2001 Draft Grades

[jarthur31]

I could have seen this being a B at best. Henry was good for us but has falen to sh-- lately. Schoebel is a high-end of the average category of a DE. Jennings? Useless. Clements has been good up until last season.

678041[/snapback]

 

Travis went to the PB twice and earned it! In his best two years, he had almost 2800 yards rushing. Wow. I think he was the team MVP both years.

[Pete]

Sixth- round pick S Tony Driver was

                  a nice choice too.

[MDH]

So, what's your opinion on Bellichick continuing to stack his roster with TEs?

681907[/snapback]

 

I think he's overdone it a bit at the expense of other areas of the team and it will eventually take its toll. Of course the Pats are in a position where they can afford to make such picks as they don't have a lot of holes on their team to fill. There's a big difference between a Falcons team that hadn't won in a long time making these types of picks and a team that's won 3 of the last 5 SBs making them.

 

And how did that pick turn out for the Saints?

 

These analyses prove one thing.  Usually teams know a hell of a lot more about what their needs are, then those who populate the draft guide cottage industry.

681907[/snapback]

 

I'd say the pick turned out pretty badly for the Saints actually. The idea of the draft isn't to pick good/great players, the idea of the draft is to pick players that make your team better. Bottom line is that picking Duece was a luxury pick that didn't help the team win.

[Chilly]

Enjoy!

 

Great picks:

 

Gerrard Warren, Quincy Carter, Kenyatta Walker, James Boyd, Kenyatta Jones, Chris Weinke, Onome Ojo

 

Bad Picks: 

 

Alge Crumpler, Ryan Pickett, Marcus Stroud, Steve Smith, LaMont Jordan, Reggie Wayne, Duece McAllister.

 

We got a C+ for a draft that landed Schobel, Clements, Jennings, and Travis Henry.

678032[/snapback]

 

F-

 

We should have drafted Vince.

[Mile High]

F-

 

We should have drafted Vince.

682161[/snapback]

Preach on preacher man.

[Orton's Arm]

How much is that 2001 draft helping the Bills today? Jennings went four and out; Henry provided little to no upgrade over Antowain Smith before being traded away, and Clements may or may not be here at this time next year. That leaves just Aaron Schobel; a DE who is average or a little above average for a starter.

[Tortured Soul]

Overall I'd say this might not have been the best choice in trying to illustrate your point (and your point is a valid one to be sure).

681877[/snapback]

Thanks for pointing that out. I think this guy did do a very good job overall analyzing the draft. There are some people that get a collective "who?" on the hit list, but most were not bad - pointing out Jonas as a starter from the 95th pick, McKenzie and Chambers were nice spots, too, and he has Hutch graded as the top player taken. And his miss list isn't bad, either.

 

How much is that 2001 draft helping the Bills today?  Jennings went four and out; Henry provided little to no upgrade over Antowain Smith before being traded away, and Clements may or may not be here at this time next year.  That leaves just Aaron Schobel; a DE who is average or a little above average for a starter.

682363[/snapback]

Jennings left because he was too expensive - would you rather draft players that stink to the point where no one wants to pay him. Henry made a Probowl and consecutive 1300 yard seasons. How many of those did Antowain have? Clements is also a Prowbowler and see the Jennings comment on free agency. and that poster a couple back showed Scouts, Inc. has Schobel ranked 8th in football. Not bad at all.

[stuckincincy]

Preach on preacher man. 

682163[/snapback]

 

During the draft coverage, Jaworski, Wingo, Hoge etc. were on their set pointing out Young's technique problems. One of them remarked that "the next staff should be able to...", meaning the next team he plays for after TEN moves him on. They uttered a collective "ooooo"

[Orton's Arm]

Jennings left because he was too expensive - would you rather draft players that stink to the point where no one wants to pay him.  Henry made a Probowl and consecutive 1300 yard seasons.  How many of those did Antowain have?  Clements is also a Prowbowler and see the Jennings comment on free agency.  and that poster a couple back showed Scouts, Inc. has Schobel ranked 8th in football.  Not bad at all.

682385[/snapback]

The bottom line with Jennings is that he went four and out. It's easy to get bogged down with a Jennings discussion. If I say Jennings should have been extended after year 2 or 3 (thereby preventing San Francisco from showing him crazy money) people come back by saying he was injury-prone, and unworthy of a long-term deal. So either TD messed up by taking a player too injury-prone to be worthy of an extension, or he messed up by letting Jennings hit free agency. One or the other. Either way, it's four and out with Jennings.

 

You'll notice that Antowain Smith's average yards per carry is 3.9, while Travis Henry's is 4.0. Do you really want to use a second round pick on a 0.1 yards per carry upgrade? Consider the fact that Smith was better at avoiding fumbles than Henry, and the fact that Henry's blocking and pass catching skills left a little something to be desired. So it's not like you're getting a complete back. On the other hand, that second round pick squandered on trying to upgrade the RB position could have been used in a more solid, though less glamorous way--upgrading the offensive line.

