Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Hurney not.....bad???? Wut


kungfoodude

Recommended Posts

There is no such thing as a good drafting team in the NFL
https://www.thescore.com/nfl/news/1969794

 

Four-year starters from 2000-15 drafts

TEAM 4-YEAR STARTERS DRAFT PICKS PERCENTAGE
Panthers 39 121 32.23
Saints 34 107 31.78
Jets 32 110 29.09
Steelers 37 130 28.46
Ravens 37 132 28.03
Chargers 32 115 27.83
Cowboys 34 125 27.20
Dolphins 33 122 27.05
Jaguars 35 130 26.92
Falcons 33 123 26.83
Broncos 34 127 26.77
Giants 31 116 26.72
Titans 38 143 26.57
Bengals 36 137 26.28
Rams 36 142 25.35
Bears 31 123 25.20
Lions 30 121 24.79
49ers 36 146 24.66
Chiefs 31 127 24.41
Cardinals 29 119 24.37
Packers 35 144 24.31
Texans 28 117 23.93
Patriots 34 144 23.61
Seahawks 33 140 23.57
Raiders 30 128 23.44
Eagles 31 136 22.79
Bills 30 132 22.73
Colts 28 125 22.40
Vikings 28 128 21.88
Buccaneers 27 124 21.77
Redskins 25 115 21.74
Browns 24 130 18.46
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's really hard to tell what this really says about drafting, other than the fact that it's less of a sure thing as everyone likes to pretend.

There are lots of factors at play here:

  • Did teams end up with 4 year starters because they simply stuck with players stubbornly?
  • Did teams end up with 4 year starters because they didn't draft properly and forced themselves to play guys who wouldn't have stuck around in the NFL on other rosters?
  • Did guys wash out because the team is a poor organization and the coaching and staff carousels grinded up players and spit them out before they ever could establish themselves in a single system or under a staff?
  • How much of this is down to bad injury luck one way or another?

This list is really confusing because it would suggest that certain teams should simply have been a lot better over the last 15 years. Yet some of your Super Bowl winners are at the bottom and some of your worst Franchises over the last 15 years are towards the top. Are we suddenly going to start heaping praise on the Jets and Dolphins? Are the Patriots a bad organization?

This is the perfect display of how numbers lie. The data has to be properly correlated, and if it's not you're going to assume that every time the Cowboys start 0-4 they're going to win the Super Bowl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Panthercougar68 said:

I’ve always felt that Hurney can find the potential talent but this previous regime did terrible at developing the talent. Hurney has done stupid things yes but what GM hasn’t?
 

This thread is either gonna be lit or quiet.

 

I have a disconnect between whose responsible for the draft picks over the years. How much is to Hurney's credit, and how much isn't? Same with the flaws in our draft classes. It would be interesting to learn how much it really comes down to the Coaches and Scouts vs Hurney's say.

My biggest frustration with Fox and Rivera is that they simply didn't let younger players have a chance vs Veterans. You look at teams winning the Super Bowl and they know what they have because they let guys go out there and play. They don't waste talent by never allowing certain players to see the field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

somebody posted not so long ago that the most you can expect out of a draft from a good GM is "3-4 impact players"

like lol.

 Most teams consider 1 a success.

still I'll wait to see where my criticism does and doesn't lie until I see what we've done with the QB position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wish they'd have had "average first round draft position" as a stat to contrast everything with. Think of how high Cleveland traditionally picks in the draft (getting what should be among the best choices) and how much lower their retention/development rate is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Malcom Spence is the best player remaining, hope he’s there.
    • The era that you played in, and, more importantly, who you played with actually matters. Honestly, that's why these issues will be debated forever, as it's just difficult to say that this person or that person is better when you're discussing the passage of time. As for me, after Rice, Moss and maybe Megatron and T.O., there's probably a dozen or so guys that can be argued about to the cows come home. Personally, I'm not putting Fitz, Harrison, Johnson, Evans, or especially D-Hop, Jefferson, Chase or Hill definitely in front of Smitty (and Colston ain't even in the discussion). Context and all that stuff actually matters. Things like the triple crown matter. 
    • Some of those guys? Yeah honestly you can.  I would 100% take Steve Smith over Larry Fitzgerald, Harrison, even Mike Evans. He is 100% a better player than those guys in his prime. If you look at the numbers Smith is historically under targeted in comparison to his contemporaries. He was only targeted 150 times or more only once in his career. Fitzgerald for example was targeted well above that 9 different seasons. Had Smith played with Peyton, Brady, Greatest Show on Turf, or even with Warner in Arizona he would broken records. His 2008 season was ridiculous accumulating 1400 yards in 13 games on less than 80 receptions. All time he also lost a season due to injury in 04, barely played WR as a rookie. Got robbed of 1k season with Clausen. Thats easily another 1800yds minimum that should have been tacked on to his #s. The only guys I’d say for certain are better than Smith are Rice, Moss, TO, Megatron, Julio Jones, Antonio Brown.
×
×
  • Create New...