Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

Smith Forbes Mag: Reese among worst drafting GM's

Defenderdawg : 10/29/2013 10:45 am
Not the usual source for sports:
Link - ( New Window )
the article seems fair and confirms what a lot of us already think -  
Del Shofner : 10/29/2013 10:50 am : link
The last five years of drafts have not been great for us, and there have been a lot of misfires.
Bill Belichik  
Pete in MD : 10/29/2013 10:53 am : link
scores lower than JR. Interesting.
And yet...  
Tim in Eternal Blue : 10/29/2013 10:54 am : link
The Bengals with NO scouting department have had pretty solid drafts of late. Interesting
the problem  
PaulBlakeTSU : 10/29/2013 10:55 am : link
with the article is that he doesn't investigate the one thing he set out to do-- whether the GIants draft picks suffered an aberrant number of injuries that would cause them to miss more time than other teams' draft picks. Since the author's success rate was based on games played an "Average Value" which is an aggregate metric directly correlated to games played, it leaves the author's conclusions lacking.

I am also curious to see what each team's average draft pick is as I'm sure there has to be a correlation between better pick slots and playing time/production-- even if not guaranteed.

Not only are earlier picks thought to be better players who would get more playing time and accumulate more production, but they are also going to worse teams who presumably have more holes to fill and an easier road to getting playing time.
Lots of misses, sure. But using  
kickerpa16 : 10/29/2013 10:57 am : link
games played as an indicator of draft success?

That can be flawed for 3 big reasons:

1. Shitty teams may have to use draft picks because their vets suck. Even if the rooks aren't any good, them playing isn't a sign of organizational success.

2. If you have good vet depth, you will look worse than what you really are. It's not a bad thing to have rooks not playing because your vets are that good.

3. Injuries. Other reasons rooks may not play perhaps not related to draft slot.
I take it  
Arcanum : 10/29/2013 10:59 am : link
With a grain of salt. Seeing how we're always drafting in the mid 20's. From where we draft at, I think we get some pretty decent players. Yeah, our LBs drafting skills is In the basement. But I think we've drafted some decent players.
evaluating drafts  
M in CT : 10/29/2013 10:59 am : link
with the benefit of hindsight is a completely useless undertaking. GMs are not fortune tellers. Reese had no way of knowing that an astronomical number of his draft picks would get injured and have their careers cut short.

and besides, any metric which tells you that Reese and Belicheck are poor GMs is absurd. we're talking about the 2 most successful franchises in the NFL in the past 10 years. and somehow, while these 2 teams have had tremendous success, they've also had the poorest GMs in terms of drafting? sure, pal.
Arcanum  
M in CT : 10/29/2013 11:00 am : link
excellent point.

again, the 2 most successful teams in the NFL in the past 10 years - gee, maybe they also had a tougher time in drafts because they always had late picks?
Common threads for many "bad" picks?  
Jupiter : 10/29/2013 11:10 am : link
1) Productive until injured in last college season.
2) Undersized.
3) Trading up.

The Giants have never been a great drafting team, but occasionally have a draft that turns out great (or lucky).

I get tired of hearing "this guy would have been a ___ (fill in blank) round pick if he hadn't been injured". That did work out with Webster and Tuck, however.

What is it with undersized DBs and WRs? They never turn out to be anything but specialists and you can't keep too many of those. Name one that has worked out well!

