Momentum vs. Draft Pick Status

[dleeholland]

Hey Guys! First time back since we switched over to the new site. I like what you guys have done to keep this going! It seems to be a much more user-friendly site as well, so keep up the good work.

 

I also haven't been back cause I've been down on this team for the past month (who hasn't?) and getting to see them get beaten twice in 5 days (i was at the Giants and Redskins games!) really sucked.

 

That said, the big win over GB yesterday got me in the mood to post again, so I thought I'd spout off about "winning when it doesn't matter" vs. "sacrificing victory for a high draft pick".

 

Let me just come right out and say it makes me sick when fans, sportswriters, and the like say the Bears win yesterday "cost" them a top-10 pick. This philosophy is absolutely absurd for a number of reasons.

 

It should be obvious to everyone by now that top-10 draft picks are never a guaranteed success. The Bears have certainly had their fair share of busts. McNown? Benson? Colombo (yeah, I know he's starting for Dallas now, but as far as the Bears are concerned, he was a bust). Certainly the list of draft picks that have victimized other teams with less-than-they're-paid-for performances are evident as well. For every Peyton Manning and Donovan McNabb, there's a Ryan leaf and Akili Smith. Top-10 offensive skill players almost never develop fast enough to contribute much in their rookie seasons. Certainly not enough to warrant paying them $20 mil. If you want to draft a QB in the 6th and develop him? Great. He's got just as much chance of being a star down the road as the #1 overall pick. Sure, you might have to restructure his contract and pay him big bucks down the road if he develops into a star, but how is that any different from signing a big-name free agent? The bears can't even get decent production out of their top-10 pick Running Back, and that's the easiest position in football to learn!

 

Secondly, I think a couple of wins at the end of the season do WONDERS for a team looking toward the future. The Packers sucked last year, but had a couple decent wins to close out the season and then came on strong this year. The Bucs, Browns, Skins and Vikes were all 4-, 4-, 5- and 6-win teams last year that were able to turn it around and get back to playoff contention this year. I don't think the Bears really even have to change that much to return to NFC North dominance in 08. All they need is a little bit of a culture shift, something to get excited about and feel like they can build on in the offseason, and they'll be winning again in no time.

 

As part of that overall culture shift, I'm going to recommend to things. 1. Bears fans should not read Jay Marriotti. This goes without saying, and I'm sure there's a chorus of "duhs" out there as you all read this. His piece about the "shaky future" of the Bears is a travesty. 2. Bears fans at home games need to stop singing "Bear Down" everytime the team kicks a field goal. It's one thing if said field goal is in overtime--to win the game. But in the 1st quarter, against the Giants, after you've just intercepted Eli Manning and you have 1st and goal from the 5 yd line? Our tendency to settle for field goals cost us games 3 straight games, against the Giants, Redskins and Vikings, and in those games the defense that so many of us had given up on all but dominated (how you lose games with a +4 and +3 turnover ratio is beyond my ability to grasp). It's time Bears fans stopped settling for offensive (and i use that word loosely) mediocrity.

[Connorbear]

Great to see you have made it the site.

 

"It should be obvious to everyone by now that top-10 draft picks are never a guaranteed success. The Bears have certainly had their fair share of busts. McNown? Benson? Colombo (yeah, I know he's starting for Dallas now, but as far as the Bears are concerned, he was a bust)."

 

Just to point out, McNown was the 11th pick in the draft, Benson is not a bust yet (most likely), and Columbo was the 31st pick in the draft. I agree with you overall premise that top ten picks tend to bust out as much or more than succeed. Just look at Enis and Terrell as good examples from the Bears.

 

"Our tendency to settle for field goals cost us games 3 straight games, against the Giants, Redskins and Vikings, and in those games the defense that so many of us had given up on all but dominated (how you lose games with a +4 and +3 turnover ratio is beyond my ability to grasp). It's time Bears fans stopped settling for offensive (and i use that word loosely) mediocrity."

 

Most definately. The Bears must concentrate on improving the offense in the off season. I think the defense will bounce back into at least the top half of the league next yr with a healthy Harris, Url (fingers crossed), and Vasher (even if Briggs leaves). We need to get the offense up into the top half as well.

