The Pick *Versus* The Results

[Off The Grid]

It seems to me that one of the biggest reasons that the evaluation of Picks causes so much rancorous debate is that folks often fail to make a distinction between two completely aspects of a single subject:

1 ~ The Quality of the Pick at the moment it is made.

2 ~ The Results.

The Quality of The Pick

What many don't get ~ respectfully submitted ~ is that this will never, ever change.

The Pick was either a good one or a bad one ~ IF that was distinguishable ~ the instant it was made...

Thus, it is possible to make an A+ Pick, and get an F- Result.

Or the reverse.

More commonly, the highly subjective quality of a Pick may be a B-...which is equally capable of providing Results that are an A OR an F.

But that does mean that the Pick was ever anything but a B-.

As to whether or not it WAS a good pick...

The cold, hard truth is that in the vast, vast majority of cases, it was subjective...and can only ultimately be accurately described in shades of grey.

Case in Point: The Putt Heard Round The World!!

Danny Noonan lines up the shot that ~ as you all know ~ launched his tremendous and illustrious career. He hits it with the same touch, the same aim, the exact same PSI...but GroundsKeeper Carl ~ shortly before launching his legendary career as The Masters Champion ~ was sleeping off a Drunk and failed to set off the pivotal half dozen or so rounds of dynamite that caused the trembling that gave Brother Noonan just enough extra to sink that putt!!

Same Aim.

Same Touch.

Same PSI.

Same Putt.

Completely different results:

"You...You're not good."

"Now I know why Tigers eat their young."

"Don't worry about it!! The world needs ditch diggers, too!!"

"So you've got THAT goin' for ya...which is nice."

 

[conway]

Agreed. Which is why it annoys me when commentators say you cant grade a pick until you see the body of work. While you cant evaluate the player with any kind of certainty until he has played x number of snaps (years, in most cases), you can certainly evaluate the quality of the pick immediately. Its far more subjective, but anyone would agree that had i been drafted with the first overall pick, that would have been a bad pick. Likewise, drafting 7 centers would represent a bad draft. And if a guy projected to go in the first inexplicably falls to the fifth, and he fills a need, thats a good pick. Most selections, however, are not as clear cut, and very few players end up with the careers predicted by draft analysts.

Be the ball.

 

[MaineMan]

Agreed. Which is why it annoys me when commentators say you cant grade a pick until you see the body of work. While you cant evaluate the player with any kind of certainty until he has played x number of snaps (years, in most cases), you can certainly evaluate the quality of the pick immediately. Its far more subjective, but anyone would agree that had i been drafted with the first overall pick, that would have been a bad pick. Likewise, drafting 7 centers would represent a bad draft. And if a guy projected to go in the first inexplicably falls to the fifth, and he fills a need, thats a good pick. Most selections, however, are not as clear cut, and very few players end up with the careers predicted by draft analysts.

Be the ball.

That depends. Have you ever played QB?

- Sincerely,
----- The Miami Dolphins Coaching Staff and Front Office

 

[jmt57]

Very good point OTG.

That is one thing that has bothered me when people try to grade drafts and hand out mythical draft awards or phantom trophies to the best drafters.

To expand on your premise, a couple examples: Many (especially fans of other teams) will point to Shawn Crable and Tyrone McKenzie as examples of busts: failures by the Patriots scouting department and 'proof' that Bill Belichick does not draft well. However, the reality is that at the time they were drafted they were viewed as solid picks. To the best of my knowledge there was nothing to indicate the injuries or lack of productivity they have had thus far in their NFL careers.

That's not to say each and every pick was a solid one. In my opinion the Kevin O'Connell selection was a head scratcher at the time it was made; the benefit of hindsight makes it seem even more so now.

