GostkowSKI

The Art (and Science) of Drafting: III. 49ers vs. Patriots in the Salary CapEra - Niners Nation

This is part two of a two part series. The first was a recap of all 49ers drafts going back to 1994 comparing where they've succeeded vs. where they've failed. Part two is comparing San Fran drafts vs. New England's drafts, as they consider the Pats to be the gold standard. Makes for an interesting read.

Ungeheuer

That is one random, harebrained analysis. Among other things the whole premise is absurd because the two teams each had several different regimes during that period. So to draw conclusions about a general drafting strategy is a non-starter. What kind of conclusion can one possibly make about the overall tendencies of some random combination of Bobby Grier and Bill Belichick draft picks?

Deus Irae

Well, given that part 2 will focus on individual regimes, maybe that can ease your pain.

__________________
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
- Marcus Aurelius

letekro

Interesting that Pats have the highest winning % over the last 15 years.

VJCPatriot

I found it interesting that the Pats do so well with 1st and 4th round picks. And it's not just anecdotal that the Pats haven't fared well with 2nd round picks, historically they haven't. Round 5 also seems unimportant to the Pats, which might explain why they were so willing to part with a 5th for Lewis.

So assuming you believe the analysis it would be more beneficial for New England to move up into round 1 where they have had more luck than to keep their plethora of 2nd round picks. This year's draft might be an exception because it is considered particularly deep, or perhaps we just think it's deep but it really won't be in hindsight? And acquiring extra 4th round picks seems a trademark of Pats draft strategy, and it has paid off considering their success in that round.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

stinkypete

I have to agree. This is further proof that, given a large enough and diverse enough sample size, you can statistically prove anything.

Some of these strategies are absurd. Take players close to the neighborhood? Well that is easily done when you are in the vicinity of the likes of USC, Cal, UCLA and Fresno St. instead of the notoriously apathetic to college sports region of New England. Take players from BSC conferences? Well duh. Don't waste draft picks of P and K? Again, duh.

A better comparison of the drafts of teams like New England and San Francisco would be to debate need vs. value and ceiling vs. security when evaluating a player.

The Niners of the past decade have been notorious for moving valuable 2nd round picks to move into the later parts of round 1 to take borderline talents. These are often panic moves to fill a need. Examples include Kentwaan Balmer, Joe Staley, Mike Rumph, Kwame Harris and Rashawn Woods.

They also have been notorious for overlooking production in round 1 in favor of riskier athletic freak types (which, actually, IS pulling an Al Davis). Examples include Alex Smith and Vernon Davis.

I would say the reason the Niners have failed is because they consistently fail to bring in impact players in round 1. Compare a list 1st round picks on the current roster with first round picks on the current Patriots roster.

Niners: Balmer, Staley, Willis, David, Smith. Of the 5, only Willis and to a lesser extent Staley have had any real impact.

Pats: Mayo, Meriweather, Maroney, Watson, Mankins, Wilfork, Warren, Seymour. Almost every player on the list is a pro bowler or an ascending player. Even the disappointments (Maroney and Watson) have outperformed most of their 49er contemporaries.

jeffbiologist

What that blog doesnt consider at all is the draft day trades that have built our championship teams. Add these picks(1st-spygate; 2nd-welker, dillon, starks; 4th-moss) and our number of picks increases significantly as well as draft positioning. These were NOT FA moves, they were using our picks in balancing the old/new. Trading picks for established players(even troubled ones) simply reduces the BUST FACTOR even further. Further, if you really study the trade-up/trade-down scenarios there are not statistically signifcant differences in trading up.....falling in love with players simply doesnt equal to wins in the long run.

ctpatsfan77

Not exactly sure what you mean by "NOT FA moves;" in any case, all of those except Moss took place before the draft. Also, thank God, the Patriots only wasted a third on Starks.

__________________
"Momentum was quickly snatched away by New England, who once again proved that any Patriot, at any moment, can make a play." —Inside the NFL, Packers v. Patriots

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Synovia

FA= Free Agent. None of those players were aquired via free agency. They were traded for.

Mainefan

The guy who wrote this had a lot of time on his hands and a big space to fill.

Most of the statistics and comparisons, I think, are bogus.

For instance, if BB hadn't drafted just one person, the winning and superbowl percentages might be significantly different. That person, of course, is Tom Brady.

Anyhow, it was entertaining/funny to read, but not particularly illuminating.