Draft Efficiency

[Wilfork#75]

The National Football Post took a look at the efficiency of all 32 teams drafts over the past 10 years. It is a very simple approach, admittedly oversimplified that looks at starts in relation to draft picks to determine efficiency. While it does have its flaw I was shocked to see the Pats ranked 3rd last draft efficiency for the 1st 3 rounds and 2nd least efficient overall.

It clearly does have its flaws and doesn't take into account things such as the strength of the Patriots roster leading to less starts for mediocre players than other teams or the Pats consistently picking at the end of rounds. One positive is the Pats did draft the equal 4th most pro bowlers over that time with 8.

Even the writer saw the Pats as an outlier and will examine them further.

As I was writing this article and then reviewing the results, one thought kept recurring. What’s the deal with the Patriots? The Patriots are undoubtedly one of the most successful teams in the league but their draft efficiency, according to this simplified analysis, is among the worst in the league. We will circle back to this issue in future articles.

Just something interesting to look at.
Which teams are the most efficient in the NFL Draft? | National Football Post

 

[GIF Man]

Hardly surprising considering all the second / third round picks they've blown on garbage players. I don't understand why the author finds it odd. If it wasn't for Brady their ineptitude in the draft would be killing them.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Another point worth noting is that he's only looking at starts, which is going to skew things tremendously for a team that drafted a Pro Bowl kicker in the fourth round and a Pro Bowl ST demon in the fifth round (who have 200+ games between them, but only 1 start, IIRC).

They also had the 2007 draft debacle, where they had eight late picks in one of the worst drafts ever.

The other issue that skews things is that he's assuming a 1, a 2, and a 3 should all contribute equally, rather than comparing them to historical averages (1s tend to start more games than 2s, etc.).

 

[stinkypete]

A couple of things to consider...

The report looks at the last 10 drafts, 2004 - 2013. The Patriots teams of 2004 - 2007 were primarily dominated by pre-Belichick holdovers, Vrabel and Harrison type free agents, and players who were drafted in 2002-03. Very little room on those teams for mid round picks like PK Sam or Garrett Mills to step in and contribute.

Also, a measure of draft efficiency is going to examine the ratio of pick productivity to picks made. Well who has made more picks in the past decade than the Patriots? More picks = more busts = lower efficiency, despite the successes.

 

[Brady6]

The National Football Post took a look at the efficiency of all 32 teams drafts over the past 10 years. It is a very simple approach, admittedly oversimplified that looks at starts in relation to draft picks to determine efficiency. While it does have its flaw I was shocked to see the Pats ranked 3rd last draft efficiency for the 1st 3 rounds and 2nd least efficient overall.

It clearly does have its flaws and doesn't take into account things such as the strength of the Patriots roster leading to less starts for mediocre players than other teams or the Pats consistently picking at the end of rounds. One positive is the Pats did draft the equal 4th most pro bowlers over that time with 8.

Even the writer saw the Pats as an outlier and will examine them further.



Just something interesting to look at.
Which teams are the most efficient in the NFL Draft? | National Football Post

I am not surprised they do not draft well overall, they hit or bust they very seldom find mid-range players that stick with the team. They do a good job in UDFA which fills the gaps left, and also the writer said the team is a top team well this team has the best QB in the game so of course it is going to be a top team year to year. If we did not have the GOAT at QB these draft mistakes would show up a lot more.

 

[Brady6]

Another point worth noting is that he's only looking at starts, which is going to skew things tremendously for a team that drafted a Pro Bowl kicker in the fourth round and a Pro Bowl ST demon in the fifth round (who have 200+ games between them, but only 1 start, IIRC).

I am sure that is true for all teams on the list, we are not the only team that has drafted a top ST Player over the last decade. Something skewed if it is only affecting one and the others are unaffected.

They also had the 2007 draft debacle, where they had eight late picks in one of the worst drafts ever.

Every team also had picks in the 2007 draft, so once again not skewed.

The other issue that skews things is that he's assuming a 1, a 2, and a 3 should all contribute equally, rather than comparing them to historical averages (1s tend to start more games than 2s, etc.).

All teams select in rounds one, two, and three as well, so that would not skew anything either. If the Patriots trade out of rounds one that is their draft philosophy, which impacts the outcome and they are responsible for that since they decide to do it on their own.