I can't think of a single trade-up that has worked out unless you consider Manning a trade-up (by EA). And trading up usually costs you another draft pick which dilutes your overall draft.
It's not just injuries. Looking at Rds 3 through 5, they haven't  
Victor in CT : 10/29/2013 11:11 am : link
had any players come through. Round 1 has generally been good, Round 2 spotty (Randle, TT, Smith, all plusses, Beatty ok. Sintim, Austin disasters). Rounds 3-5 have been big goose eggs , especially since 2008. Manningham and nobody. And even he wasn't great, though capable of the big play. Chad Jones, who knows what might have been. The rest is littered with names like Kehl, Goff, Hosley, Beckum, Bhomar. YIKES.
I see it like Victor.  
Del Shofner : 10/29/2013 11:16 am : link
Forget our draft position. Two #2s that were complete and total busts, and nothing at all out of rounds 3-5. That's not dictated by draft position.
Not  
AcidTest : 10/29/2013 11:16 am : link
impressed with his drafts. Not sure how anybody could be. A litany of blown high round picks, year after year after year. Not much from the lower rounds either. Some of this may be him allowing too much influence by Coughlin and Ross. Coughlin apparently wanted Sintim, and Ross had very bad drafts with the Eagles. But Reese is ultimately responsible. Either he and Ross need to go, or Reese needs to make all the picks himself, with far less input from Coughlin and Ross.
We have not really missed  
BigBlueDownTheShore : 10/29/2013 11:18 am : link
out on 1st rounders and those are the ones that count. You can't grade Wilson or even Pugh accurately yet, but the rest have been successful and round 2 has been hit or miss. The rest are not great, but the average team is not finding hall of famers in those rounds either.
Under Coughlin/Accorssi/ and Reese....  
Reb8thVA : 10/29/2013 11:22 am : link
there have been no real head scratching reach picks like the Joe Montgomery, Sean Bennet, and Ron Dixos of the world. For the most part, our picks have come from solid programs and were not reaches at the time. Nevertheless, the drafting record of late has been poor. We've aged rapidly largely because our mid round picks have not panned out. If you are going to credit Reese for his role in building two Superbowl teams you have to hold him accountable for the failures as well.
I forgot to mention:  
Victor in CT : 10/29/2013 11:22 am : link
Nassib. Another mid round non-factor. And stupid, senseless pick that cost an additional pick to boot. Show me a team that gets no athletes from the middle rounds, and I'll show you a team with shitty special teams and poor depth on the lines.

I give you the 2013 NY Giants
Lot of truth there,but teams with poor records  
chops : 10/29/2013 11:23 am : link
over several seasons draft high and tend to stock up

on blue chip players. Look at KC and Bengals. Successful teams: Patriots and Giants,etc usually draft at the bottom.

Suddenly, stuff happens.
Kehl, Goff and Beckum  
M in CT : 10/29/2013 11:26 am : link
all had devastating knee injuries.

from the 2008 draft alone, we had KP (knees), TT (knees), Manningham (good pick, then knee), Kehl (knee) and Goff (knee).

you guys seem to think that Reese could have/should have predicted that would happen. that's not how it works, unfortunately. the man can't control absurdly bad luck.

if those 5 players progress through normal careers, you have at least 2 perennial pro bowlers in KP and TT and solid contributors in Manningham, Kehl and Goff.

you can't evaluate the draft with the benefit of knowing who got hurt after the fact. that makes no sense.
95 % of the differences between teams' drafts is pure luck  
nygirlie : 10/29/2013 11:28 am : link


Also the value of the the top picks in the first round is less than the later picks and most of the 2nd round picks. This takes salaries into account ie skill/performance per dollar.

Bad Bill's record is not bad when you take the total number of picks obtained by trading down into account. His record per pick is poor but he got more picks.
NFL draft study - ( New Window )
RE: We have not really missed  
Victor in CT : 10/29/2013 11:28 am : link
In comment 11308441 BigBlueDownTheShore said:
Quote:
out on 1st rounders and those are the ones that count. You can't grade Wilson or even Pugh accurately yet, but the rest have been successful and round 2 has been hit or miss. The rest are not great, but the average team is not finding hall of famers in those rounds either.


You don't need to get HOFers in the middle rounds. That would be dumb luck (see H. Carson). What you do need to get are pluggers. Solid guys who can play specials and provide quality depth, or be decent starters at positions like LB, OL, DT.
The Gambler  
ghost718 : 10/29/2013 11:42 am : link
should be Reese's nickname.Sorta like James Caan in the movie.He tends to either play it safe and take whoever falls to him.Especially in the 1st round.Or go for it all and take a project with no college production.

I think either way you want to break it down his drafts are disappointing.Whether using AV or just going right down the line,player for player.
So  
Joey in VA : 10/29/2013 11:53 am : link
The Falcons and Dolphins are the best drafting teams, from 2008-2012, and are held up as who we should strive to be. In that time, how many titles have the teams combined for? WHat is their record? How many of those players contributed to a Super Bowl win? While we were drafting in those years, how many of those picks had a chance to unseat the incumbent during that time? Again, on a team that perennially is in the hunt in December and has 2 rings in that time, are you going to be adding as many rookies that contribute?

This is my issue with all this advanced stat bullshit, there are factors outside of purely games played and that is not even touched on here because neither of the "authors" has a fucking clue what's going on between the white lines.
Wonder how JR  
old man : 10/29/2013 11:53 am : link
would have measured out if the 2007 class had all stayed healthy, and,likely have this wrong but Phillips/TT in '08?

