NFP»Columns»Guest Star»Robert Boland
RSS

Draft Aftermath & Rankings Fallout

But while there’s a big exhale this morning around football, and some teams are patting themselves on the back as others are kicking themselves, the post-draft hangover doesn’t get to last long. Mini-camps, OTAs and the season all loom. Robert Boland

Bookmark and Share Print This Send This April 28, 2009, 07:45 AM EST
42 Comments

Patting Themselves on the Back

The months and weeks leading up the NFL Draft are highly stressful for players, teams, agents and perhaps even writers who’ve been covering this non-stop road show. 

My draft days as an agent -- particularly as someone who had mostly free agent-caliber players as clients -- were, as Jack Bechta has detailed as so well, some of the more awful days of my life. I was usually scrambling late into Sunday night and sometimes Monday morning to find a slot for a player.  The week occasionally dragged into Wednesday or Thursday, when I was usually looking to the Arena League to find a playing opportunity for a client passed over by the NFL and was fortunate enough to get two guys to the NFL after stints in the AFL. As I told a client once, it was easier for me to convince an NFL scout or personnel director to look at him or consider him for a roster spot if he was playing in a game somewhere instead of working out in his backyard. 

When I joined a much more established agency, I was pleased to see those draft days were as nerve-wracking as mine had been on my own.  It meant it wasn’t just me.  It isn’t that different for teams or players.  Only the No. 1 overall pick and his agent seem to escape this fateful weekend unscathed.  Of course, would you really want the pressure Matthew Stafford has now to end a 50-year rebuilding project in Detroit, even for his guaranteed money?

But while there’s a big exhale this morning around football, and some teams are patting themselves on the back as others are kicking themselves, the post-draft hangover doesn’t get to last long. Mini-camps, OTAs and the season all loom.

The Draft and Organization Rankings

Over the past three weeks, we have undertaken our own pre-draft marathon to rank NFL owners and organizations. I have my own hangover today from that process and have just finished writing “it’s Bidwill, not Bidwell” and “Steve Bisciotti, not Ben Bisciotti” one thousand times on the chalkboard as punishment for my mistakes. We have a fantastic editorial staff here, but sometimes they give too much deference to my professorial status. 

It’s too early to pass judgment on any draft as it relates to an organization, but it’s worth mentioning that two of the bottom-dwelling organizations drafted according to form. 

Justifying Rankings

Oakland Raiders

Perhaps the most hotly debated issue from your comments was my ranking of Al Davis and the Raiders at No. 30. A lot of folks complained loudly about my ignoring Davis’ legacy. I don’t, and no one should, dispute the legacy of Davis as one of the greatest innovators in the history of the sport.  But in the six years since the Raiders’ last Super Bowl appearance, Davis has aged from 73 to 79 years old, suffered several health setbacks and seemingly become a shell of his former self. He has also gone through five head coaches, run off a number of highly respected football executives and has the league’s fewest wins in that same period. 

Now, Davis’ reach for Maryland WR Darrius Heyward- Bey with the seventh overall pick and Ohio S Mike Mitchell in the second round underscores our depiction of Davis as one of the league’s great geniuses heading toward a sad end. Heyward-Bey was included in Wes Bunting’s all-bust list, and Mitchell was considered a second-day pick by most other teams. 

Cincinnati Bengals

The Bengals, the team ranked beneath the Raiders, had a terrific draft, adding five players in the first four rounds who are well-known and talented prospects. But the Bengals, who have some talent but little discipline on the field or self-control off it, drafted Alabama OT Andre Smith, whose stock fluctuated because of maturity issues; USC LB Rey Maualuga, who had similar struggles early in his college years; and Georgia Tech DE Michael Johnson, whose effort and desire have been questioned. So rather than running in the opposite direction from their own troubled past, the Bengals are saying, “This time will be different.”  It’s hard not to like the players and be excited by the infusion of talent they provide. But the definition of insanity, as Einstein told us, “is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”

Answering Critics

Houston Texans

The most vocal and surprising complaints I received were from Texans fans, who didn’t complain about owner Robert McNair being ranked No. 15 but instead voiced concern about their passion being underestimated. Nice draft in getting players to make the defense move from 4-3 to 3-4 pretty flexibly.  Hopefully, it will translate into a playoff appearance that will let everyone know just how passionate the Texans’ fans are.

New England Patriots

I was also roundly criticized by Patriots fans and Patriots haters for ranking New England No. 3. Some of you said too low; some said too high.  Admittedly, owner Robert Kraft probably suffers slightly because of the influence of two people, Bill Belichick and Tom Brady, over the entire success of the organization. But being in the top tier of all teams is a pretty high honor, and on draft day, Belichick showed himself to be the most “Moneyball” -oriented player in all of sports. His revolutionary change is the complete integration of the cost of acquisition with the overall player evaluation process.

