Inside Slant: Bengals, Saints bracket this accounting of NFL homegrown talent (1 Viewer)

[goboilers]

Inside Slant: Taking stock of homegrown talent - NFL Nation - ESPN

Shocking!!!

Some would argue that percentages are more instructive than raw numbers, and it's true that the New Orleans Saints rank at the bottom of this list in large part because they've made the NFL's fewest number of draft selections (31) in the previous five drafts. But to me, draft commitment is at least partially based on maintaining and/or expanding your annual total under the (generally) accepted theory that volume is an asset in what is often a crapshoot.

 

[Gumbo's Dad]

Wow this is an eye opener. I think the strategy should be to raid the scouting departments of Green Bay and the Pats. So far last year's draft is an abomination other than Cooks.

 

[JackDiesel]

Wow this is an eye opener. I think the strategy should be to raid the scouting departments of Green Bay and the Pats. So far last year's draft is an abomination other than Cooks.

We did replace our head of college scouting and brought in Ireland.

 

[TribuneUK]

And in the face of this data, the board clamour to trade up for wish list players will continue unabated. Those who don't learn from the mistakes of history are destined to repeat them.

 

[Gumbo's Dad]

We did replace our head of college scouting and brought in Ireland.

Yeah but....will it be enough? As far as I know we have the same boots on the ground. Guess we will find out soon enough. Under Pace we flat out could not draft defense. Sure, we have a few solid guys, but no game changers. Our best defensive talent has been through free agency.

 

[saint_drago]

Good find. This was a troublesome read. Especially when they mentioned this:

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | The Saints, the Draft, and the Winner's Curse

 

[Saint Droopy]

And in the face of this data, the board clamour to trade up for wish list players will continue unabated. Those who don't learn from the mistakes of history are destined to repeat them.

THANK YOU!

Been saying this from the jump. Keep all of your picks and use them to build this team for the long haul. We have picks in the first 78 (or 75?)... we can set ourselves up with this draft, and we can also find some gems in the remaining picks and also UDFA.

 

[SweetT]

THANK YOU!

Been saying this from the jump. Keep all of your picks and use them to build this team for the long haul. We have picks in the first 78 (or 75?)... we can set ourselves up with this draft, and we can also find some gems in the remaining picks and also UDFA.

Funny how when we less than 7 picks, many on here wishes we trade down-get more picks.
However, when we finally have more than 7, many wish that we trade up.

We have 9 picks, with great draft placement. I'm fine staying pat and executing accordingly.

 

[bradman1965]

I'm pretty convinced that these analyses are correct. Doesn't change the fact that the Saints are one of the must successful NFL franchises in the last 10 years. These statistics guys are always talking up not to confuse strategy and outcome and it looks like the Saints are enough of an outlier that they need to crunch some more numbers to figure out why.

 

[pete]

I don't find this so alarming. If you draft a player and later trade him for a position of greater need, then it's not a failure. Quite the opposite. A better analysis would note how many players the Saints drafted are still in the league.

 

[Saint Spud]

And in the face of this data, the board clamour to trade up for wish list players will continue unabated. Those who don't learn from the mistakes of history are destined to repeat them.

I've seen a lot more people in the "stay at 13" or "trade down" camp than the "trade up" camp on this board.

 

[TribuneUK]

Then I suggest that you and I are reading different posts...

 

[SoggyBottomBoy]

Then I suggest that you and I are reading different posts...

I've seen many predict that we'll move up because of Payton/Loomis' draft history, but very few condoning it. I for one would like to stay put in the first 2-3 rounds and take what falls our way. Mid-round movement, I have no problem with.

Regarding the article, I saw something similar a couple of days ago and it's an eye opener. There are a lot of variables - very active in FA market, fewer picks due to moving up often and commissioner thievery, very successful UDFA signings, etc. Though we have been successful, this stat is biting us in the rear with cap concerns and an aging roster. This offseason looks to be the start to remedy this.

 

[AARPSaint]

I don't find this so alarming. If you draft a player and later trade him for a position of greater need, then it's not a failure. Quite the opposite. A better analysis would note how many players the Saints drafted are still in the league.

Of course. Does anyone believe that the Saints wanted desperately to trade Jimmy Graham, for instance? No, they needed draft picks and a Center more. According to the writer's methodology, that counts as a failure. Even the Ricky Williams trade eventually produced some compensation. I'm sure that it was a lot of work to compile these statistics, but their method is hardly unquestionable.

 

[KtoLV]

I'm pretty convinced that these analyses are correct. Doesn't change the fact that the Saints are one of the must successful NFL franchises in the last 10 years. These statistics guys are always talking up not to confuse strategy and outcome and it looks like the Saints are enough of an outlier that they need to crunch some more numbers to figure out why.

Imagine how successful we would have been if we had drafted better.