This applies to more than just the draft. For example when Danny Woodhead was signed by the Pats many wondered what the point was of adding him to the roster. Kevin Faulk was the 3rd down back, and some questioned using a precious roster spot on a 5th running back rather than on another position. The 'expert analysis' at the time of the signing gave the roster move a low grade. Faulk of course had a season ending injury a day later and the rest is history; now of course everyone grades that roster move as an 'A'. Which simply goes to show that maybe, just maybe, the paid professionals really do know a bit more about player evaluations than the rest of us do.

 

[Off The Grid]

To expand on your premise, a couple examples: Many (especially fans of other teams) will point to Shawn Crable and Tyrone McKenzie as examples of busts: failures by the Patriots scouting department and 'proof' that Bill Belichick does not draft well. However, the reality is that at the time they were drafted they were viewed as solid picks. To the best of my knowledge there was nothing to indicate the injuries or lack of productivity they have had thus far in their NFL careers.

Ah...Great examples.

I heartily agree: It is, indeed, a CrapShoot, and a Good Pick does not in ANY way carry a guarantee.

That's not to say each and every pick was a solid one. In my opinion the Kevin O'Connell selection was a head scratcher at the time it was made; the benefit of hindsight makes it seem even more so now.

TREMENDOUS example.

It was, indeed, the O'Connell Pick, itself, that almost single-handedly divested me of any notion of Coach Bill's Sanity.

But that, of course, does not mean he isn't...Great.

This applies to more than just the draft. For example when Danny Woodhead was signed by the Pats many wondered what the point was of adding him to the roster. Kevin Faulk was the 3rd down back, and some questioned using a precious roster spot on a 5th running back rather than on another position. The 'expert analysis' at the time of the signing gave the roster move a low grade. Faulk of course had a season ending injury a day later and the rest is history; now of course everyone grades that roster move as an 'A'. Which simply goes to show that maybe, just maybe, the paid professionals really do know a bit more about player evaluations than the rest of us do.

Danny WoodHead!! Spectacular Example!! :rocker:

Of course ~ *ahem* ~ SOME folks may've seen this coming!!

Faulk 2.0!! Absolutely LOVE this kid!! :rocker:

* Athletic FREAK.

* Heart of a LION.

* ALL Go, ALL the time.

* ASTONISHING FootBall Instincts + Intelligence

* Above all: He simply Makes Things Happen.

He was BORN to be a Patriot. :rocker:

New England Patriots Forums - PatsFans.com Patriots Fan Messageboard

 

[randomk1]

If a guy turns out to be a bust then that is poor scouting...how is there any way around it?

No player that enters the league is perfect(there are exceptions but those are usually the top picks) It's their job to find those flaws and make the right decision. It's impossible to have a 100% success rate in the draft but there are reasons why some teams draft better than others.

 

[Clonamery]

If a guy turns out to be a bust then that is poor scouting...how is there any way around it?

No player that enters the league is perfect(there are exceptions but those are usually the top picks) It's their job to find those flaws and make the right decision. It's impossible to have a 100% success rate in the draft but there are reasons why some teams draft better than others.

Getting the right people and clued in to what you are looking for takes time and trust.

 

[borg]

Remember this is pro sports...so contracts and dollars spent must factor in the evaluation.
Example:
Peyton Manning gets picked #1 and signs a mega contract with huge guaranteed money. The day after the ink is dry, the female trainer that Peyton teabagged at U of Tenn decides to go to the police and file multiple complaints including false imprisonment, sexual assault, and multiple balls to the chin.
At this point, the profound love for Mr. Manning has turned sour. The Our Lady of the Ballz-free Chin church choir storms the capital in Indy and takes over the state government, singing a raucous version of the classic, "Not in my eye." State and city officials feel helpless, unable to defend the teabagger despite prompting from local business leaders who equate Manning with dollars.

Farmers from the north fork, who believe that teabagging is a God given right and that gravy should be renamed ketchup, assemble at Fatty's BBQ and Feed Imporium. There, it is decided to take their protest to Indy as well. Suddenly, tractors descend onto the Indy streets clogging the roadways and causing gridlock. The city is shut down. The farmers rally at the Monument of the Husk shouting, "Tea Bag any Hag, Tea Bag any Hag!" The Ballz-free choir matches the intensity with chants, "Not in my eye!"