 

Clements is a Pro Bowler in the same sense Antowain Winfield is a Pro Bowler--they're both excellent players TD should have done more to keep. Had TD locked Clements up to a long-term deal, do you really think the Bills would have drafted Youboty?

[Dibs]

How much is that 2001 draft helping the Bills today?  Jennings went four and out; Henry provided little to no upgrade over Antowain Smith before being traded away, and Clements may or may not be here at this time next year.  That leaves just Aaron Schobel; a DE who is average or a little above average for a starter.

682363[/snapback]

 

Do you realize you constantly alter the topic discussed?

 

The question is weather the 2001 draft was a good one or not(obviously in relation to the fact that people are grading the 2006 draft now....i.e. bust/pro-bowl).

 

You are discussing how effective we managed said 2001 draftees.

 

IMO, the 2001 draft was A grade. If we could emulate that this year & next year...

 

Regarding our managing of the 2001 players....I'm not as negative as H_A. but I think we certainly could have managed them better than we did.

[bartshan-83]

Do you realize you constantly alter the topic discussed?

 

The question is weather the 2001 draft was a good one or not(obviously in relation to the fact that people are grading the 2006 draft now....i.e. bust/pro-bowl).

 

You are discussing how effective we managed said 2001 draftees.

 

IMO, the 2001 draft was A grade.  If we could emulate that this year & next year...

 

Regarding our managing of the 2001 players....I'm not as negative as H_A. but I think we certainly could have managed them better than we did.

683038[/snapback]

Well put.

 

If we could draft a double-digit sack DE, an mid-to-upper echelon offense lineman, and a Probowler for both offense and defense every April, I think we would be okay...

[colin]

How much is that 2001 draft helping the Bills today?  Jennings went four and out; Henry provided little to no upgrade over Antowain Smith before being traded away, and Clements may or may not be here at this time next year.  That leaves just Aaron Schobel; a DE who is average or a little above average for a starter.

682363[/snapback]

 

who drafted that year or after has more sacks than aaron schobel?

 

how many sacks does the average DE from that year have since then?

 

please bring up other aspects of DE play as a counterpoint to me bringing up sacks (HINT: aaron does a few things well), or just handwave and say aaron's sacks only come in one game a season.

 

thanks

[bills_fan_in_raleigh]

Enjoy!

 

Great picks:

 

Gerrard Warren, Quincy Carter, Kenyatta Walker, James Boyd, Kenyatta Jones, Chris Weinke, Onome Ojo

 

Bad Picks: 

 

Alge Crumpler, Ryan Pickett, Marcus Stroud, Steve Smith, LaMont Jordan, Reggie Wayne, Duece McAllister.

 

We got a C+ for a draft that landed Schobel, Clements, Jennings, and Travis Henry.

678032[/snapback]

alaska dont you read this board enough dont you recall that Shobel sucks, Clements Sucks, Jonas and henry are has beens

[Alaska Darin]

alaska dont you read this board enough dont you recall that Shobel sucks, Clements Sucks, Jonas and henry are has beens

683091[/snapback]

Actually, I rarely read this board anymore.

[Orton's Arm]

Do you realize you constantly alter the topic discussed?

 

The question is weather the 2001 draft was a good one or not(obviously in relation to the fact that people are grading the 2006 draft now....i.e. bust/pro-bowl).

 

You are discussing how effective we managed said 2001 draftees.

In my mind, the purpose of the draft is to build long-term value for your team. The 2001 draft achieved this to a certain degree, but not to the degree I'd have liked. You seem to think that good player selection was sometimes spoiled by poor post-draft player management. Fair enough.

 

I'm not trying to change the subject with this draft conversation; it's just that I see things differently. My thought process is this: you build the core of your team through the draft, then you round out the edges via free agency. You can't get very far without a core group of high level players that will be with you a long time. Peyton Manning and Marvin Harrison in Indy. Jim Kelly, Andre Reed, and Thurman Thomas with the Super Bowl Bills. Troy Aikman, Michael Irvin, and Emmitt Smith with the Cowboys. Players like that.

 

If the goal of the draft is to build such a core, then you evaluate a draft by the extent to which such a core was in fact built. If you look back and see that all you have left is Aaron Schobel, a 3rd round pick from trading away Henry, and the right to franchise Clements, there's the extent of your core. Basically, one guy, and the possibility of two more (assuming Clements agrees to an extension, and that Youboty works out well). The draft could have been worse, as we learned in 2002. But it also could have been better.

 

Was this a case of having the right players, but not getting them signed to the right contracts? Maybe; if you're willing to overlook Clements' disappointing 2005 season, Jennings' injuries, and the apparent brevity of Henry's career.

 

In any case, I happen to view contracts as part of the drafting process. If you're confident a guy is going to work out long-term, you give him a long contract, as TD did with Mike Williams. If you're less sure, you sign him to a shorter deal, as TD did with Nate Clements, Jonas Jennings, and Travis Henry.

