Gruden / Allen Draft Success?

[Riverview_Buc]

I heard on the radio this morning a statistic about the drafting success of the current regime of Gruden & Allen that was quite disturbing. They stated that of the 46 draft selections the Bucs have made in the last five years over 20 are no longer in football at all. This doesn't even take into account players who cannot crack the line-up or must be considered busts. A quick review of recent drafts raise the question are we placing too much faith in Chucky and Brucey to take advantage of this upcoming draft to restock and retool the Bucs roster? :confused:

[Acacius]

That's really not terribly unusual. If you look at the five years before that, you have plenty of Nigea Carters as well. Gruden and Allen are really pretty average drafters.

[96Bucs]

They're average to below average drafters. Most teams build through the draft and complement through free agency. They do the opposite.

[PizzaBoy]

We only had later round picks Gruden's first years as the bucs Head coach so obviously those numbers are worse than they really are.

[CPT_FEAR]

I heard on the radio this morning a statistic about the drafting success of the current regime of Gruden & Allen that was quite disturbing. They stated that of the 46 draft selections the Bucs have made in the last five years over 20 are no longer in football at all. This doesn't even take into account players who cannot crack the line-up or must be considered busts. A quick review of recent drafts raise the question are we placing too much faith in Chucky and Brucey to take advantage of this upcoming draft to restock and retool the Bucs roster? :confused:

Let's do some math:

32 players x 7 rounds = 224 players drafted by year (not considering supplemental picks and undrafted free agents).

224 players x 10 years they might play in average = 2240 players in the league

2240 players in the league / 32 teams = 70 players per team. This doesn't work.

Considering undrafted free agents and stuff, there are about 2 rounds you can totally forget and about 2 rounds of backup players. Means, that statistically every 2nd day pick is crap (not all, but there are first day busts compensating this).

Now the Bucs had 12 first day picks in the last five years. So the numbers are looking worse than they are.

20 don't play football anymore? No wonder! We had 14 (!!!) 7th round picks and 6 6th round picks against just 3 1st and 3 2nd round picks.

How can a GM look good in drafting with this???

[ThanksBrad]

Let's do some math:

32 players x 7 rounds = 224 players drafted by year (not considering supplemental picks and undrafted free agents).

224 players x 10 years they might play in average = 2240 players in the league

2240 players in the league / 32 teams = 70 players per team. This doesn't work.

Considering undrafted free agents and stuff, there are about 2 rounds you can totally forget and about 2 rounds of backup players. Means, that statistically every 2nd day pick is crap (not all, but there are first day busts compensating this).

Now the Bucs had 12 first day picks in the last five years. So the numbers are looking worse than they are.

20 don't play football anymore? No wonder! We had 14 (!!!) 7th round picks and 6 6th round picks against just 3 1st and 3 2nd round picks.

How can a GM look good in drafting with this???
Very good post, with factual information to make your point much more credible.

[barberandbrooks]

lest look at our 1st round picks since gruden has been here

3 years ago we got clayton who had one of the best rookie seasons ever for a reciever

2 years ago we got the rookie of the year

last year we got a gaurd who will barring injury become an all pro for the next 10 years

[#1BucsDefense]

Let's do some math:

32 players x 7 rounds = 224 players drafted by year (not considering supplemental picks and undrafted free agents).

224 players x 10 years they might play in average = 2240 players in the league

2240 players in the league / 32 teams = 70 players per team. This doesn't work.


You think 10 years is the average NFL career? Aren't you optimistic. The average football player does NOT play 10 years in the NFL. The average NFL career length is about 3.5 seasons (http://www.nflpa.org/Faqs/NFL_HopefulsFaq.aspx#3). I guess that kills your math argument.

[#1BucsDefense]

lest look at our 1st round picks since gruden has been here

3 years ago we got clayton who had one of the best rookie seasons ever for a reciever

And since then has sucked for 2 seasons.

