General Draft Strategy Musings / Thoughts

[Super Nomario]

Here's a thread to debate the merits of trading up vs trading down, taking QBs with every pick or never taking them in the first round, seeking out or specifically avoiding SEC prospects, etc.
 
I'll kick it off - I increasingly feel like taking tackles high is overrated.
 
Here are the tackles taken in the top 10 in the last 10 years:
2004 - #2 Robert Gallery, OAK - huge bust, eventually became an average G for a couple years
2006 - #4 D'Brickashaw Ferguson, NYJ - fine, he's been an above-average tackle for the Jets
2007 - #3 Joe Thomas, CLE - he's been great
2007 - #5 Levi Brown, ARZ - he hasn't
2008 - #1 Jake Long, MIA - he was great for 4 years, now he's OK
2009 - #2 Jason Smith, STL - huge bust
2009 - #6 Andre Smith, CIN - took a little bit but now he's an excellent RT
2009 - #8 Eugene Monroe, JAX - solid LT, probably about average
2010 - #4 Trent Williams, WAS - he's been great
2010 - #6 Russell Okung, SEA - solid LT, probably about average
2011 - #9 Tyron Smith, DAL - he's been great
I'll ignore the 2012 (Kalil) and 2013 guy (Fisher, Joeckel, Johnson) because I think it's too early to tell.
 
Overall, I think the hit rate is OK - 3 busts out of 11, several stars. Small sample size, but the bust / star rate smells about average.
 
Joe Thomas is almost the platonic ideal of a LT - his teams have finished 8th, 30th, 29th, 31st, 30th, 24th, 27th in points. In Jake Long's hey-day, the Dolphins were 21st, 15th, 30th, 20th. Even if you get a great LT, it doesn't seem like it helps that much. Having a terrible LT certainly seems like a problem (although the elite guys like Manning and Brees were largely able to overcome it), but how much difference is there between the very best LTs in the league and an average one? Would the Pats score any more points upgrading from Solder to Thomas? If the answer is no, why would you use a top-10 pick on one?
 
I think there's a catch-22 here: you want a great LT to protect a star QB, but the star QBs don't need great LTs because they have quick releases and pocket presence. Maybe a top LT helps more limited guys, but how far are you going with a QB like that anyway?

 

[Seels]

I don't know if it's possible but it seems like if there were any year it would be worth it to have multiple picks it would be this year. Between the absolutely loaded classes of WR TE and just the depth of the class I hope the Pats can do something to come up with another pick in the 20-50 area.

 

[Phragle]

Here's a thread to debate the merits of trading up vs trading down, taking QBs with every pick or never taking them in the first round, seeking out or specifically avoiding SEC prospects, etc.
 
I'll kick it off - I increasingly feel like taking tackles high is overrated.
 
Here are the tackles taken in the top 10 in the last 10 years:
2004 - #2 Robert Gallery, OAK - huge bust, eventually became an average G for a couple years
2006 - #4 D'Brickashaw Ferguson, NYJ - fine, he's been an above-average tackle for the Jets
2007 - #3 Joe Thomas, CLE - he's been great
2007 - #5 Levi Brown, ARZ - he hasn't
2008 - #1 Jake Long, MIA - he was great for 4 years, now he's OK
2009 - #2 Jason Smith, STL - huge bust
2009 - #6 Andre Smith, CIN - took a little bit but now he's an excellent RT
2009 - #8 Eugene Monroe, JAX - solid LT, probably about average
2010 - #4 Trent Williams, WAS - he's been great
2010 - #6 Russell Okung, SEA - solid LT, probably about average
2011 - #9 Tyron Smith, DAL - he's been great
I'll ignore the 2012 (Kalil) and 2013 guy (Fisher, Joeckel, Johnson) because I think it's too early to tell.
 
Overall, I think the hit rate is OK - 3 busts out of 11, several stars. Small sample size, but the bust / star rate smells about average.
 
