PDA

View Full Version : Where do the Broncos rank in drafting



Fan in Exile
05-27-2008, 08:15 AM
If you take a look here (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=531#more-531) Then you'll find a pretty reasonable analysis of how all 32 teams have drafted over the 1996-2005 time frame. (That's why I put it in general because it doesn't cover the 2008 draft.)

It's a pretty long account so I'll give you the Highlights.

We drafted one player in the top 35 Clinton Portis.

One player in the worst 35, Willie Middlebrooks.

We ranked 17th overall in drafting during that period.

We ranked 7th when just counting first round drafts. I think this might surprise a lot of people because it's easy to forget other teams bust in the first round as well, and generally speaking during this time they were busting at higher draft slots than we were.

We ranked 19th for rounds 4-7.

Our three best draft picks of that time were Clinton Portis, Al Wilson, and Trevor Pryce.

Our three worst picks were Willie Middlebrooks, Marcus Nash, Paul Toviessi.

We certainly aren't great at drafting but I think this gives a good indication of where we are compared to other teams. It's too easy to just focus on the picks that we've gotten wrong and say we are the worst drafting team ever, that's just not true.

I hope we get better than this and that we do a better job keeping our players.

MOtorboat
05-27-2008, 08:22 AM
We ranked 17th overall in drafting during that period.

We ranked 7th when just counting first round drafts. I think this might surprise a lot of people because it's easy to forget other teams bust in the first round as well, and generally speaking during this time they were busting at higher draft slots than we were.

Great find Exile.

This is what I have wanted to see for a long time, but didn't have the time or the will to do my own research. Especially after all the people railing on Shanahan for being the "worst drafter in the NFL." I knew that statement was preposterous, and people failed to COMPARE our drafts to others. This article shows that exactly.

BOSSHOGG30
05-27-2008, 08:36 AM
Last year we had the 2nd fewest Broncos drafted players on our team. The only team with less players was the Washington Redskins.

MOtorboat
05-27-2008, 08:46 AM
Last year we had the 2nd fewest Broncos drafted players on our team. The only team with less players was the Washington Redskins.

But that's not what the study is about.

That's player management after the draft.

Cugel
05-27-2008, 09:28 AM
I look at those numbers differently than you do. To sum up.


Initially, I compared the approximate value of each player selected at any spot in the draft, relative to the draft value of that pick. If the players a team has drafted have accumulated more value than the pick is worth, he’s a good pick and that team did well.

OK, fair enough. How do the teams rank?


So which teams have done the best? Not surprisingly, it’s the Colts. Indianapolis has been a great team for the past decade, and it’s almost all because of homegrown players. The worst drafting team [Lions] probably isn’t much of a surprise, either.

So, the system produces results that make some sense. The Colts have been SB champions and are contenders every year. Take a look at the top teams.

I color coded it to make it easier. Teams in YELLOW went to the SB during this period. Teams in CYAN went got to the Conference Championship, but lost.


AV DV Diff
Indianapolis Colts 40.74 31.12 9.62
Green Bay Packers 34.89 28.87 6.02
Baltimore Ravens 35.99 30.54 5.45
Pittsburgh Steelers 36.61 31.19 5.42
Philadelphia Eagles 38.42 33.26 5.16
Dallas Cowboys 34.79 31.07 3.72
Tennessee Titans 37.90 34.83 3.07
Buffalo Bills 32.25 29.38 2.88
New York Giants 31.40 28.78 2.62
Jacksonville Jaguars 37.47 35.15 2.33
Chicago Bears 37.36 35.30 2.05
New England Patriots 35.75 34.55 1.20
Kansas City Chiefs 27.47 27.08 0.39
St. Louis Rams 36.19 35.80 0.39
Seattle Seahawks 34.62 34.59 0.03
New York Jets 32.24 32.25 -0.01
Denver Broncos 30.47 30.71 -0.24

So far so good. Good drafting results in success. For some reason (lack of a good QB or good defense) the Chiefs and Bills haven't been successful despite having good drafts for years. In the Chiefs case, they drafted both one of the best steals (Jared Allen) and one of the biggest busts (Ryan Sims), so that's rather a wash. Notice that Denver has had 3 of the top busts on it's roster (Willie Middlebrooks, Courtney Brown and David Terrell), but only one of them (Middlebrooks) was drafted by them.