So far, he might be the only “Moneyballer” to ever win a championship in any sport. Oakland A’s GM Billy Beane has only advanced beyond the first round of the playoffs once. GM Theo Epstein is a disciple of Beane, but his championships with the Red Sox have been won with the second-highest payroll in all sports. It’s hard to tell how good any of the four Patriots second-round picks will be, but getting four players among the top 83 picks and having no first-round signing bonus is an enviable record.

Pittsburgh Steelers and New York Giants

The top-rated organization covered all its widely listed needs for OL, DL, CB and WR. The Steelers had only one rookie start in 2008, and it figures that 2009 will hold more of the same and this group will be properly evaluated in a few years. 

The Giants also checked the box for their needs at WR, LB, TE, OL, QB and DB and got two players to help fill the Plaxico Burress void.  Suddenly and without a costly move, the Giants’ WR depth chart doesn’t look so thin.

A Final Word from a Reader

Because GC in DC summed up this whole organizational ranking business superbly:

 

“The interesting part of this is that the best franchises seem to be pretty easy to copy: come up with a long-term strategy, stick to the strategy, make changes to that core strategy only upon rigorous evaluation, and empower your people to support that strategy. But so few actually do.” 

Comments

Add a Comment
dave
Apr 28, 2009
08:50 AM

how are the pats "moneyballers"? they have a payroll as high as everyone else...

JT
Apr 28, 2009
09:05 AM

GC in DC is right, consistency builds good organizations (in most places).

Thanks again Robert.

damookster
Apr 28, 2009
09:28 AM

ummm, I think he kind of explained that in the next line:

His revolutionary change is the complete integration of the cost of acquisition with the overall player evaluation process.

dino
Apr 28, 2009
09:35 AM

One day theLions will move up.... c+/b- on the draft... but the talent has improved

Doug
Apr 28, 2009
09:40 AM

The Texans are not going to change their base to a 3-4.

Nate Lennox
Apr 28, 2009
10:16 AM

Being a "Moneyball" team has nothing to do with how high your payroll is... a team that uses the MB strategy is trying to identify winning traits, found in athletes, that are undervalued in the current market. It does not matter what your final payroll is, it only matters that your player acquisition is done in a concise manner where you are intentionally trying to acquire a certain undervalued athletic trait in most of your roster. The 06 Red Sox featured players with high OPS and high KBB ratios. That was how the Red Sox drafted for 2-3 years previous to the championship they won. it does not matter that all of those people eventually got raises and that the Red Sox carry a high payroll. Those players were identified during the draft because they had an under the radar characteristic that Epstein thought he could win with. The Patriots handle things in a similar manner.

Eric Green
Apr 28, 2009
10:19 AM

Robert,
I was thinking the same thing about the Bengals. Lombardi said Johnson was knocked for his toughness. Being an ex-Marine, I know a lot of kids (and Marines for that matter)that lack toughness. They may be tougher than average, but may not be tough enough for the NFL. Johnson may be the player that needed to go to a team like the Ravens or Steelers to give him an example of how to play.

Andy
Apr 28, 2009
10:24 AM

If I'm not mistaken NE had the 3rd lowest payroll in the NFL last year.

Andrew V
Apr 28, 2009
10:24 AM

I wouldn't couch it under the "moneyball" moniker necessarily, but its a similar sentiment. With the salary cap, the ideas of moneyball get washed away for the most part, because Beane's idea was to find players that fit certain statistical profiles (OBP, taking a lot of pitches to make the pitcher eat up his pitch count over a small number of innings, etc) for cheap in order to compete with the high payroll teams, ie. the Yankees and Red Sox (though when the A's hit their peak, the Red Sox payroll was a bit more palatable. And I do argue that Theo did win using the attributes of moneyball, but thats a different conversation for a different day).

Because the NFL has a salary cap and revenue sharing, there is more parity in the league. What Belichick has done is find cheap players that fit his personnel profile, as opposed to statistical, and compete over an extended period. Its similar, but I think there is a difference, because teams in the NFL have done similar things (I think the Steelers have been pretty successful by doing things in a similar way, ie. not overpaying for players, finding guys to fit their system not forcing it, etc, as have the Colts and the Eagles and the Giants, I think.) However, all of these teams have been able to reward their stars, like Brady, Manning, Big Ben, and sign big-ticket free agents/make trades for big-ticket players, like Moss, Adalius Thomas, and Jason Peters. This is something that the Oaklands, Floridas, and Tampas haven't been able to do in baseball.

Again, I think it is a similar sentiment, but because of the cap and revenue sharing, the NFL teams can vary how they approach personnel, where as the A's, for the most part, have to develop their own players and trade them before they leave in free agency.