Yes, his/the organizations OL and LB philosophy has, well, sucked, and his Sintims and 'projects' as well,but, as I've mentioned in other threads the last several months, I believe the approach changes and we start to see good drafts over the next 2 offseasons. If it doesnt change likely neither will the success/failure rate.
On the other hand, Reese does tend to draft guys with injury histories  
SB : 10/29/2013 11:54 am : link
...and simply put, guys who tend to get injured in college tend to get injured in the pros.

It almost seems like Reese and Co. look at college injuries as a pro, "if ____ didn't miss last year because of injury, he'd be a first round pick!"
There's no way to  
RB^2 : 10/29/2013 12:02 pm : link
differentiate between player selection and coaching using those metrics. A team's GM may draft good players but if the team has bad coaches that fail to adequately develop incoming talent, this analysis will make it look like the GM drafted poorly.

An NFL organization really needs to be top notch from top to bottom. Running a professional football team is insanely complicated.
Lets not make excuses  
Vegas Steve : 10/29/2013 12:05 pm : link
Reese has done a poor job of Drafting in rounds 3-5 and a shoddy job in round 2 as well.

He also hasn't been doing great signing young, talented FA's to fill holes either but that's not part of this thread.

No one expects any GM to hit on all their picks or FA signings all the time. That's crazy! even for the BBI to expect that.

However, Whether it's injuries, poor coaching, not a good fit for our Offensive and Defensive schemes or coaches playing Vets over the rookies. It all boils down to this.

We simply haven't developed talented players who can step in when opportunity knocks. If we had we wouldn't be 2-6

To the "In Reese we trust" group here; I'm sorry but whether it's his fault or not the buck stops at JR's Desk. He gets the credit for our success; it's only fair he gets the credit for our failures.
Reese's job isn't to have great drafts, its to field a team that wins  
JohnB : 10/29/2013 12:06 pm : link
the Super Bowl. On that score, Reese has been the very best GM since 2007.
Th Giants drafts have basically sucked lately.  
LauderdaleMatty : 10/29/2013 12:07 pm : link
Having a true franchise QB changes everything. The Giants have one and especially for the last Super Bowl he carried the team.

Reese's good moves no longer outweigh his bad ones and he needs to pull his head out of his ass and fix the OL which is the biggest issue with this team. I know beefing to shot teams has put a bit of perfume of this turdlike season but the OL needs a major overhaul and his performance there has been beyond bad the last 5 years.
so basically  
M in CT : 10/29/2013 12:11 pm : link
Reese needs to pull his head out of his ass and start accurately predicting that his players will get injured. all Reese's fault that he didn't predict Snee's hip injury or Baas' ridiculous list of injuries. at the time he signed Baas, he should have used a magic 8-ball to evaluate Baas' future injury history and then decided not to sign him accordingly.
M in CT so it takes a brain surgeon not  
LauderdaleMatty : 10/29/2013 12:19 pm : link
To extend Snee with his injury history? To not draft offensive linemen to develop instead of studs like Jernigan, Beckum, AustIn, Barden, and Sintim.

Oh and giving Beatty 9 million per yer was pure genius. Restricting Baas after multiple injuries in his first two years here,

Yeah. I guess you think the OL has a bright future. He's done. Shit job on the OL. Don't let actual facts cloud judging Reese.
Well put Matty  
Vegas Steve : 10/29/2013 12:27 pm : link
One other point; It was no secret that both Snee and Baas were rehabing all spring with 2 starters hurting and Questionable whether they'd be ready for opening day not to have a backup plan is Criminal! Like signing a Vet FA who could play at least 1 of the 2 positions Guard or center.
Snee and Baas's contracts  
RB^2 : 10/29/2013 12:33 pm : link
are totally on Reese. Contract decisions can be analyzed much more cleanly than draft pick selection, though Reese does have some head scratchers that you can't really blame on coaching (Sintim, Dodge, Nassib, Beckum, Dillard).
Actually  
RB^2 : 10/29/2013 12:38 pm : link
It's really hard to tell with Snee. The family issue just clouds the picture too much. For all we know, Judy could be the driving force behind that (with the Mara's ultimate acquiescence). Snee's contract status affects her daughter and her grandchildren.

Frankly, it almost reads like a textbook HBS case study in what can happen when you family does business with each other.

