Yeah you're right about the QB it's obviously going to define whether you can win, I guess my general theory is that there are two types of draft mistakes imo, first one is drafting the wrong player (The Browns drafting Kizer in the second round) which is a failure to evaluate players. The second is giving in to the glamour picks, especially QBs and other skill positions in the first round, like the Cardinals did with Rosen. I would contend that the net effect of the Browns and Cardinals drafts over the two years kind of validates what the Browns did as a slightly more medium term approach: Browns start from a base of 1-15 2017, draft Garrett and then in rd 2, Kizer at QB who requires no long term commitment if he turns out to be a bust, finish 0-16 2018, draft Mayfield, QB of the future and go 7-8-1 Net result over two drafts: +6 wins and a mid-range defense, a bust 2nd round pick in 2017 Cardinals start from a base of 8-8 2018, draft Rosen and pass up defensive players almost entirely, finish 3-13 2019: draft Murray, QB of the future, and finish 5-10-1 Net result over two drafts: -3 wins and finishing last in the NFL in yards allowed, a bust first round pick in 2018 but +1 2nd round pick in 2019. Obviously a lot of what-ifs if you think Mahomes or Watson would have transformed the Browns equally quickly (I would agree) and the free agency signings, coaching changes, player development etc. My general feeling is that Murray would be in a better position in almost every single game if the Cards had drafted defensive players in 2018. They drafted a LB, two DT's and a safety via the supplemental draft and traded for Hopkins, so they realised after the fact that they had no supporting cast for him a little too late and in his first year, he has been through an awful lot. But maybe this season the Cards will drive home those draft picks and trades and look smart That's the difficulty, that none of it occurs in isolation or from a clean slate. Anyway I was mainly writing this down because I'm playing with an algorithmic approach to evaluating the net effect of drafts over a period that a user defines, I'll let you know if we ever do that publicly haha.
All really good points mate. What's your view on draft approach at a basic level? Best player available or best player that fills a need?
I think it depends upon the individual circumstances of the team tbh. The top teams (particularly if they have depth) should look at best available as rookies take up less cap space. Those struggling (and we can include the Browns in this) should look at players that fill a need. Looking at this years draft, that's the way Cleveland have gone about it by strengthening the areas needed with players that fit the coach's style.
Yeah I quite like it might get one myself Do Bengals take a hit on Cap ? This dead mo ney seems strange to me .
Yeah I agree with @Ozzymac that where you start from is crucial because sometimes you have to prioritise an area that is weak, but generally speaking... QB excepted, the one thing I am always wary of is teams passing up obviously great players in order to draft 'needs'. I would argue that you underpay so much for great players via the draft due to the fixed salaries over their first 4-5 years, that you should theoretically be able to divert those savings into free agent veterans in other areas. Obviously QB is a difficult one because only one player is realistically going to play, so drafting two high picks consecutive years is obviously a waste of capital. The main reason I think like this for almost every other position is the ridiculously fast turnover of rosters and players in the league. You see players whose productivity plummets, they get injured, or they have off-field stuff, or the team can't afford to keep them. You can't take for granted that the spine of your team will be there in 2-3 years time. As some examples, at wide receiver/TE: Gronk, AB, AJ Green, Doug Baldwin, Jordy Nelson, OBJ, Amari Cooper. If you go back a few seasons, those guys weren't just good, they were great. Now a bunch have retired early, or been traded/released for various reasons, some of which their teams would see coming, some they wouldn't. So my philosophy would generally be that at a lot of positions, you're never set for more than a year or two even if you've got a great nucleus. You have to get a balance in where you spend your dollars, and it doesn't mean you only draft the can't-miss players, but because the draft is a hard science to get right at the best of times, if you come across someone who you just know will be amazing like Peterson, Manning, Joe Thomas, Calvin Johnson, Julio Jones, Suh, Von Miller, Revis etc, then you just take them and figure it out if you get the chance, because the chances are your guy there now ain't going to be around in 4 years anyway.