 

While good player contracts can't save a bad draft; poor player contracts can largely spoil a good draft years after it's taken place.

[Dibs]

In my mind, the purpose of the draft is to build long-term value for your team.  The 2001 draft achieved this to a certain degree, but not to the degree I'd have liked.  You seem to think that good player selection was sometimes spoiled by poor post-draft player management.  Fair enough.

 

I'm not trying to change the subject with this draft conversation; it's just that I see things differently.  My thought process is this: you build the core of your team through the draft, then you round out the edges via free agency.  You can't get very far without a core group of high level players that will be with you a long time.  Peyton Manning and Marvin Harrison in Indy.  Jim Kelly, Andre Reed, and Thurman Thomas with the Super Bowl Bills.  Troy Aikman, Michael Irvin, and Emmitt Smith with the Cowboys.  Players like that. 

 

If the goal of the draft is to build such a core, then you evaluate a draft by the extent to which such a core was in fact built.  If you look back and see that all you have left is Aaron Schobel, a 3rd round pick from trading away Henry, and the right to franchise Clements, there's the extent of your core.  Basically, one guy, and the possibility of two more (assuming Clements agrees to an extension, and that Youboty works out well).  The draft could have been worse, as we learned in 2002.  But it also could have been better.

 

Was this a case of having the right players, but not getting them signed to the right contracts?  Maybe; if you're willing to overlook Clements' disappointing 2005 season, Jennings' injuries, and the apparent brevity of Henry's career. 

 

In any case, I happen to view contracts as part of the drafting process.  If you're confident a guy is going to work out long-term, you give him a long contract, as TD did with Mike Williams.  If you're less sure, you sign him to a shorter deal, as TD did with Nate Clements, Jonas Jennings, and Travis Henry. 

 

While good player contracts can't save a bad draft; poor player contracts can largely spoil a good draft years after it's taken place.

683255[/snapback]

 

I agree with you in that the complexities of 'the draft' & player management are many & varied.

I could be wrong but I feel people generally look at grading the draft as simply(or perhaps firstly)...

...are the players drafted going to be HOFers/pro-bowlers/good players/journeymen/busts etc.

 

Once this grading has been determined, people may chose to progress onto further aspects of said draft.

There is no use even thinking about how the draftees were managed etc if all the players drafted that year were total busts.

 

Like I said, I could be wrong but I feel pretty confident that is how most view the topic of this thread.

[Dibs]

Furthermore.....

Should what Marv & Co. do effect how we grade TDs drafts?

i.e. if one of last years draftees come on strong(future HOFer) & Marv stuffs it up letting him go with no compensation, should that downgrade TDs 2005 draft?

I guess I see this as more an exercise in assessing the players talents(& talent evaluators evaluations) rather than the managements managerial abilities.

[Bill from NYC]

Two quick points.....

 

I am amazed at how little respect is given to Schobel by so many posters. Yes, he is a little small, but he gets better vs. the run each year imo.

Please, don't point out team stats. Last season, there was barely a DT who was able to make a tackle vs. the run, and Spikes was out.

As Schobel ages, he appears to be getting stronger and smarter. He had very good games against some very good LTs. The man, because of his great speed, is able to make pursuit tackles and apply consistent pressure.

We were VERY lucky to re-sign him!

No offense, but what are some of you guys looking at?

 

Also, I think that Hutch was a pretty good pick in 01, wouldn't you say?

[stuckincincy]

I think he's overdone it a bit at the expense of other areas of the team and it will eventually take its toll.  Of course the Pats are in a position where they can afford to make such picks as they don't have a lot of holes on their team to fill.

682113[/snapback]

 

NE's tight end picks did seem a bit odd. But I wonder if they are using to some degree, the philosophy of drafting to one's strength. I suppose it's more of a tendenancy than philosophy; the idea being that if you are strong in one area, keep up drafting there to keep it a reliable part of the team.

 

Like for many a year, the Raiders keeping their passing game in good shape, or Pittsburgh always adding to the defense.

 

It's an arguable approach, for sure. But it's a good one when applied to the OL.

[GG]

I'd say the pick turned out pretty badly for the Saints actually.  The idea of the draft isn't to pick good/great players, the idea of the draft is to pick players that make your team better.  Bottom line is that picking Duece was a luxury pick that didn't help the team win.

682113[/snapback]

 

Wowee. Talk about a reach. Spoken like a true fantasy football manager.

 

Why in the world would a team use a first round draft pick on a versatile star RB, when they have a sulking head case dope fiend RB in the lockerroom? Would you imagine that Hasslett knew something more about Ricky than what showed up in the stat pages on Mondays, when they made the Deuce pick?

 

Yeah, picking Deuce was a disaster for NO, especially when counted against the eventual trade of ganja boy to Dolphins.