Still the Broncos overall rating is a net negative. Over the ten year period from 1996-2005, given their draft position, they haven't done well in drafting, but they are far from the worst in the league. I think everybody understands this.

The Broncos have been held back by bad drafting, but they weren't totally hapless like the Matt Millen Lions, the Cleveland Browns, the Saints, Bengals, Cardinals or the Raiders. Carson Palmer aside, none of those teams has done anything for years or is likely to this year.

But, the picture is muddied by being such a long time. Most players DON'T LAST TEN YEARS IN THE NFL. The average is more like 3 or 4 years. And starters might last 5 or 6. Notice that two of the three "best" Broncos draft picks were taken back in the 1990s and NONE are still with the team (Al Wilson, Trevor Pryce and Clinton Portis). Portis was traded for Bailey, who has a marginally better score than Portis so that was a net plus.

So, the drafts from 1996-1998 were better than those since then - up to 2005. That also accords with what we know, since the 2005 team was the last to have significant impact from players drafted/acquired in the early Shanahan years (Al Wilson, Trevor Pryce, Rod Smith).

Things have gone downhill the last two years because the drafts from 2001-05 sucked so bad. That's when Shanahan was drafting Deltha O'Neal, Willie Middlebrooks, Paul Toviesi, George Foster, Ashley Lelie, Terry Pierce, Tatum Bell, and Darius Watts in the first or second round.

This present team is a product of the last 3 years draft. Since 2005, the team has produced better talent, but it's too early to tell if it will pan out. Too many young players are unproven. So, 3 years from now we could either be looking at the drafts as great or shoddy depending on how players like Moss, Crowder, Sheffler, Thomas and Ryan Harris do.

Lonestar
05-27-2008, 10:08 AM
Great job Cugel best break down of the data..

It still comes back to even if we did draft well we did not keep them, for what ever reason..

When we acquired "top" talent like Courtney brown for the most part it was HOPING he'd be different in DEN..

It still boils down to having a "top" talent evaluator and the fortitude to do the correct thing when drafting, trading, cutting talent.

Something this teams has not had IMO since Mikey took over..

Ziggy
05-27-2008, 11:09 AM
Great job Cugel best break down of the data..

It still comes back to even if we did draft well we did not keep them, for what ever reason..

When we acquired "top" talent like Courtney brown for the most part it was HOPING he'd be different in DEN..

It still boils down to having a "top" talent evaluator and the fortitude to do the correct thing when drafting, trading, cutting talent.

Something this teams has not had IMO since Mikey took over..



You're a bit off here JR. Shanny deserves a lot of credit for bringing in key elements to the Super Bowl teams. Mark Schlereth, Ed McCaffery, Tony Jones, Howard Griffith, Alfred WIlliams, Neil Smith, Keith Traylor, and Bill Romanowski were all brought in by Shanny and the FO either by trade or free agency. Without this core of players, we don't win any Super bowls.

After those seasons though, there seemed to have been a huge dropoff in talent evaluation and quality signings. The Broncos well ran dry so to speak between 1998 and 2005 as far as core talent goes. We had a lot more misses than hits. I'll have to do some research and see if I can't pin down exactly who we lost or added in the scouting and evaluation departments during that time.

BOSSHOGG30
05-27-2008, 11:26 AM
But that's not what the study is about.

That's player management after the draft.

It plays into the question.... Where to the Broncos rank in drafting... obviously not very well if they can't, don't, or aren't keeping too many of there draft picks.