I think Snee's play warranted the contract he got in 2008 but any other team would have cut him or given him a pay cut in the later years with high salaries.
I like his picks in rounds 1,2,3 this year very much.  
Ira : 10/29/2013 12:41 pm : link
Round 4 looks like a mistake, but it's too soon to judge. We got some value in round 7 which is a bonus.
There is no science to the draft.  
djstat : 10/29/2013 12:42 pm : link
The Bengals have had some success the last couple of years. But had about 20 years of pathetic drafting. Say what you want about the Reese drafts, the 2007 class almost all contributed to that Super Bowl Run. Jerry Reese cannot help the massive knee injury KP suffered etc.

That said there has been almsot nothing in the late rounds. JR likes to say he dratfs best player available, yet Linebackers are never available.
....  
BrettNYG10 : 10/29/2013 12:44 pm : link
RB, your thread this off-season about why a team with a supposed elite GM, coach, and QB could miss the playoffs so frequently was really interesting. Of course, it was muddled with crappy arguments that refused to acknowledge a shortcoming, but I've felt for a handful of years that Reese was not the top 3-5 GM many believed - particularly because he has yet to prove himself in the two most important areas; drafting a QB and selecting a HC. His misallocation of the cap this year supports this view a bit, imo. I'd be interested in a another thread discussing that.

I think Reese has done a good job of overall. But I don't think he's up there with Newsome - yet.
Here are my thoughts...  
EricJ (formerly Tyleraimee) : 10/29/2013 12:46 pm : link
First on the article...
I would rather measure how many of our draft picks are still STARTING in the NFL whether it is for the Giants or another team. That is a better measurement. To be fair, you should include any player who was penciled as the starter this year but is out with an injury. Then, remove any player who is only starting due to an injury.

Here is where Reese has failed... our depth. The article starts out talking about our injuries. That is going to happen to us every year. It seems like every season we look around and say "well, if it wasnt for all of these injuries". This is why our depth is important. Plus our lack of talent on the bench is another example of why our special teams suck.

Other than the draft, we can point to off season free agent moves and to me Jerry is 50/50 there. Like getting a guy like Ross but then Baas is horrible. At least with free agents they have some type of track record in the NFL and it is less of a crap shoot vs draft picks. We should not be missing so often on these.

Finally there is the managing of the cap which basically dictates whether we can go after free agents or have enough money to go after top free agents. Maybe it is just my perception, but it seems that we are always bumping up to our cap limit in the off season and rarely go into it with a pile of money to spend.
Brett  
RB^2 : 10/29/2013 12:51 pm : link
Yeah, I just thought about that, too. An alleged combination of HOF QB in his prime, HOF head coach who "still has a lot of years left"(TM), and one of the top GMs in the game just doesn't add up to the Giants' performance over a stretch of several years.
NYG drafts beginning with 2008 have been just plain bad.  
Red Dog : 10/29/2013 1:04 pm : link
You can argue about the games played metric or other measurements all you want. The final proof is the team record and post season accomplishments.

Other than the Super Bowl winning 2011 season, which is increasingly looking like a total fluke considering that the GIANTS barely even got into the playoffs that year, there have been no other playoff appearances from those five completed seasons. And this season, the team is fighting to stay out of last place in the division, and out of the worst five teams in the league. There is no rational reason to expect them to not finish in the bottom five or so this year.

That record stinks as bad as the drafts, which are a big part of the reason for that stinking record.

So many factors contribute to drafting successfully....  
Torrag : 10/29/2013 1:11 pm : link
...it is difficult to nearly impossible to quantitatively evaluate it accurately.

Example...how does Chad Jones car injury and failure to ever suit up impact the Giants draft rankings. Does he grade out as a 0 in AV analysis? If he had started 30 games it would impact heavily in that statistical category.

That's the impact of one player on these statistical analyses.

IMO the Giants drafting has suffered but for a differint reasonst. The teams philosophy of devaluing positions in favor of others is of concern to me. It is difficult enough identifying talent in the draft without adding positional preferences. It's a barrier to successfully acquiring talent for the roster we just don't need. The team drafted Aaron Ross ahead of Jon Beason. Ross was a contributor on championship teams yet Beason is the better player. CB over LB. Fail.

This is just one example, yet magnified over time how much talent has the team left on the board in such scenarios? I propose that over an extended period it will result in a diluted roster and mediocrity.
I disagree that the drafts have been bad  
oipolloi : 10/29/2013 1:15 pm : link
JPP and Nicks were great picks. They just got injured and they were guys with no injury histories.

Wilson, Austin, and Sintim were bad picks. But that is mostly because Reese made the young-GM mistake of going away from his draft philosophy of taking high character guys at LT, DE, DT and CB in the first two rounds.