 

Peace

[adam]

It should be obvious to everyone by now that top-10 draft picks are never a guaranteed success. The Bears have certainly had their fair share of busts. McNown? Benson? Colombo (yeah, I know he's starting for Dallas now, but as far as the Bears are concerned, he was a bust). Certainly the list of draft picks that have victimized other teams with less-than-they're-paid-for performances are evident as well. For every Peyton Manning and Donovan McNabb, there's a Ryan leaf and Akili Smith. Top-10 offensive skill players almost never develop fast enough to contribute much in their rookie seasons. Certainly not enough to warrant paying them $20 mil. If you want to draft a QB in the 6th and develop him? Great. He's got just as much chance of being a star down the road as the #1 overall pick. Sure, you might have to restructure his contract and pay him big bucks down the road if he develops into a star, but how is that any different from signing a big-name free agent? The bears can't even get decent production out of their top-10 pick Running Back, and that's the easiest position in football to learn!

Top 10 picks are not necessarily a guaranteed success, but the odds of getting a Pro Bowler are 1 in 3 for the Top 12 picks. That is pretty decent odds.

 

Since 2002's draft, 24 draft picks in the top 12 spots have made the Pro Bowl. That is 24 out of 72 picks or exactly 33%.

 

For picks 13-32, that goes down to 17 out of 120 picks (14.1%).

 

For the 2nd round, only 14 made it out of 192 picks (7.3%).

 

For the 3rd round, only 7 made it out of 192 picks (3.6%)*.

 

For the 4th round, only 6 made it out of 192 picks (3.1%)*.

 

* The 3rd and 4th rounds actually have a ton of compensatory selections, so the percentages are actually much lower.

 

So based on the numbers, the higher you draft, the better chance you have for an impact player.

[Pixote]

Interesting stats. Did you compile these figures or are they documented anywhere in an article on the net to be reviewed?

[LT2_3]

Okay. Someone's fudging the numbers to try and make a point.

 

In 2002, These were the top 12 picks:

 

1 1 David Carr Texans QB Fresno State

2 2 Julius Peppers Panthers DE North Carolina

3 3 Joey Harrington Lions QB Oregon

4 4 Mike Williams Bills T Texas

5 5 Quentin Jammer Chargers DB Texas

6 6 Ryan Sims Chiefs DT North Carolina

7 7 Bryant McKinnie Vikings T Miami (FL)

8 8 Roy Williams Cowboys DB Oklahoma

9 9 John Henderson Jaguars DT Tennessee

10 10 Levi Jones Bengals T Arizona State

11 11 Dwight Freeney Colts DE Syracuse

12 12 Wendell Bryant Cardinals DT Wisconsin

 

None made the Pro Bowl in 2002

 

Dwight Freeney and Roy Williams made the Pro Bowl in 2003

 

Julius Peppers, John Henderson, Dwight Freeney, and Roy Williams in 2004

 

Julius Peppers, Dwight Freeney, and Roy Williams in 2005

 

Julius Peppers, John Henderson, and Roy Williams in 2006

 

So, out of 60 possible Pro Bowl selections, the players in the top 12 that year earned 12 selections - or they got Pro Bowl selections a mere 20% of the time.

 

Interestingly, of the 4 players that ever got a Pro Bowl nod, only 1 (Peppers) was a top 5 pick while the remainder were selected at 8,9, and 11. Also, if you add in Shockey at #14 multiple times and it completely blows away the idea that a higher pick will get you a better player.

 

Anyone else notice that the guys in the top 12 that made the Pro Bowl were all defensive players?

 

Now I'll be the first to bring up that this is too small a data sample to learn anything. That being said, the changes in the league, the differences in quality of draft class, and the number of juniors that declare, ALL make each draft unique and NO data sample would be complete enough to draw valid conclusions.

 

I also question the validity of Pro Bowl selections as a measure for the quality of a draft since it's a popularity contest anyway.

 

My bottom line on the subject is that I would prefer a pick in the 12-16 range because I think that's where the contracts start to get reasonable for a guy with no proven experience and they won't turn into a boat anchor if they REALLY REALLY suck.

 

 

Top 10 picks are not necessarily a guaranteed success, but the odds of getting a Pro Bowler are 1 in 3 for the Top 12 picks. That is pretty decent odds.

 

Since 2002's draft, 24 draft picks in the top 12 spots have made the Pro Bowl. That is 24 out of 72 picks or exactly 33%.

 

For picks 13-32, that goes down to 17 out of 120 picks (14.1%).

 

For the 2nd round, only 14 made it out of 192 picks (7.3%).

 

For the 3rd round, only 7 made it out of 192 picks (3.6%)*.

 

For the 4th round, only 6 made it out of 192 picks (3.1%)*.

