Eying the Draft -- Macro-level Immutable Rules of Drafting �.
Editor's note:� This annual article is based upon 2003's "Macro-level
Immutable Rules of Drafting".�
With the draft day beckoning
the nation's attention, it's time to pause and consider the time-honored, but
all too often forgotten, Immutable Rules of NFL Drafting.��
- It burns various teams
every year, and the Stillers have seen their share of problems with this
immutable rule of drafting:� Do not
reach to fill a need when a far better football player is available.� Yet, sure enough, all too many fans clamor
for the player that fills the immediate hot need, totally regardless of who
else is available.� This really stems
from America's insatiable appetite to scratch an itch and "do it now"
mentality without thinking through the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th order effects of a
given decision.�
Sure, if it's your turn to
draft and 2 available players are at the top of your evaluation criteria, one
might reasonably take player B to address a need even though Player A is a smidgen
better.� That's acceptable.� What isn't acceptable is passing on Jevon
Kearse to reach for Troy Edwards, which was one of the most hideous reaches in
modern NFL history.� An oft-forgotten
reach was the selection of FB Carlos King in round 4 of the 1998 draft.� King was well-known to be a total zero as a
blocker, yet the Stiller offense mandated that the FB be able to plow through a
brick wall.� Undeterred by King's total
lack of strength, power, and blocking ability, the Stillers pissed away a 4th
round pick on him, all because they wanted to fill a void at FB.�� King was cut just about as quickly as cajun
cornerback Liffort Hobbley back in the 80's under Chas Noll.� Back in the 1995 draft the Stillers reached
desperately to fill a need.�� Mark
Bruener was the 27th player selected in that draft, and the Stillers frothed
over him primarily because Eric Green departed town.� The player taken directly after the bootfooted Bruener was a
linebacker by the name of Derrick Brooks.�
Had the Stillers taken Brooks, he would have easily been the franchise's
career sack leader instead of Jason GilDong, and more importantly, Brooks would
have given the Stillers some supreme linebacking instead of the fraudulent play
of Carlos Emmons, Donte Jones, and Jason GilDong.� In '96, the Stillers reached like rabid giraffes to select
fatassed OT Jamain Stephens, who was a total bust.�
What makes the "reach
to fill a need" stupidity all the more stupid, is the fact that, with
modern-day free agency and the statistical probability of career-damaging
injury, your roster is susceptible to 25% annual turnover.� With that in mind, it makes absolutely no
sense to reach to fill this year's need, when, inevitably, you'll have other
major needs the following season anyway.�
If you reach and fill the void with a weak player, you now have TWO
needs the following year -- the "original" need that you reached for
the prior year, and another major need that has now cropped up due to injury,
free agency, or retirement.� Few things
are more hideous than the rabid reach�.avoid at all costs.��
- Select the best
football player/best athlete.� I
cannot stand the "best athlete available" (BAA) mantra.� If this were the decathlon, or a SuperStars
Competition, then BAA might apply.� This
is football.� Neither Jack Lambert, Jack
Ham, nor Andy Russell could even remotely approach the label of "excellent
athlete".� All three, however, were
excellent football players.�
Don't get me wrong --
athleticism is good to have.� The grave
blunder, however, is placing too great a premium on "athleticism" (or
"sheer athleticism", as the trite saying goes), and not enough on
whether the guy can crack skulls and play with a rugged, tough mentality as a
football player in the National Football League.� The Stillers drafted OLB Steven Conley back in round 3 of the
1996 draft.� Conley was hailed as the
"next coming", mostly due to his sheer athleticism as a hoops player
and some track skills as well.�� When it
came time to put on the pads and crack skulls, Conley was as soft and feeble as
a Jason Gildon, and never amounted to squat in the NFL.� 14 picks later, the Pats selected Teddy
Bruschi, a far less athletic linebacker but a guy with the heart of a lion and
the passion to be an NFL football player.�
Later in that same draft, the Dolphins selected an
"un-athletic" LB named Zach Thomas in round 5, and the Stillers
themselves drafted an un-athletic LB named Earl Holmes.� Of these LBs, the Stillers got the best
athlete available in Conley, while the Pats and Dolphs (and even the Stillers
with Holmes) got the best football player available in terms of
linebacker.� Certainly, the scouting
department needs to evaluate a prospect's athleticism in terms of his 40 time,
cone drill time, high jump, bench press, and so on.�� Let's face it -- a tough football player who runs a 5.6
"40" probably won't pan out as a safety in the NFL, although a coach
like Billy Cowher might very well froth over the guy's "playcalling
ability" and his "awareness" and his "ability to get others
into the right positions".�� It's
got to be a combination of "football player" and
"athlete".�� For example,
Kendrell Bell is both.� Will Blackwell
wasn't anything approaching a football player, and even as an athlete,
had dubious merits.� That's why Bell was
a steal as a 2nd round pick, while Jackwell was one of the very worst 2nd round
selections in the history of the franchise.�
Dan Kreider is, according to "measurables", a lousy athlete
but one helluva football player.�
Same for Hines Ward.� Hall of
Fame RB Marcus Allen was deemed "too slow" and was subjected to all
sorts of paralysis by analysis, and then had one of the greatest RB
careers of all time.� I cringe every
time I see too much emphasis placed on a guy's "measurables"
and "athleticism", and not enough on his ability to simply play
football.�
Just to further clarify, you
want to select the BPA, regardless of need, unless need and BPA are