2 years ago we got the rookie of the year

Who also appears to be getting worse as time goes on, with less than 800 yards this past season.

last year we got a gaurd who will barring injury become an all pro for the next 10 years

How do you figure he'll be all pro for the next 10 years? Hope? I have hope too, but I'm not calling Davin an all pro until he reaches that level.

Yea, great drafting jobs there.

[CPT_FEAR]

You think 10 years is the average NFL career? Aren't you optimistic. The average football player does NOT play 10 years in the NFL. The average NFL career length is about 3.5 seasons (http://www.nflpa.org/Faqs/NFL_HopefulsFaq.aspx#3). I guess that kills your math argument.

That's because of 7th rounder never playing.

I meant as an average of good players of course.

[FBaller]

You can't blame Clayton or Caddy's future on how well they drafted. They did their job in that regard. You can't say they didn't make the right draft choice when they both have rookie seasons like they did.

After that maybe they mishandle players, but you can't say they didn't do a good job of drafting when the player already proved he can play in the league. No I'm not a huge fan of Gru but he can draft. It's what he does with them after that which really bothers me.

[Acacius]

You think 10 years is the average NFL career? Aren't you optimistic. The average football player does NOT play 10 years in the NFL. The average NFL career length is about 3.5 seasons (http://www.nflpa.org/Faqs/NFL_HopefulsFaq.aspx#3). I guess that kills your math argument.

Of course, even if we look at it from that viewpoint, it would demonstrate that it would be wholly unremarkable for 20 of the players we've drafted in the last *five* years to be out of the league. No matter how you want to look at it, the original poster really didn't have much to hang his hat on.

[Acacius]

Who also appears to be getting worse as time goes on, with less than 800 yards this past season.

"As time goes on"? You're trying to extrapolate results from a single data point there.

[#1BucsDefense]

"As time goes on"? You're trying to extrapolate results from a single data point there.

Actually, I was comparing his first season to his second season. See, he did well his first season, and as time went on, his second season was worse. Two year=more than a single data point.

[Public Enemy II]

That's because of 7th rounder never playing.

I meant as an average of good players of course.
Tell me you really aren't this dumb.

[CPT_FEAR]

Actually, I was comparing his first season to his second season. See, he did well his first season, and as time went on, his second season was worse. Two year=more than a single data point.

He didn't get worse just his stats. We had bad run blocking last season. Look at how often he was tackled in the backfield. No back in that league will look too good in that situation.

Our Caddy is still a great HB. I guess that our blocking will be a whole lot better this year. You will see caddies numbers rise again.

[BGcarnage32]

And since then has sucked for 2 seasons.



Who also appears to be getting worse as time goes on, with less than 800 yards this past season.



How do you figure he'll be all pro for the next 10 years? Hope? I have hope too, but I'm not calling Davin an all pro until he reaches that level.

Yea, great drafting jobs there.

Do you watch football much, or know anything about it?

Just wondering, because there are rarely any players who come out and have record breaking years, EVERY year.

Fact is, our line is new and it made it difficult for our ROOKIE QB, our 2 ROOKIE OL and 2nd year OL, our 2nd year RB, our 3rd year and ROOKIE WR's and our 2nd year TE.

Fact is, the guys on offense that Gru and Bruce have drafted are better than what we have on the team, and that's why they're playing. That sounds like a pretty good job drafting by me, and now it's time to start working on the defense.

[Acacius]

Actually, I was comparing his first season to his second season. See, he did well his first season, and as time went on, his second season was worse. Two year=more than a single data point.

You know what? You're right. I phrased that very poorly. And by very poorly, I mean downright incorrectly. I still think you're original comment was remarkably silly and premature, but my response was no better.

[#1BucsDefense]

Do you watch football much, or know anything about it?

Just wondering, because there are rarely any players who come out and have record breaking years, EVERY year.

Fact is, our line is new and it made it difficult for our ROOKIE QB, our 2 ROOKIE OL and 2nd year OL, our 2nd year RB, our 3rd year and ROOKIE WR's and our 2nd year TE.