Joe Thomas is almost the platonic ideal of a LT - his teams have finished 8th, 30th, 29th, 31st, 30th, 24th, 27th in points. In Jake Long's hey-day, the Dolphins were 21st, 15th, 30th, 20th. Even if you get a great LT, it doesn't seem like it helps that much. Having a terrible LT certainly seems like a problem (although the elite guys like Manning and Brees were largely able to overcome it), but how much difference is there between the very best LTs in the league and an average one? Would the Pats score any more points upgrading from Solder to Thomas? If the answer is no, why would you use a top-10 pick on one?
 
I think there's a catch-22 here: you want a great LT to protect a star QB, but the star QBs don't need great LTs because they have quick releases and pocket presence. Maybe a top LT helps more limited guys, but how far are you going with a QB like that anyway?

 
How could it be no? Better LT = better O line = better offense = more points. What am I missing?
 
Also you forgot run blocking.

 

[Super Nomario]

How could it be no? Better LT = better O line = better offense = more points. What am I missing?

This is the conventional wisdom, but I wonder how much difference it makes. I don't think it's literally zero points, but I would guess it's fewer than 10 points. The Broncos lost Ryan Clady, a pretty good LT for the whole season, but still set a record for points scored in a season. The Pats lost Vollmer for 2/3 of the season and didn't suffer for it; getting Amendola and Vereen back helped more than losing Vollmer hurt them.
 
I think OL is largely a "sufficiency" position - it's important not to be terrible, but once you reach a certain level it doesn't matter much beyond that. I think upgrading from below-average Wendell to a decent C would have made more of a difference to the OL than upgrading from Solder to Thomas, for instance. I expect an OL of five decent guys will outperform an OL with two stars and two scrubs.
 

Also you forgot run blocking.

I left it out because I think it's a whole other can of worms. I have a lot of questions but not that many answers:

• When we think of great LTs, are we thinking of great run blockers, or great pass blockers? The PFF folks insist that Joe Thomas, for instance, is a great pass blocker but just an average run blocker.
• Do follow up on this ... are tackles or interior guys more important in the running attack?
• How much does one great run blocker improve your running game? If you took the worst run-blocking OL in the league and added an Anthony Davis or Marshall Yanda, how much does that improve it?
• Can you even run against great run Ds, or do great run Ds beat great run Os?

In this draft, you've get three tackles projected to go top 10 - Taylor Lewan and Jake Matthews are solid LT-type guys, while Greg Robinson is a mauling run-blocker who has pretty big questions in pass protection. Does Robinson have more upside because he might be a great run-blocking OT? Or does he have less upside because he's probably never going to be a pass-blocker on the order of the other guys. It's not clear to me that how we think about great OTs, how we think about OT prospects, and what actually makes an OT great are all in alignment.

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

This is the conventional wisdom, but I wonder how much difference it makes. I don't think it's literally zero points, but I would guess it's fewer than 10 points. The Broncos lost Ryan Clady, a pretty good LT for the whole season, but still set a record for points scored in a season. The Pats lost Vollmer for 2/3 of the season and didn't suffer for it; getting Amendola and Vereen back helped more than losing Vollmer hurt them.
 
I think OL is largely a "sufficiency" position - it's important not to be terrible, but once you reach a certain level it doesn't matter much beyond that. I think upgrading from below-average Wendell to a decent C would have made more of a difference to the OL than upgrading from Solder to Thomas, for instance. I expect an OL of five decent guys will outperform an OL with two stars and two scrubs.

I tend to agree with all of this. In a league with limited resources (both draft pick wise and salary cap wise) there is a very strong argument for being "just good enough" on the OL and spending more heavily on offensive and defensive play makers.

 

[Shelterdog]

I tend to agree with all of this. In a league with limited resources (both draft pick wise and salary cap wise) there is a very strong argument for being "just good enough" on the OL and spending more heavily on offensive and defensive play makers.

 
On the other hand a lot of the pretty good teams -- the Pats, the Ravens, the 49ers -- have spent a lot of resources on their offensive lines.  This may be an area where fans underrate the difference between good, average, and below average players because it's just too hard to evaluate o-line play.

 

[Phragle]

This is the conventional wisdom, but I wonder how much difference it makes. I don't think it's literally zero points, but I would guess it's fewer than 10 points. The Broncos lost Ryan Clady, a pretty good LT for the whole season, but still set a record for points scored in a season. The Pats lost Vollmer for 2/3 of the season and didn't suffer for it; getting Amendola and Vereen back helped more than losing Vollmer hurt them.
 