Overall first two rounds:

Hits: JPP and Nicks

Solid: Hankin, Joseph, Thomas, Prince, KP, Randle, Ross, Pugh, Beatty

Misses: Wilson (jury still out), Austin, Sintim

Most of the picks have been solid, despite the fact that the Giants have generally been drafting fairly late.

Third and fourth rounds have been subpar, but he has had some excellent picks in the later rounds, such as Boss and Bradshaw.

I think that is a very solid record.

RE: Brett  
BrettNYG10 : 10/29/2013 1:16 pm : link
In comment 11308742 RB^2 said:
Quote:
Yeah, I just thought about that, too. An alleged combination of HOF QB in his prime, HOF head coach who "still has a lot of years left"(TM), and one of the top GMs in the game just doesn't add up to the Giants' performance over a stretch of several years.


Exactly - I completely agree.
RE: So many factors contribute to drafting successfully....  
Victor in CT : 10/29/2013 1:24 pm : link
In comment 11308815 Torrag said:
Quote:
...it is difficult to nearly impossible to quantitatively evaluate it accurately.

Example...how does Chad Jones car injury and failure to ever suit up impact the Giants draft rankings. Does he grade out as a 0 in AV analysis? If he had started 30 games it would impact heavily in that statistical category.

That's the impact of one player on these statistical analyses.

IMO the Giants drafting has suffered but for a differint reasonst. The teams philosophy of devaluing positions in favor of others is of concern to me. It is difficult enough identifying talent in the draft without adding positional preferences. It's a barrier to successfully acquiring talent for the roster we just don't need. The team drafted Aaron Ross ahead of Jon Beason. Ross was a contributor on championship teams yet Beason is the better player. CB over LB. Fail.

This is just one example, yet magnified over time how much talent has the team left on the board in such scenarios? I propose that over an extended period it will result in a diluted roster and mediocrity.


Every team "devalues" certain positions over others. It depends on their organizational philosophy. And when Ross was drafted, what was the greater need? CB!And Beason has been hurt severely for 2 years. Beason has been an upgrade, but how do you know he will stay healthy? And will you love the trade so much if he finishes strongly and leaves for more $$?
Oipolloi....  
Torrag : 10/29/2013 1:28 pm : link
Nicks struggled with a hamstring injury leading up to his draft. I agree he was an above average selection but there were injury considerations.

IMO the test of a draft isn't successfully hitting on 1st rounders. Those players should consistently be key contributors. Marc Ross and the scouts have to be better beyond the first round. That's where they have struggled in recent years. Especially in identifying talent at the LB position.
M in CT  
Emlen'sGremlins : 10/29/2013 1:30 pm : link
Kiehl, Goff and Beckum all sucked long before their knee injuries.
Victor you prove my point with your own words...  
Torrag : 10/29/2013 1:33 pm : link
Beason has been an upgrade and this is a Beason with a lot of wear and tear. How often can a team leave superior prospects on the board before it impacts the teams overall success? I don't know but imo eventually you will reach a tipping point that will be seen in the on field results.

The implied question is...Are we there now?
Doesnt the draft fall  
Rory : 10/29/2013 1:57 pm : link
more on lead scout Marc Ross's shoulders then Reese's?

Yes Reese is the man who makes all the decisions personnel wise but the draft is just 1/5th of the whole puzzle.

IMO Reese excels more at finding gems through trades and off the street/practice squads.... when he's not up against the pressure of having to choose athletic talent over football player ability.

I feel like the Giants have fallen into this routine of picking players who have great ability but the right coaching. This philosophy was great when the Giants were a young team and Eli was still in his developmental stages but he's 31 now in his prime.

The Giants need to focus on more guys who are ready now
LauderdaleMatty  
M in CT : 10/29/2013 2:03 pm : link
if you are suggesting that it was a bad move to extend Snee in 2008, coming off a Superbowl victory and an All-Pro season for Snee, then quite frankly, you don't have a damn clue what you're talking about.

the contract looks bad NOW because of what we subsequently learned about Snee's health AFTER the extension was already in place. Reese didn't have access to that information at the time he decided to extend Snee unless, again, he left his magic eight ball at home that day.

you could make the argument that Snee should have been cut last season or the season before, but if you want to argue that he shouldn't have been extended in 2008, you won't find any credible Giants fan arguing that it was a bad move at the time.
RB2  
M in CT : 10/29/2013 2:07 pm : link
it's not so simple to cut Snee in the later years of his contract because of the dead money hits that would accrue to the subsequent year's salary cap. i agree with you that Snee's relationship to the team could potentially have clouded that decision, but i don't agree that another team simply cuts him if he had a similar contract with them.

the way the contract was structured simply didn't allow for it unless you were willing to absorb an enormous hit to the cap for a player who isn't on the team.
people are attributing  
BigBlueCane : 10/29/2013 2:09 pm : link
Gettleman's success to Reese.