simultaneously available.�
- Do not forget undrafted
rookies free agents and SalCap casualties.�
The draft isn't the do all and end all.�
Undrafted rookies can be signed, and some -- like Dan Kreider -- can and
do make an impact.� (Sure, Kreider was
ultimately cut at the end of camp in lieu of Jon Witman, but luckily was
re-signed a few weeks later when injuries hit the roster.)�� There will be numerous June 1st
"salcap cuts", and other unsigned UFAs remain a reasonable course of
action.� Because of the pool of
undrafted rookies, salcap casualties, and "neglected UFAs", there
shouldn't be any reason to reach for an inferior player in
the draft simply to fill a need.�
- Don�t get too enamored
with vanilla adequacy when brilliant, impact playmaking is
available in the draft.� Some scouts
and some teams get too enamored with polite draft prospects who have shown
solid, middle of the road production and potential�.but nothing more.� In the meantime, there are some dazzling
flowers just waiting to bloom, but these same scouts will inevitably pull out
the microscope and frown over every last minute flaw.� This is precisely why the Jerry Rice's, the Randy Moss's, the
Brian Urlacher's, and even the Kendrell Bell's get passed over in favor of
"safer" bets that turn out to be vanilla mediocrity.�
- There's more than 1
round in the draft.� Another immensely important stratagem is
that the 1st round is not the do all and end all.� The Stillers seem to put all of their intellectual eggs into one
basket -- the first round -- and then grab-bag it thereafter, selecting stiffs
like Larry Foote that have no purpose, no upside, and no chance to ever be a
starting-caliber player in the NFL.� The
mid rounds -- rounds 3-5 -- are a verifiable goldmine, but the Stillers have
gotten next to nothing in these 3 rounds in the past 4 drafts.� This is the round where you should find some
solid players who soon develop into very solid backups, if not solid
starters.� Instead, the Stillers have
gotten virtually nothing.� In terms of
rounds 3-5, the Stillers' draft of 2000 was quite possibly the worst ever in
league history.� Because of trades, the
Stillers had 5 picks in those 3 rounds, and came away with Clancy, Poteat,
Farmer, Haggans, and Martin.� Only
Haggans remains, and the contributions of the other 4 players combined were
equivalent to the gnat on the backside of a buffalo.� Clearly, the Stillers must start getting some utility from these
mid-rounds if they want to return to championship contention.�
Some caveats:
- QB is a position that can
appropriately be passed over -- situation dependent -- even when a QB is
clearly the BFPA (best football player avail) and BAA.� The reason is three-fold:��
���� a.)� unlike nearly
every other position outside of the kicking game, you can have only QB on the
field at a time (unless you've got a "slash"), and it's basically
impossible to "rotate" or "platoon" the QB position.� For example, every team needs 2 good OLBs to
round out their starting lineup, plus depth, plus special teamers...so adding
another LB who is the BFPA/BAA is sensible.�
But if you're already fairly set at QB, adding another QB when some
other player ranks nearly as high on your evaluation criteria, might be
investing too much for a guy to rot the pine.�
���� b.)� QBs taken in the first
day of the draft typically command massive signing bonuses and salaries.� This can be a cap killer, and to teams
either well stocked at QB, or with too many other gaping holes, it may not be
prudent to lavish millions on an unproven greenhorn.�
�� ��c.)� because of the nature of the position, QB is
the very toughest position in all of pro sports.� Therefore, it takes the longest to master, and the ROI (return on
investment) may not pan out, or may pan out far too slowly.� (Having said all of this, until the Stillers
plucked Ben Roth last year in round 1, they had eschewed the QB position in the
draft for far too long, content to spend nothing more than scrap-heap picks in
the 5th, 6th, or most often, the 7th round.)���
- FB is another position
that can be passed over if you're already stocked pretty well, such as the
Stillers.� And by FB, I'm referring to a
pure blocking FB, not a Franco Harris or a Larry Czonka.� A modern NFL team needs, at most, 2 FBs, so
this isn't a spot that you need to stockpile a whole lot of talent.�
- Ignore kickers (both
punters and placekickers) on Day 1, regardless of their measurables,
"productivity" and so on.�
- Speed kills, and it should
the one criterion that gets heavier weighting in the decision matrix (assuming
the Stillers use anything approaching such an analytical tool for decision
making, which is doubtful).� This
Stiller team has been painfully slow at most starting positions.� Only Joey Porter and Troy Pola can be said
to have above-average speed; every other starter is, at best, average in
relation to his NFL peers, and all too many of this team's starters are below
average.� Ike Taylor or Ric Colclough,
if either one starts, would be a starter with above average speed, but that's
it.� I certainly realize that foot-speed
for all of the O-linemen, as well as the NT, is entirely immaterial, but at
every other position, speed can make a big difference.� This Stillers team is among the slowest 3 or
4 teams in the league.� I'm not saying
to disregard BPA, but all things being equal between two draft prospects, the
Stillers need to select the one with better speed.�
One last note: muchos kudos
to my esteemed colleagues, Phantom and Haven, for their splendid work on the
upcoming draft.� Please take the time to
read, digest, and assimilate their draft articles.� You won't find anything -- and I do mean anything, anywhere --
even remotely close to the depth, breadth, and analysis of the draft as what these
two preeminent writers have provided.����
(Still Mill and Stillers.com -- the only nationally read coverage on the Pittsburgh Stillers that has accurately predicted the how's and the why's of the past 4 Stiller playoff losses�.)