Good post. I've got a huge obsession with NFL, but i'm very new to the game compared to most fans. I started watching Superbowls and although I've seen parts of games before, the Seahawks win over the Broncos in 2014 was my first all the way through. I really enjoyed that Legion of Boom attitude, particularly Sherman. I did this for 2/3 years until I got a TV package that allowed me to watch weekly. I started watching Seahawks games but found myself more interest with RedZone. I kept watching and every week there was a ridiculous thing done by the Browns to throw away another game and it felt so Sunderland to me that I was drawn to them. I watched the 2nd half of the Browns 1-15 season (missing the Xmas eve win over the Chargers!) and that was it. Being a novice to NFL, I figured that I was in on the ground floor and with the early draft picks, we'd start to get better. I wasn't expecting an 0-16 the next year but by that point, I was in too deep.
I can only sympathise with a Browns and SAFC fan in 2016-17, that is a bad combo. Great to hear of someone getting into the game though, it's a grind and there's just so much to take in and understand generally. I'm a huge fan and actually work in the data industry around the NFL and other American sport, so I have a bit of a leg-up at times. I have a friend who got into it the same time (roughly) as you, and he decided to go with the Broncos because he liked the uniform. They ended up winning the Super Bowl that year Meanwhile I'm a lifelong Bears fan, and the last 30 years have not gone so well...
Oh aye, I know my Rex Grossmans, sadly. What's great now is that you can actually watch games and enjoy them in ways that were genuinely impossible 15 years ago. I used to listen to Bears games on the radio back in 2004 via a web player that would barely work. I was offered a job at Profootballfocus in 2009 and turned it down because I didn't see how they were going to get the film in time to be meaningful - they were spending the entire offseason grading tapes (literal dvd's!) from the season before, and I told Neil (Hornsby) that it was a great idea, I just didn't feel like they could do it a year behind and get any traction. A year later the NFL made Gamepass in the UK 'properly' available and I looked a bit silly
Sounds fascinating actually mate. What kind of qualifications do you need to go down that career path?
I agree it takes a hell of a long time to understand NFL I've been watching since 1982 and still dont know anywhere near enough ! Its maybe the reason a lot just say its crap and they dont like it . I love it and prefer it to football . I like the fact that it isnt going to be just 4 ish teams that's gonna win over the next 25 years .
I started watching it and loved it when it first arrived on c4 but lost touch with it when it went over to sky. I then got back in to it relatively recently when c4 started showing a highlights programme fronted by Vernon Kaye. I think they also showed the Monday Night Football game live. Fairly certain that it was the year the Patriots beat the Seahawks with Butler's last gasp interception. Still no one knows why they didn't give the ball to Lynch. I've gone from that to having Gamepass for the last two seasons and understanding more about the game than I ever did during the many years of watching highlights of the previous week's games in a Sunday teatime. Love the game.
It's difficult to say, because I started from scratch with my own data project and it snowballed into a business as it became successful, so the only qualification I had was being willing to work at it for free for a few years until it took off. I've never had formal qualifications that are specific to it, I did a lot of quantitative analysis at uni for my history degree, and a lot of it in a job in information security that I had to quit to go full time with this about 5 years ago now. Now that NFL analytics are a fairly big deal, it's super competitive, so I'd advise the easiest path today would be to wait for PFF or similar to advertise entry level data jobs and see if you can use that semi-voluntary role to learn it on the job. A good understanding of the NFL is pretty essential though. If anyone is ever interested in discussing it properly, let me know, happy to advise on the best path.
Of course if anyone happens to be a javascript developer who loves the NFL, definitely get in touch because we will pretty much hire you on the spot
Don Shula passed away. Absolute legend of the game and coach of 1 of only 3 teams to have gone undefeated in a season. Technically 4 teams but the Bears done it twice lol. RIP Don.
PFF are actually advertising entry level jobs, unfortunately my knowledge of NFL isn't nearly good enough. If there was something similar footy related however, I think I'd gamble at the career change.
No not yet, it's not officially released until 29th May I think so should be few days after hopefully. Edit, it is ordered, just waiting... impatiently...
I've found sizing weird. I have a few jerseys (I also collect football shirts that I like) and the chest is often tight, with baggy arms In the US they have more 'casual' jerseys that are better fitting than the types we get over here, generally.