I think OL is largely a "sufficiency" position - it's important not to be terrible, but once you reach a certain level it doesn't matter much beyond that. I think upgrading from below-average Wendell to a decent C would have made more of a difference to the OL than upgrading from Solder to Thomas, for instance. I expect an OL of five decent guys will outperform an OL with two stars and two scrubs.

10 per game or 10 per season?

I think any QB that throws as quickly as Brady and Manning are going to be affected less by OT injuries. Also Cannon stepped in and played great. Don't forget that.
 
Don't ask me about Wendell. I'm completely irrational about him.
 
 

I left it out because I think it's a whole other can of worms. I have a lot of questions but not that many answers:

• When we think of great LTs, are we thinking of great run blockers, or great pass blockers? The PFF folks insist that Joe Thomas, for instance, is a great pass blocker but just an average run blocker.
• Do follow up on this ... are tackles or interior guys more important in the running attack?
• How much does one great run blocker improve your running game? If you took the worst run-blocking OL in the league and added an Anthony Davis or Marshall Yanda, how much does that improve it?
• Can you even run against great run Ds, or do great run Ds beat great run Os?

In this draft, you've get three tackles projected to go top 10 - Taylor Lewan and Jake Matthews are solid LT-type guys, while Greg Robinson is a mauling run-blocker who has pretty big questions in pass protection. Does Robinson have more upside because he might be a great run-blocking OT? Or does he have less upside because he's probably never going to be a pass-blocker on the order of the other guys. It's not clear to me that how we think about great OTs, how we think about OT prospects, and what actually makes an OT great are all in alignment.

 
Both. Great LTs are generally great overall players. Joe Thomas is a good run blocker. So is Joe Staley.
 
"are tackles or interior guys more important in the running attack?" No I'd argue they are equally important.
 
"How much does one great run blocker improve your running game? If you took the worst run-blocking OL in the league and added an Anthony Davis or Marshall Yanda, how much does that improve it?" I wouldn't go so far to say an O-line is a good as it's weakest link, but I think it's something like that. Davis or Yanda would vastly improve the right side, but not much overall.

 

[Reverend]

I think SN raises a really interesting point with respect to our evolving understanding of what makes a great QB (and what teams should be scouting). There's been a great deal made about quick release in recent years, and it appears that that release time may be more important than other more traditional--and dramatic--measurables such as having a laser cannon arm or great foot speed.
 
One of the things that's also been discussed of late is how having cost controlled young QBs frees up a team's cap space. So, what if having a QB with a quick release time allows you to save money on your offensive line? If so, then the trait should be valued in excess of the more obvious direct value in terms of contributing to the offense. That would be some serious higher order moneyball shit right there.

 

[Phragle]

Do you mean Time to Throw? Release Quickness is inconsequential in comparison to Time to Throw if you're looking to avoid QB pressure.
 
Or you can have a fast QB. Fast QBs have long TTTs because they can buy time, unlike the QBs discussed up thread.

 

[soxfan121]

Both. Great LTs are generally great overall players. Joe Thomas is a good run blocker. So is Joe Staley.

 
This is a very good point from the first word to the last. 
 
And it sorta proves the thesis statement in the first place - top 10 left tackles are probably a little overrated because first round LT are more than comparable. 

 

[Super Nomario]

10 per game or 10 per season?

Sorry, per season.
 

I think any QB that throws as quickly as Brady and Manning are going to be affected less by OT injuries. Also Cannon stepped in and played great. Don't forget that.

I think Cannon was fine, but I think your first and second points are related. I think a lot of guys would be fine protecting for a Brady or a Manning. So should a team like Denver or New England be less concerned with pass blocking for their Ts, and prefer guys who are better run-blockers?
 

Both. Great LTs are generally great overall players. Joe Thomas is a good run blocker. So is Joe Staley.

It's funny that you name those two. I think (by reputation, PFF, etc.) both are good at both, but Thomas is an excellent pass blocker and just a decent run blocker, while Staley is a terrific run blocker and just an pretty good pass blocker.
 