Denver relies too much on veteran players and its come up and bit them in the ass. It looks like Denver has figured that out finally and the past few drafts have been decent ones. Maybe we will see a new trend.

atwater27
05-27-2008, 11:35 AM
Post by Cugel...
"Things have gone downhill the last two years because the drafts from 2001-05 sucked so bad. That's when Shanahan was drafting Deltha O'Neal, Willie Middlebrooks, Paul Toviesi, George Foster, Ashley Lelie, Terry Pierce, Tatum Bell, and Darius Watts in the first or second round. "

Oh my God, looking at that list I just want to puke! We have done horrible.

Kaylore
05-27-2008, 12:21 PM
Aaron Rodgers and Alex Smith are already busts? I think that's a bit unfair. I don't that either one will wash out, but I certainly don't think you say that yet.

Retired_Member_001
05-27-2008, 12:24 PM
Aaron Rodgers and Alex Smith are already busts? I think that's a bit unfair. I don't that either one will wash out, but I certainly don't think you say that yet.

Alex Smith is not a bust?

What makes you say that?

dogfish
05-27-2008, 12:43 PM
Aaron Rodgers and Alex Smith are already busts? I think that's a bit unfair. I don't that either one will wash out, but I certainly don't think you say that yet.

i thought the same thing when i saw rodgers' name on the list-- WTH was he supposed to do, beat out brett favre??

Fan in Exile
05-27-2008, 02:08 PM
But, the picture is muddied by being such a long time. Most players DON'T LAST TEN YEARS IN THE NFL. The average is more like 3 or 4 years. And starters might last 5 or 6. Notice that two of the three "best" Broncos draft picks were taken back in the 1990s and NONE are still with the team (Al Wilson, Trevor Pryce and Clinton Portis). Portis was traded for Bailey, who has a marginally better score than Portis so that was a net plus.

So, the drafts from 1996-1998 were better than those since then - up to 2005. That also accords with what we know, since the 2005 team was the last to have significant impact from players drafted/acquired in the early Shanahan years (Al Wilson, Trevor Pryce, Rod Smith).

Things have gone downhill the last two years because the drafts from 2001-05 sucked so bad. That's when Shanahan was drafting Deltha O'Neal, Willie Middlebrooks, Paul Toviesi, George Foster, Ashley Lelie, Terry Pierce, Tatum Bell, and Darius Watts in the first or second round.

This present team is a product of the last 3 years draft. Since 2005, the team has produced better talent, but it's too early to tell if it will pan out. Too many young players are unproven. So, 3 years from now we could either be looking at the drafts as great or shoddy depending on how players like Moss, Crowder, Sheffler, Thomas and Ryan Harris do.


The picture isn't being muddied because of the long time span that it's covering it's being clarified. It isn't meant to be an evaluation of the current state of the team but of what kind of production draftees produce.The people who like to bag on Shanahan for his bad drafting never list any of the good people who were drafted or compare to how other teams do in the draft or look at the needs of the team at the time. He compares all of the teams and we've got some strengths and some weaknesses.


Even with all of the bad draft choices that you listed we still ranked seventh in the first round. I think this points to how much of a crap shoot the draft truly is and should help us all keep a certain amount of perspective when it comes to analyzing the draft.

I also don't know how you can list 2005 as a bad draft, because it fit the needs of the team at the time they got players who could come in and play. Sure ol grey goose was a head scratcher, but he was the only one at the time, which isn't too bad for a third round comp pick.

Again I'm not saying that we are great at drafting I just want everyone to have a balanced idea of what we can truly expect from a draft. It's too easy to get caught up in the pre-draft hype where everyone is a star and then blame the coach when those impossible expectations aren't met.

Fan in Exile
05-27-2008, 02:14 PM
i thought the same thing when i saw rodgers' name on the list-- WTH was he supposed to do, beat out brett favre??

