PDA

View Full Version : High Draft Picks are overrated


Hayeksheroes
12-10-2009, 02:04 PM
Detroit, Browns and St. Louis are examples of teams that have had high draft choices and still are bad teams.

The Patriots, Colts and Steelers have consistently been a the bottom of the draft and done well. I don't think there is much correlation between high draft choices and great teams.

Having said that I want the Steelers to win out or at least win as many games as they can and to never play for a draft spot. Losers play for draft positions.
:tt:

43Hitman
12-10-2009, 02:19 PM
Well I kinda agree with that. The problem is not with the high draft picks, it's with the teams they are getting drafted to. Let's face it, the teams you mentioned are in need of more than one good draft pick. So teams that are established like the Steelers and Patriots don't really rebuild like the teams you mentioned, they just re-load.

plenewken
12-10-2009, 02:21 PM
[QUOTE=Hayeksheroes;724672]Detroit, Browns and St. Louis are examples of teams that have had high draft choices and still are bad teams.

The Patriots, Colts and Steelers have consistently been a the bottom of the draft and done well. I don't think there is much correlation between high draft choices and great teams.

Having said that I want the Steelers to win out or at least win as many games as they can and to never play for a draft spot. Losers play for draft positions.
:tt:[/QUOTE

Teams also trade draft positions up and down, regardless where they stand at the end of the season.

Angus Burgher
12-10-2009, 02:26 PM
If you're referring to this season, didn't the Browns trade out of the first round completely?

Oh, that MANGENIUS!!! He's so brilliant!

wootawnee
12-10-2009, 02:28 PM
I do not judge any person because of other people........
How did the first pick in the 1970 draft turn out........
It was a 1-11 team that drafted first.......
Every man and situation is different.......

The_WARDen
12-10-2009, 02:40 PM
Draft picks are not overrated. If you have the right people in the front office, they will rarely make mistakes.

HughC
12-10-2009, 02:47 PM
Given the salary cap and what the 32 first round draft picks make, it seems like the best value is from about the 10th to 20th, or maybe even 15th to 25th pick of the draft. If you have a top ten pick and he gets injured or turns out to be a bust, it's going to have a huge negative effect on your cap and your roster for several years.

SteelerFanInStl
12-10-2009, 03:18 PM
Draft picks are not overrated. If you have the right people in the front office, they will rarely make mistakes.

Agreed. Those teams don't have good people in the front office, scouts, etc. They choose the wrong people.

Playing on a poor team is certainly a factor though in the success of a pick. It's easier to be successful when you have better talent around you.

steelreserve
12-10-2009, 03:46 PM
Given the salary cap and what the 32 first round draft picks make, it seems like the best value is from about the 10th to 20th, or maybe even 15th to 25th pick of the draft. If you have a top ten pick and he gets injured or turns out to be a bust, it's going to have a huge negative effect on your cap and your roster for several years.

^^ This.

If you have a top-5 pick, you're basically screwed, because you have to pay one guy $10 million a year and you don't know whether he's going to be any good or not. And you probably have a top-10 pick from last year making close to that too.

Meanwhile, you've got six or seven other positions where you need help, but two guys are eating up a sixth of your cap space.

I think right around the 15th pick is the sweet spot. High enough that not all the top talent is picked over, low enough that you don't have to waste several million dollars based on hype. And honestly, players from the top of the first round to the middle of the second round all tend to have a pretty good success rate. I'd be surprised if there was that much difference.

RoethlisBURGHer
12-10-2009, 05:02 PM
If you can pick the right person, and know how to build a football team, then you can have success with high picks.

Too many teams take a QB with that high pick when they don't have an offensive line in front of him that can protect him.

That would be fine, if the team would let that QB sit for a season or two and let him develop. Throw him in at the end of blowout losses so he can see the speed of a regular season football game.

But instead the cave to pressure from the fans and throw the QB in too soon.

steelreserve
12-10-2009, 05:16 PM
I'm less and less inclined to believe the notion that quarterbacks need to "develop" for a year or two. Regardless of how good or bad the line is, it seems like if you're a QB, either you get it at the pro level or you don't -- and that's rarely something where sitting on the bench for a year is going to make the difference.

And honestly, I'd like my team's chances better with a good quarterback and a bad offensive line ... than with a bad quarterback, one good OL and four bad OLs.

LukesDad88
12-10-2009, 05:40 PM
When a high round draft pick is going to a bad team, there's typically nobody very talented in that position to help mentor them, and typically not a decent coach to help them develop. That's a big reason why so many high draft picks are busts.

MaidenIndiana
12-10-2009, 05:43 PM
It doesn't help when a team like Detroit drafts wide recievers 3 years in a row with their high draft picks. It all depends on the front office personel. Besides if we didn't have a high draft pick every now and then do you really think that Big Ben would be our QB?

Hayeksheroes
12-10-2009, 06:24 PM
It doesn't help when a team like Detroit drafts wide recievers 3 years in a row with their high draft picks. It all depends on the front office personel. Besides if we didn't have a high draft pick every now and then do you really think that Big Ben would be our QB?


Ben was not even in the top 10. He barely made it in the top 3rd of the 1st round.
Yes, you can score winners being at the top of the draft, but it is made more difficult by the salary cap and the huge salary commitment you have to pay for the top pick. If the guy is a bust, then you've screwed the rest of the team because you don't have the room under the salary cap to pick up guys to help you out.

That is why the later round are more crucial than the first 3 rounds. If you can pick up 2 or 3 Wallaces or a Parkers in the later rounds, you've had a successful draft.

43Hitman
12-10-2009, 06:57 PM
Ben was not even in the top 10. He barely made it in the top 3rd of the 1st round.
Yes, you can score winners being at the top of the draft, but it is made more difficult by the salary cap and the huge salary commitment you have to pay for the top pick. If the guy is a bust, then you've screwed the rest of the team because you don't have the room under the salary cap to pick up guys to help you out.

That is why the later round are more crucial than the first 3 rounds. If you can pick up 2 or 3 Wallaces or a Parkers in the later rounds, you've had a successful draft.

We didn't draft Parker, he was an un-drafted free agent and Ben was the 11th pick.