 How much does one great run blocker improve your running game? If you took the worst run-blocking OL in the league and added an Anthony Davis or Marshall Yanda, how much does that improve it?" I wouldn't go so far to say an O-line is a good as it's weakest link, but I think it's something like that. Davis or Yanda would vastly improve the right side, but not much overall.

I think we're on the same page with respect to "the weakest link" being important. I tend to think of that more the case with pass blocking than with run blocking (since the defense gets to choose where they put their rushers, while the offense gets to choose the direction they run), but to some extent it's true for both.
 

I think SN raises a really interesting point with respect to our evolving understanding of what makes a great QB (and what teams should be scouting). There's been a great deal made about quick release in recent years, and it appears that that release time may be more important than other more traditional--and dramatic--measurables such as having a laser cannon arm or great foot speed.
 
One of the things that's also been discussed of late is how having cost controlled young QBs frees up a team's cap space. So, what if having a QB with a quick release time allows you to save money on your offensive line? If so, then the trait should be valued in excess of the more obvious direct value in terms of contributing to the offense. That would be some serious higher order moneyball shit right there.

I think the other thing is that the relative value of tackles and interior linemen changes. A Brady or Manning can deal with edge pressure by stepping up in the pocket, but get some pressure up the middle and they're screwed. The team that's employed this approach more than any other, I think, is New Orleans - they've spent pretty big money on guards but let Bushrod walk away this offseason and tried to fill his spot on the cheap. Then again, this didn't work very well - they dropped from 3rd in the league in points to 10th.
 

Do you mean Time to Throw? Release Quickness is inconsequential in comparison to Time to Throw if you're looking to avoid QB pressure.

Release quickness is part of it, but you're right the picture's more complicated. Making quick reads and good footwork in the pocket is just as critical.
 

Or you can have a fast QB. Fast QBs have long TTTs because they can buy time, unlike the QBs discussed up thread.

I wonder if different spots become important, too, with a mobile QB. Like maybe LT isn't as important because he can run away from blindside pressure, but RT is more important because it lets him scramble to his dominant throwing side.

 

[Phragle]

Release quickness is part of it, but you're right the picture's more complicated. Making quick reads and good footwork in the pocket is just as critical.

 
It's far more critical. A quick release is .30 and slow one is .40. That's only a tenth of a second difference. The difference between a quick throw time (2.50, Brady) and a slow throw time (3.00, Glennon) is five times bigger.
 

I wonder if different spots become important, too, with a mobile QB. Like maybe LT isn't as important because he can run away from blindside pressure, but RT is more important because it lets him scramble to his dominant throwing side.

 
Unless you have a lefty, like Vick.

 

[jsinger121]

 

Dan Duggan ‏@DDuggan21  2m
Patriots director of player personnel Nick Caserio at Rutgers pro day.
 

 

[bakahump]

 

Dan Duggan ‏@DDuggan21  2m
Patriots director of player personnel Nick Caserio at Rutgers pro day.

 

 Do any other teams bother to even Show up?

 

[Super Nomario]

I think we're on the same page with respect to "the weakest link" being important. I tend to think of that more the case with pass blocking than with run blocking (since the defense gets to choose where they put their rushers, while the offense gets to choose the direction they run), but to some extent it's true for both.

Andy Benoit made this point recently for MMQB (specific to RB pass blocking, but I think it applies generally):
 

The nature of pass-blocking is different from the rest of football. A pass-blocker is the only player who is tethered to a strictly reactionary duty. He cannot create anything; he can only prevent something. Really, an offense does not need a superstar pass-blocker, it just can’t have a bad one. Think about it: On a given play, in the broadest terms, a dominant pass-blocking effort produces the same outcome as an average pass-blocking effort: a clean quarterback. It’s a bad pass-blocking effort that dirties the quarterback or his pocket.
 
Teams that invest in stud pass-blockers are really just buying bigger insurance policies. A stud pass-blocker won’t win you a game, but he’s less likely to lose you one.
 

 

 

[j-man]

if i was elway i would think about putting R Clady on the block for a 1st and 3rd in 14 or 15 i am a big fan of tradeing down for more picks if u can 

 

[mpx42]

I wouldn't trade your All-Pro starting left tackle when the plan this season is pretty clearly to go for it all now.