Rodgers name on the list shows the problem with the BPA theory of drafting. The Packers rightly IMO get dinged because they've gotten very little on field production out of their first round pick. I wouldn't ding Rodgers for that I but it is still a knock on the Packers FO that they didn't have a handle on how long Favre would be around for.

It's a good reminder that talent evaluation is only one part of good drafting. You also have to know team needs, character issues, medical problems and a host of other things.

I wouldn't give the Packers a pass on Rodgers anymore than I would give the Broncos a pass on Pierce.

Kaylore
05-27-2008, 02:42 PM
Alex Smith is not a bust?

What makes you say that?

I think he will bust, but that doesn't mean he can be considered one now. I think he has one season left to show some real growth. Certainly Aaron Rodgers is a unique case and saying he's a bust because he was behind Brett Favre is incredibly stupid. They would be calling Steve Young a bust in 1989.

Retired_Member_001
05-27-2008, 02:45 PM
I think he will bust, but that doesn't mean he can be considered one now. I think he has one season left to show some real growth. Certainly Aaron Rodgers is a unique case and saying he's a bust because he was behind Brett Favre is incredibly stupid. They would be calling Steve Young a bust in 1989.

I wouldn't call Aaron Rodgers a bust. In fact he looked pretty good in that game for the Packers.

Alex Smith though is just a plain bust. He makes bad decisions, has a completely innacurate arm and lacks the ability to handle being sacked. It's just sad watching him play Quarterback, he actually sometimes tries hard, he just can't make good passes. Alex Smith will be a pretty decent backup in my opinion, considering where he was taken in the draft, that is a big bust.

NameUsedBefore
05-27-2008, 03:05 PM
Everytime I think our drafting/FO is bad I just think about the Lions.

Fan in Exile
05-27-2008, 03:15 PM
Smith and Rodgers aren't busts, but so far they haven't produced on the field what their draft position is expected to produce. That's all the article is trying to say.

BOSSHOGG30
05-27-2008, 03:32 PM
There use to be a time when QB's were given at the very least a few years to gain experience before they were threw under the bus and considered bust... now days players don't have long to prove they belong. I feel bad for Alex Smith because he has so many offensive coordinators that it is ridiculous. I imagine this takes a toll on his progression not to mention he went to one of the worst teams in the league that have a lot of work to go before they become a better team.

As for Rogers, he was drafted as the back up to Farve and the future if Farve decided to leave... Rogers needs at least two years of starting experience before we can call him a bust. Lets wait till after the 2010 before we lable him a bust or not.

Fan in Exile
05-27-2008, 03:37 PM
It truly amazes me that so many people have lept in here to defend Rodgers and Smith when no one called them a bust.

Lonestar
05-27-2008, 04:00 PM
When you look overall at the different franchises, some get a pass because they suck, no other way to put it they suck, they have sucked and they will continue to suck.. DET, CIN, PHX, SFO, OAK, maybe CLE, BAL, CHI, WAS fall into the next tier.. But the top winning franchises all have something in common great owners DEN, NE, IND and now SAN..

It equates to Ownership since Pat has owned the franchise he has spent money to bring in talent both on the field and off. Has spent huge money on facilities..

Many on the other franchises are not blessed like DEN is..


Now that said he had quality coaching overall and decent FO, until he brought in Mikey as czar..

At that point he really upgraded the coaching side and IMO downgraded the talent evaluating/GM/FO area.

That is not to say that mikey and staff do not have a keen eye for talent, just that discipline in ranking same few through the cracks..

With few exceptions of the blind homer Mikey lovers, almost everyone would agree that during mikeys tenure here that more than 50% of the day one draft choices were stretches.. Could have been had in a later rounds.. I liken it to a kid on Christmas morning that just can't wait to unwrap his presents, mikey wants a specific one and will go crazy to get it earlier cause he is gonna be the next TD..

I have always said that I like mikey as the guy making decisions on the field games day prep and execution seem to be his strong point, and if only we could find a mikey like guy for the personnel side it would make mikey the Head coach almost unbeatable..