 

* The 3rd and 4th rounds actually have a ton of compensatory selections, so the percentages are actually much lower.

 

So based on the numbers, the higher you draft, the better chance you have for an impact player.

[adam]

Okay. Someone's fudging the numbers to try and make a point.

 

In 2002, These were the top 12 picks:

 

1 1 David Carr Texans QB Fresno State

2 2 Julius Peppers Panthers DE North Carolina

3 3 Joey Harrington Lions QB Oregon

4 4 Mike Williams Bills T Texas

5 5 Quentin Jammer Chargers DB Texas

6 6 Ryan Sims Chiefs DT North Carolina

7 7 Bryant McKinnie Vikings T Miami (FL)

8 8 Roy Williams Cowboys DB Oklahoma

9 9 John Henderson Jaguars DT Tennessee

10 10 Levi Jones Bengals T Arizona State

11 11 Dwight Freeney Colts DE Syracuse

12 12 Wendell Bryant Cardinals DT Wisconsin

 

None made the Pro Bowl in 2002

 

Dwight Freeney and Roy Williams made the Pro Bowl in 2003

 

Julius Peppers, John Henderson, Dwight Freeney, and Roy Williams in 2004

 

Julius Peppers, Dwight Freeney, and Roy Williams in 2005

 

Julius Peppers, John Henderson, and Roy Williams in 2006

 

So, out of 60 possible Pro Bowl selections, the players in the top 12 that year earned 12 selections - or they got Pro Bowl selections a mere 20% of the time.

 

Interestingly, of the 4 players that ever got a Pro Bowl nod, only 1 (Peppers) was a top 5 pick while the remainder were selected at 8,9, and 11. Also, if you add in Shockey at #14 multiple times and it completely blows away the idea that a higher pick will get you a better player.

 

Anyone else notice that the guys in the top 12 that made the Pro Bowl were all defensive players?

 

Now I'll be the first to bring up that this is too small a data sample to learn anything. That being said, the changes in the league, the differences in quality of draft class, and the number of juniors that declare, ALL make each draft unique and NO data sample would be complete enough to draw valid conclusions.

 

I also question the validity of Pro Bowl selections as a measure for the quality of a draft since it's a popularity contest anyway.

 

My bottom line on the subject is that I would prefer a pick in the 12-16 range because I think that's where the contracts start to get reasonable for a guy with no proven experience and they won't turn into a boat anchor if they REALLY REALLY suck.

I am not fudging any numbers.

 

I think you missed the point. I was saying since 2002, so 2002 until 2007's draft. Not just the 2002 draft and how many Pro Bowls they made. My data was the total # of players to make at least one Pro Bowl since being drafted in 2002 until now.

 

What other measure would you use for top players? The only time it is a popularity contest is after their first selection - just like the Gold Glove in baseball.

[BearFan2000]

I pick momentum. In a season that hasn't gone the way any of us expected winning the last couple games here allows you to enter the offseason on a positive note. We haven't done well with high picks anyway. Finishing 5-11 vs 7-9 won't make all that big of a difference draft wise. Had we ended up with a top 10 pick who here thinks we stay at 10 and who here thinks we trade down? I woul bet we'd trade down unless we could land one of the top offensive OL in the draft. Sure the win possibly moved us out of the top ten to #11 a win next week could have us sitting at #12. I havent' really studied the mock drafts to this point since till the season's over and the draft spots are set it's hard to expect any of these to be completely accurate outside of Miami having clinched the first pick. I think we need to go OL with our first pick. Not knowing he the final draft order makes it hard to know where exactly we'd need to be to pick up guys we need. IMHO Jerry will need to be agressive in the Draft and FA. There are a lot of holes to plug on this team. Fixing the OL will help make some of the other needs not as pressing. As much as I like what Briggs brings to the table tallent wise I say let him walk. At this point there are more pressing needs for our cap dollars. Same with Brendan, he wants too much for an admitted special teams only player. We need upgrades at WR, RB OL, Safty, still need to stabalize the QB position. Too many holes to tie that much money up in guy's like Briggs, Brendon, Moose, etc. Some tough choices face Jerry this coming offseason.

[Pixote]

I agree, it will take a tremendous job to fill all the needs the Bears have within salary cap restraints. It will definately be an interesting off-season.

[adam]

I agree, it will take a tremendous job to fill all the needs the Bears have within salary cap restraints. It will definately be an interesting off-season.

Now the one thing that is the wild card is injuries. If we get some of these guys back at 100% for next season, some of the holes will be filled already.