See George Young flailing in Free Agency.
Surprising most have awakened to the fact  
DelZotto : 10/29/2013 2:17 pm : link
That the drafts under Marc Ross have been terrible. Most of the same scouts are on board, the only change is that Ross was put in charge. Fired by the Eagles and scouting for the Bills, but quickly became the scouting director of the G-Men and the results are in the Pudding.
Reeses has used his first pick for need very often  
old timer : 10/29/2013 2:41 pm : link
That probably has an influence.
Reese says  
Bill in UT : 10/29/2013 3:19 pm : link
he drafts best player always
Since 2008  
Phil from WNY : 10/29/2013 3:39 pm : link
the Giants have had a strong core of players that have produced two SB wins. In my opinion, this has allowed the Giants to gamble on athletes more than proven players. Guys like Brewer, Barden, Jernigan, and Austin either didn't play enough in college or didn't face top flight competition, making them gambles on athletic ability. This approach makes sense if you believe in the strength of your roster.

It worked with guys like JPP but failed with guys like Kehl. Had the core not aged as rapidly as it has over the past couple of years, the strategy could have been deemed successful except for the fall-off in play of Snee, Diehl, Baas, and Tuck.
RE: We have not really missed  
oldutican : 10/29/2013 3:56 pm : link
In comment 11308441 BigBlueDownTheShore said:
Quote:
out on 1st rounders and those are the ones that count. You can't grade Wilson or even Pugh accurately yet, but the rest have been successful and round 2 has been hit or miss. The rest are not great, but the average team is not finding hall of famers in those rounds either.


I totally disagree. First rounders should be good players. The real test is the 3rd round on. Are you getting any players that contribute?

Consider that the NFL says the average career is 6.86 years. So on average 7-8 players on an a season-opening 53-man NFL roster will not be in the league the next year.
To me, too many of the mid to late round picks appear to  
317 Giants : 10/29/2013 5:50 pm : link
be boom or bust. Barden, Beckum, Austin et al. I would prefer solid if unspectacular. As some have said, this would help our lousy special teams.
Didn't read all the discussions...  
Dan in the Springs : 10/29/2013 6:32 pm : link
but I did see where draft position was brought up. Last year I averaged our pick positions during JR's tenure as GM.

Here's what I found:

Worst pick position:
#1 New England (27.17)
#2 New York Giants (24.
#3 (tie) Steelers/Ravens (23.83)
#4 Colts (23.67)
#5 Packers (23)

Best pick position:
#1 Rams (5.67)
#2 Browns (7.8)
#3 Raiders (9)
#4 (tie) Lions/Bills (9.3)
#5 Redskins (10)


Now, how can you try to compare draft results when inputs are so different? Giants on average over the six years in question are picking 14 spots after the Redskins, almost 1/2 a round later.

This is to say nothing of the comparison of outcomes using their methodology. There are WAY too many factors that drafted players don't play. The least common factor may be whether or not they were a good pick.
also  
giantfanboy : 10/29/2013 7:06 pm : link
victor cruz was not drafted
Victor Cruz, Will Hill, Spencer Paysinger, Henry Hynoski, Jim Cordle,  
BlueLou : 10/29/2013 8:07 pm : link
Jake Ballard, Bruce Johnson...

That article is truly awful, more full of holes than swiss cheese. The above list points out that any GM's success at signing good UDFAs would automatically hurt his "ability to draft."

It's a stupidly thought out and executed bit of "research" from the get-go, turly moronic...
It's hard to know who to blame for this, the scouts, Ross or Reese,  
yatqb : 10/29/2013 8:12 pm : link
but imo the drafts have been worse since Ross took over the draft board.
Re: Dead Money and Snee  
oipolloi : 10/29/2013 8:18 pm : link
Not cutting a guy like Snee or Baas just puts off the inevitable and throws good money after bad. You don't "save" money by not cutting a guy. Dead money is the amortized portion of the guaranteed money that a player received. There is no way to eliminate or reduce it. In fact, you actually spend more by keeping a guy around because you wind up paying his salary as well.

Once a guy can't play, he has to be cut regardless of the dead money involved.
Back to the Corner