Fact is, the guys on offense that Gru and Bruce have drafted are better than what we have on the team, and that's why they're playing. That sounds like a pretty good job drafting by me, and now it's time to start working on the defense.

Who said I was expecting record breaking performances every year? What I do expect if for a 1st round WR to get more than 372 yards a year, which Clayton hasn't done in two years. Cadillac may play better his 3rd year, the jury is still out on him, but his performance this past year wasn't very inspiring for the future. And the jury is still out on Davin since he hasn't even played a full NFL season yet.

So you define success as drafting players that are better than what you currently have on the team? That's not a success, that's just not a complete failure. A success is drafting players who perform in relation to the round they were drafted in. So far, Clayton hasn't played like a 1st round receiver since his rookie year, and Cadillac hasn't rushed like a 1st round RB since his rookie year. Things might turn around, but until they do its hard to call those draft picks successful.

[BGcarnage32]

Who said I was expecting record breaking performances every year? What I do expect if for a 1st round WR to get more than 372 yards a year, which Clayton hasn't done in two years. Cadillac may play better his 3rd year, the jury is still out on him, but his performance this past year wasn't very inspiring for the future. And the jury is still out on Davin since he hasn't even played a full NFL season yet.

So you define success as drafting players that are better than what you currently have on the team? That's not a success, that's just not a complete failure. A success is drafting players who perform in relation to the round they were drafted in. So far, Clayton hasn't played like a 1st round receiver since his rookie year, and Cadillac hasn't rushed like a 1st round RB since his rookie year. Things might turn around, but until they do its hard to call those draft picks successful.


I define successful picks as players who play extensively on the team they are drafted by. There are too many variables to judge success by how good of a player they are in accordance to the round they were drafted in.

How can you blame Caddy for a poor year when he was getting hit at the line almost every run?

The fact that rookies and young draftees are taking over the spots of players who have been in the league for quite some time, is a success.

I'd rather be the team that has a good 8 - 10 recently drafted players STARTING than the team who has 2 first round picks being the stars of the team.

[CPT_FEAR]

Tell me you really aren't this dumb.

Hint: Read the whole thread, before calling guys dumb.

Of course there are seven rounders playing, but statistically there is only place for players from about 5 rounds to play in the NFL.

This was just simple mathematical model. to show why the numbers can't look too good and why i stated 10 years as an average of players being in the league (this wasn't considering the players never playing or just for a year or two)

[#1BucsDefense]

I define successful picks as players who play extensively on the team they are drafted by.

And that's where we differ. It is true there are too many variables to make an exact definition of what a bust is, but just starting for a team doesn't mean a player isn't a bust. Troy Williamson is still playing for the Vikings, does that mean he was a successful pick at #7 overall? Donte Stallworth played for the Saints for four years, was he a successful pick at #13 overall? Ike Hilliard played for the Giants for 8 years, was he a successful pick at #7 overall? A successful pick to me is when the player drafted lives up to what they are supposed to be depending on where they were drafted. A mediocre starter who was drafted in the 5th round is a successful draft pick, and anyone drafted in the top 5 overall who is less than a consistent pro bowler is not a successful top 5 pick.

[PopularStranger]

A successful pick to me is when the player drafted lives up to what they are supposed to be depending on where they were drafted. A mediocre starter who was drafted in the 5th round is a successful draft pick, and anyone drafted in the top 5 overall who is less than a consistent pro bowler is not a successful top 5 pick.


a consistent pro bowler is wanting too much and not realistic how about a good starter?

[#1BucsDefense]

a consistent pro bowler is wanting too much and not realistic how about a good starter?

If someone is drafted in the top 5 picks, they're expected to be a consistent pro-bowler. Anything less and they're not living up to their potential. Would you want the Bucs to draft a player at #4 overall that was expected to be a "good starter." If you're talking about later in the 1st round, a good starter is enough to live up to their potential, but the higher up they're drafted the more they have to do to not be considered a bust, and just starting for the team that drafts you (as BGcarnage said before) is not enough to not be considered a bust.