Andrew V
Apr 28, 2009
10:36 AM

I agree with Nate. i realize this is a football site, but Im just going to say, the Red Sox, since Epstein came in as GM, have change their organization completely. They went from a team under the Harrington/Duquette era that sought out high priced free agents for quick fixes (lets call that the Yankees way). With Epstein, they targeted pure moneyball players (why they went after Ortiz in the first place) and started drafting more college baseball players, who could compete sooner in the high minors and majors. Their payroll from 2003-2007 was inflated by Manny's $20M a year, plus Pedro's big contract, and Damon's, and a few others. This isnt to say that they havent signed big deals under Theo (JD Drew comes to mind, and the offer to Texeira), or that they missed on some moves (Jeremy Giambi, Matt Clement) but they haven't overpayed for anyone, they have Beckett signed for a under-value deal, and they signed Youklis, Pedroia, and Lester for about a third of what Sabathia got from the Yankees this year. Its just sound management. And its what Belichick does.

The clearest similarity in my mind between what Belichick does and what the Red Sox do is they get rid of veterans early as opposed to late. That is to say, the Pats trade Vrabel, who probably has one, maybe two solid years left, instead of keeping him for three years for sentimental reasons, when he could be hurting the team. Shades of the Sox not overpaying for Pedro (complete bust for the Mets) or Damon (not exactly an All-Star for the Yankees). Again, sound management.

dave
Apr 28, 2009
11:19 AM

if "moneyballers" means they found one of the best QB's ever...then i guesss i see the point...

without brady...team is average...just like everyone else...even with an easy sched they couldnt make the playoffs...

to

Bill Parcells is my uncle
Apr 28, 2009
11:39 AM

I was and still am a strong opponent of your ranking of Mr Davis and the Raiders in the comments section, Robert -

Your justification here has done nothing to change my viewpoint - The only justification you have in my view is a 5-6 (5) year down time with respects to their record -

And I say that for these reasons - First off, in 2003 the Raiders lost their Pro Bowl quarterback and team leader Rich Gannon to a career ending injury - So despite the fact that they were 2-7 at the time of Gannon's injury, I still give them a pass on that year - Because not many teams could survive that hit to the quarterback position -

As for these great head coaches and highly respected football executives - If these guys that Mr Davis ran off are so great, then why are they not with other NFL teams currently?

To the draft - I agree Heyward-Bey was a reach there at 7 - But let me tell you something, this man knows his receivers and defensive backs...and history bears this fact out - These are positions where his love of speed is often a big factor -

So if Darius Heyward-Bey ultimately turns into a Randy Moss type threat on the field for the Raiders - Color me as not surprised, even though I didn't agree with the pick - Many people criticized Mr Davis Nmandi Asomugha round one pick at corner a few years back - And now we all know this kids name and we all know it well -

As for Mitchell, the fact that a defensive innovator (see his charting loafs) and defacto defensive genius like Lovie Smith was said (rumor) to be taking Mike Mitchell a few picks later - Has me giving that pick a pass for the moment, until I find out more on the subject -

In my view Mr Davis biggest problem is in not getting the big nasties to back up his speed players -

Jerry Jones completely ran the Dallas Cowboys void of talent and took Quincy Carter in round 2 of the draft a few years back - Jones ran off Hall of Fame coaches like Jimmy Johnson - due to Jones ego - and Bill Parcells - Parcells built that team back up, then Jones took away his grocery shopping privileges - Jones team hasn't won a playoff game in well over a decade - Jones gave up ridiculous compensation for an unproven receiver in Roy Williams - To the point where his own Super Bowl winning quarterback Troy Aikman was even critical of the move -

Jones hasn't accomplished anywhere near the things that NFL legends like Clint Murchison (RIP), Tex Schramm (RIP), Gil Brandt and Tom Landry (RIP) did in Dallas when they made America's team - And believe me, these guys made something in America's team that is never going away - A moniker and love for a team that is everlasting...no matter if Jones dropped his pants Mike Singletary style and crapped on the city from the top of west end - Yet Jones is still up there on your list above the NFL legend, Al Davis -

Like I said before, I have no problems as I am sure Mr Davis has no problems with admitting the mistakes in brass, coaching and personnel decisions Davis has made in the last 5-6 years in trying to replace a veteran laden Super Bowl team - Mistakes are bound to happen eventually with a dominant team (49ers, Giants, Bears etc) - Not everyone can be the Pittsburgh Steelers in terms of consistency -

Bottom line in my view - The Raiders still have young and talented players on the roster, as I showed the last time around - Much more talented players than many of the teams (Detroit etc) that you had ranked above them - Clubs that don't have near the legacy of Mr Davis and 5 consecutive decades of multiple Super Bowl-Conference Championship appearances -

If your article was about "what have you done for me lately" then the Cardinals would have been ranked higher than 28-29 with their great young players and coaching staff -

You sir used Pittsburgh as your guideline at #1 - And if that is the case then you are using a historical perspective to present day to define your rankings -

In this sense, no way, now how do the Raiders and Mr Davis deserve an insulting 30th rank -

Next 1 - 12 of 42 Prev COMMENTS

Add a Comment

* Required - Keep track of your comments Login or Register with NFP
(will not be published)