47:39 PM

Alright, maybe I'm misinterpreting you. Maybe you've changed your position two times. Maybe posterity will judge.

Anyway, I thought your responses were that you'd better connect with those players in the 6/7 round and that you're missing out or a poor drafter if you're not connecting. And my response to that is that if your goal is to pick up guards or role players or special teams, then sure, I'd agree that you're wasting picks if you screw those up. Because it's tough to flame out on special teams. But if instead you're saying that you should be hitting on your third quarterback or fourth receiver or what have you, I'd just reiterate that these are crapshoots for skill positions, and though you didn't mention Brady, your first post indicated to me that you were talking about these type of players, not the ordinary not-flashy-we're-on-the-team-but-you-don't-notice-us guys. So the point is I'm either apologizing or repeating that I think you're a toolbox for your suggestion. Take your pick, amigo.

Haven't changed my position at all, so I'll go with "not a toolbox", at least this once.  I'm sure I'll deserve it several times over in other threads.  My point was and remains:  You have to hit on some of those late rounders to get "cheap labor" contributors, thereby freeing up the premium picks and cap space necessary to get the premium players.  I think we've done a very poor job of this, and it is apparent when you look at the premium picks we have tied up where a lot of teams have developed their scrubs.


bouconagain

*
Pro Bowler
*****
Posts : 1087
Offline
#25 : March 24, 2007, 11:58:27 PM

Alright, maybe I'm misinterpreting you. Maybe you've changed your position two times. Maybe posterity will judge.

Anyway, I thought your responses were that you'd better connect with those players in the 6/7 round and that you're missing out or a poor drafter if you're not connecting. And my response to that is that if your goal is to pick up guards or role players or special teams, then sure, I'd agree that you're wasting picks if you screw those up. Because it's tough to flame out on special teams. But if instead you're saying that you should be hitting on your third quarterback or fourth receiver or what have you, I'd just reiterate that these are crapshoots for skill positions, and though you didn't mention Brady, your first post indicated to me that you were talking about these type of players, not the ordinary not-flashy-we're-on-the-team-but-you-don't-notice-us guys. So the point is I'm either apologizing or repeating that I think you're a toolbox for your suggestion. Take your pick, amigo.

Haven't changed my position at all, so I'll go with "not a toolbox", at least this once.  I'm sure I'll deserve it several times over in other threads.  My point was and remains:  You have to hit on some of those late rounders to get "cheap labor" contributors, thereby freeing up the premium picks and cap space necessary to get the premium players.  I think we've done a very poor job of this, and it is apparent when you look at the premium picks we have tied up where a lot of teams have developed their scrubs.

Copacetic, we could **CENSORED**er about this a bit longer, but as long as you're not saying that the Bucs should have picked a starter in the 6/7, which is how I interpreted your first post, we're in agreement.  I mean, yes, I agree with the sweet benefit of hindsight that Anderson beats the sweet BeJesus out of Bennett as a pick last year in the sixth.  My larger point was that neither of these guys should be expected to put up the numbers that Anderson did last year, given their draft position, and the fact that Anderson is more a wow-Bears-you-got-lucky than wow-Bucs-you-suck-monkey-balls.  Because the bottom line is, regardless of how you want to spin it, if the Bears (or anyone else) thought Anderson would pick up 12 sacks, well hell, he'd have been drafted a whole lot earlier than the 6th.  The point is that you shouldn't dog about the Bucs picking someone over him in the 6th since 31 other teams did the same thing the 5 previous rounds.

But Bradentonian, we're on the same page here.  Kudos, my good man.

ONEBIGDADDY

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4506
Offline
#26 : March 25, 2007, 08:54:02 AM

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.

Exactly!!!! There is a difference when you have been a Defensive team all these years and Then needing to build an offense. The Colts would not get rid of their offensive co-ordinator and let Dungy know that fact also. This year will be the tell of the tape year to see how we do. Its hard to build with just so many games and when you had cap problems and so many more issues. I would like to draft some of these internet QB's and Coaches and watch how fast they would fumble.....NOT!!!!
JMO....OBD


BucLord

****
Starter

Posts : 517
Offline
#27 : March 25, 2007, 09:12:37 AM

and the Raiders, oh, have never not had offensive playmakers probably plays a bit into those particular draft strategies.

The Raiders had the #1 offense from 2000-2002, they had plenty of playmakers, they were leading the league in every single offense category from rushing to passing and receiving.. Tim Brown, Jerry Rice, Charlie Garner, Tyrone Wheatly, Rich Gannon  etc

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcia, Marcia, Marcia

It's always about Marcia


MiltonMack21

User is on moderator watch listWatched
******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 8969
Offline
#28 : March 25, 2007, 09:35:59 AM

I don't know why you keep bringing up names like Brady; I never said I expected a premium position to be filled so late.  But the fact is we aren't even doing a good job of coming up with role players.
QFT


bouconagain

*
Pro Bowler
*****
Posts : 1087
Offline
#29 : March 25, 2007, 09:48:45 AM

and the Raiders, oh, have never not had offensive playmakers probably plays a bit into those particular draft strategies.

The Raiders had the #1 offense from 2000-2002, they had plenty of playmakers, they were leading the league in every single offense category from rushing to passing and receiving.. Tim Brown, Jerry Rice, Charlie Garner, Tyrone Wheatly, Rich Gannon  etc

Dooood - we're saying the same thing.
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