Meanwhile, back at the set of the Double-stuff Oreo commercial, producers decide to shut down the shoot and postpone the Manning father and son commercial. Archie is livid. He needs this pay day. Father and son return to their double wide in Baton Rouge and wait out the storm. Archie assembles the local media and gives a brief statement. " My boy gots no recollection of this here chinnin. Thank you and God bless dem boys from Fatty's."

Up in New York, Commissioner Rozelle assembles the NFL power players for a high level brain storming session. Al Davis spoke first. "We must not let beer companies dominant the concession stands in our stadiums. Rye, Whiskey, Bourbon....and Gin Baby...that's all I am saying. " Members were in agreement, and the meeting was adjourned.

Bill Polian, who was spotted with a NFL Rule Book, took to the airwaves on WCOB in Muncie with his weekly sports talk show. Edgar from Elkhart chided Polian for not defending his new stud QB. "Bill, we're talkin about OUR boy now, ya here. What cha gonna do to get him on the field for them Sundays...and how ya gonna shut up them frigid free facers?" An excited Polian responded, " First, thanks for being a longtime season ticket holder...now shut the f**k up." Mary from Whiteville was next. "I can't believe you didn't check out this face fornicator better. You shoulda known." "Maam, all I can say is, I am advising the rules committee on how to proceed. Does that answer your concerns Darlin?"

Back in Louisianna, Archie strikes a deal. The Governor of Louisianna arrives late night and slips through the back door of the doublewide. "Mr. Governor, my boy Horseface has already been drafted. Not much more I can do about dat. But listen up. My little Chucker will be going through this here draft "process" in a couple of years. How bout I work a little effort into guarantee'n that my boy plays on your indoor carpet, no matter who drafts him." "Archie, I likes the sound of that. I know your word is gold....let me make a call."

One call leads to another....and finally....a forensics expert employed by the State of Tennessee specializing in face trauma offers his opinion on the case. " After exhaustive testing, we have detirmined that the depressions formed on Miss X's chin are from dimples and not repeated ball lashings. Futhermore, the dark "bruiselike" discoloration on Miss X's forehead was caused by faulty makeup application. We see no evidence of face trauma and therefore are recommending that all charges be dropped. There was no teabagging here.

So you see, contracts and dollars did factor here

 

[jmt57]

If a guy turns out to be a bust then that is poor scouting...how is there any way around it?

No player that enters the league is perfect(there are exceptions but those are usually the top picks) It's their job to find those flaws and make the right decision. It's impossible to have a 100% success rate in the draft but there are reasons why some teams draft better than others.

I am curious what you (and others) define as a bust? Is it any player whose career does not meet the expectations of his draft status?

If on one hand it is accepted that team or personnel evaluator can possibly have 100% success rate, then is it not possible that there reasons other than poor scouting?

For example first-round draft pick Robert Edwards finished his career in the NFL with 1222 yards rushing. Based on those stats was he a bust? If so, was it due to poor scouting?

In my opinion an incomplete pass or an interception cannot be blamed solely on the quarterback 100% of the time. Similarly a draft choice that has less than average productivity relative to when he was drafted cannot be blamed solely on poor scouting, in my opinion.

Agree, disagree? I'm curious how everyone else feels about the definition of a draft bust and how much blame should be placed on the scouting and evaluation of a player by the team that drafted that player.

 

[randomk1]

It's hard to pinpoint the line between a bust and a good pick.

Would Reggie Bush count as a bust? Saints probably had him as the next Barry Sanders but in reality he is just a 3rd down back...but then again when he is healthy the Saints are a far better team.

I'd generally expect 1st and 2nd rounders to become starters or solid contributors at some point during their career.

It's hard to call 3rd-7th rounders as busts.