Forbes: Drafting Success - A Paradox to Ponder

[signbabybrady]

would be interesting to know the percentages of first rd picks still with their team over the course of say the last ten years and compare....and maybe each rd by itself.

And also maybe instead of just with the team maybe starting or contributing a certain percentage of snaps.

 

[Lloyd_Christmas]

You really need to adjust for draft round.

This analysis inherently assumes that a first round, third round, and seventh round pick are equally valuable.

You made some excellent points.

I also want to point out that just "remaining on the team" is not an indication of a draft success.

Usually when we have these discussions, we bring up the round they were drafted in and whether or not they became starters, are dependable backups, are special teams standouts, etc. Just being on the team only means so much.

As someone pointed out, if you have a crappy team, there is a higher chance that you will retain a marginal draft pick that you believe has some upside... at the very lease, you have the luxury of holding on to a questionable pick longer ... that's where the small window they chose comes into play to help skew the numbers even more.

The article is like a poorly run science experiment where the results have led to an eroneous conclusion because important factors were not considered. It's hard to believe people get paid to write this stuff.

 

[KingChre]

So...after reading this article, I'm to assume that the only way to evaluate a successful draft is the amount of rookies from year to year that stick with a team? This is such a crock of BS that I feel foolish and petulant even responding to it, but I'm off today from work, and quite bored, so hey, what the heck?

I would admit that the last few years were not the best drafts they've had, and there are a couple of questionable picks (Maroney and Jackson immediately come to mind), but as other posters have noted, the Patriots don't view the draft as simply a way to infuse its roster with youth, they use it as a utility in getting better as a team.

That's why you see them make trades for players, and trade up & down all over the draft board, and into subsequent years. They use the draft as they see fit, and I love their approach. It's obviously hard to argue with their success.

 

[Terry Glenn is a cowgirl]

Well, judging by this article, that venue isn't football reporting.

Every year they get the list of the richest people in the world wrong too.

Bill Gates is the richest man in the world?

Ummmm... OK.:singing:

Sure!!!!

 

[TimU]

The Forbes measure is a simplistic one for sure. But can anyone really disagree with the findings - the Pats just haven't drafted well in recent years. I would say that weak drafts are the #1 reason the franchise has slipped from Super Bowl winner to strong playoff contender over the last five years.

 

[apple strudel]

The Forbes measure is a simplistic one for sure. But can anyone really disagree with the findings - the Pats just haven't drafted well in recent years. I would say that weak drafts are the #1 reason the franchise has slipped from Super Bowl winner to strong playoff contender over the last five years.

Oh my. Almost super bowl winner last year. And last year was a pretty sweet draft for them. The findings are silly. The Texans haven't won crap and have a depleted roster easy to fill with draftees. Ugh.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

The Forbes measure is a simplistic one for sure. But can anyone really disagree with the findings - the Pats just haven't drafted well in recent years. I would say that weak drafts are the #1 reason the franchise has slipped from Super Bowl winner to strong playoff contender over the last five years.

LOL Success is truly relative...

 

[Ryan]

I guess this shows that great drafting isn't an absolute necessity when it comes to winning in the NFL. Despite poor drafts, the Pats have still been the class of the NFL.

 

[BadMoFo]

How dare anyone make light of the mighty Patriots. We are the best at everything. Right, guys?

 

[apple strudel]

I guess this shows that great drafting is an absolute necessity when it comes to winning in the NFL. Due to good drafts, the Pats have still been the class of the NFL.

It also shows how flawed methodology gives convenient or misleading results.

 

[apple strudel]

How dare anyone make light of the mighty Patriots. We are the best at everything. Right, guys?

That's not the point. The point is that 1) the Patriots are still ridiculously successful, and 2) have drafted pretty well and are far from the bottom of the bunch. The team obviously whiffed on some picks, but by and large are a good drafting team. But any analysis that lauds the Texans drafting over the Patriots just goes to show that Bud Adams is a Forbes shareholder or a close friend of somebody at Forbes. It's beyond absurd.

 

[Deus Irae]

How dare anyone make light of the mighty Patriots. We are the best at everything. Right, guys?

Given that most analysts rank the Patriots at or near the very top when it comes to drafting, perhaps there was a flaw in the Forbes methodology?

No, it can't be that, right? It's got to be that everyone here is posting in homer mode. The fact that the Patriots have had a lot of lower round picks, and traded away one of the second rounders for Welker while also losing a first rounder to the Ommissioner is no justification for a lower percentage of draftees making the squad, for example, right?

Sheesh!

 

[tanked_as_usual]

the article is invalid because the clown doesn't have a clue.....

the pats did not draft kareem brown in the 2nd round


with the exception of neal, the entire OL is draft picks

the entire DL is draft picks......

the QB's are draft picks.......


I dont know........to say the texans are the best at anything makes the whole notion sound ridiculously stupid

 

[BadMoFo]

in the past three years, ... people read that part, right?

 

[Deus Irae]

in the past three years, ... people read that part, right?

Yes. You should now read the rest of the article.

 

[apple strudel]

in the past three years, ... people read that part, right?

2008 defensive rookie of the year.

 

[Jackson 2]

There are loads of Patriots draft choices who were cut here who are on 53 man rosters for other teams.

 

[BadMoFo]

Yes. You should now read the rest of the article.

If this is the only criteria they are using to determine who is the best and worst in the past three years, then the writer is correct.

To judge them, we looked at the percentage of players from those three draft classes who were still listed as active members of the team. The results were surprising.

I do not agree that this is the best way to judge success in drafting, but this is the only argument that the writer is making. And he is correct: we have the lowest percentage of players drafted in the past three years on our active roster of all 32 teams in the league. Is he wrong there?

 

[apple strudel]

I do not agree that this is the best way to judge success in drafting, but this is the only argument that the writer is making. And he is correct: we have the lowest percentage of players drafted in the past three years on our active roster of all 32 teams in the league. Is he wrong there?

It's a completely useless conclusion drawn from very poor evaluation methodology. It doesn't tell you how well teams draft, it tells you how deep current rosters are. But it's presented as a draft analysis. Total failure of an article.

 

[Pat_the_Patriot]

Read it all the way through before you kick the dog, it puts things in a better perspective than you might think at first blush.

Best And Worst NFL Draft Teams - Forbes.com

Wow... I'm an accountant, so I read Forbes a lot... BUT, this just shows that accountants can/will "make" numbers say anything that they want... ANYTHING that the Pats AND Steelers are in the bottom five of... well, it just doesn't make sense.

What I read is this: The Pats don't keep as many rookies as other teams... well, duh.

As someone else noted... this doesn't take into consideredation number of positions "covered" prior to the draft, number of FA adds from draft picks/non draft picks, coaching style (read: difficulty of the offense/defense - Vets needed)....

I guess it is what it is... it's Forbes best shot at "covering" the NFL...

as far as, BB and crew needing billboard material... they probably just have a big bold "2006" up on the wall (Maroney and Jackson were the first two picks of that draft).... but, I would say that BB would laugh and just think that Forbes should keep to money... leave football to him.

Just my two pennies.... fairly fun read in this dry season, I guess.