How many 1st and 2nd round picks can you have not starting?

[Orton's Arm]

Fascinating, but I'm calling BS on this. How can Lee Evans be classified as a bust by the author's own logic? In his best year, he had 1300 yards and averaged nearly 16 yards a catch. Moreover, Whitner was a starter in his third season. He was hurt and saw some bench time, but he was definitely the nominal starter. Also, saying Lynch is a bust when he was highly productive in years 1 & 2 is a real stretch. Finally, in McGahee's third year after signing his contract, he had 1247 yards; in his fifth season (final year of his original contract, although I realize it was reworked), he had 1,207 yards for Baltimore.

The man who created that analysis had three criteria for determining whether a player was a bust:

 

Criterion 1: Whether he was a starter by his third season.

Criterion 2: Whether he was still a starter by the last year of his original contract.

Criterion 3: Whether he was in the top 30% at his position.

 

The person also noted that, "if players left their original team and then turned it on with a new team I still counted them as busts, since they were not successful with the team that drafted them."

 

Obviously, Whitner was not even close to being in the top 30% among strong safeties, so he didn't meet criterion 3. Lynch wasn't a starter in his third year in the league, because he'd been relegated to the bench by Fred Jackson. So he didn't meet criterion 1. McGahee's season in Baltimore was discounted because it did not help the Bills.

 

Apparently, Lee Evans wasn't among the top 30% of WRs in the league, which meant that he didn't meet criterion 3. This is a case where criterion 3 looks a little harsher than would be ideal. There should be a category for players who, while perhaps not in the top 30% at their positions, are nonetheless solid starters and solid contributors to their teams.

 

At the same time, it's worth remembering that the author's harsh criteria were applied to everyone else's first round picks as well. Everyone in the league--except of course the Bills--was able to have at least one non-bust even by the high standards the author had created. The best-drafting teams were able to obtain four or more non-busts during the period he examined. That clearly demonstrates that the Bills have been among the league's worst when it came to evaluating talent in the first round.

[SouthernMan]

I understand it really doesn't matter if you're winning games, which Buffalo isn't, but

how many teams in the NFL have as many 1st and 2nd round picks not starting?

 

I see:

 

1. Lynch 1st

2. Maybin 1st

3. McLuvin 1st

4. Hardy 2nd

 

Are there others?

 

 

It's so obvious that the Bills' problems start with their personnel department. The bad choices are further compounded by all the great players they've skipped over who could have helped.

 

Ironically, they've done a reasonably good job in later rounds and free agency. If only they'd make good choices with all their first rounders we might have a good team.

 

BTW - excellent point to poster who commented on the wasted 1st round money that prevents re-signing productive players who leave in free agency. It kills me that our run game has been a joke since the departure of big Pat, Ted, Sam, and others who used to plug holes. Pat is still a force with the Vikings.

 

Look no further than the Patriots for the model of how a front office and personnel dept should be run. They find amazing players in later rounds, sign productive FAs when necessary, and parlay departing FAs into additional draft picks. How many times in the past 10 years have they had multiple first round picks? All while remaining a playoff team.

 

Meanwhile, the Bills are converting their D-line into linebackers (or attempting to) and a journeyman castoff from the Dolphins is poised to be slotted ahead of last year's high draft pick and bust, Aaron Maybe. I will not be the least bit shocked if he doesn't make the 53 man roster.

[dave mcbride]

Actually due to QB situation Evans has not been a top 30% producer. With Whitner it is hard to say as how do you judge the position (typically people would be prone to look at turnovers generated but I do not believe this is in any way accurate). Based on last year - Lynch is not in the top 30%.

 

I am not defending the analysis - if anything I think it is incomplete. What I did find interesting is the fact that the guy probably did not have an agenda to call the Bills out as sucking but that is what he came to. The results on the field over the last ten years certainly suggest the Bills have not made good picks on a consistent basis.

The writer said that when judging whether someone was in the top 30 percent, he picked their best year to judge. Evans finished sixth in yards in 2006, and since there are roughly 180 receivers in the NFL, that certainly puts him in the top 30 percent.

[dave mcbride]

The man who created that analysis had three criteria for determining whether a player was a bust:

 

Criterion 1: Whether he was a starter by his third season.

Criterion 2: Whether he was still a starter by the last year of his original contract.

Criterion 3: Whether he was in the top 30% at his position.

 

The person also noted that, "if players left their original team and then turned it on with a new team I still counted them as busts, since they were not successful with the team that drafted them."

 

Obviously, Whitner was not even close to being in the top 30% among strong safeties, so he didn't meet criterion 3. Lynch wasn't a starter in his third year in the league, because he'd been relegated to the bench by Fred Jackson. So he didn't meet criterion 1. McGahee's season in Baltimore was discounted because it did not help the Bills.

 

Apparently, Lee Evans wasn't among the top 30% of WRs in the league, which meant that he didn't meet criterion 3. This is a case where criterion 3 looks a little harsher than would be ideal. There should be a category for players who, while perhaps not in the top 30% at their positions, are nonetheless solid starters and solid contributors to their teams.

 

At the same time, it's worth remembering that the author's harsh criteria were applied to everyone else's first round picks as well. Everyone in the league--except of course the Bills--was able to have at least one non-bust even by the high standards the author had created. The best-drafting teams were able to obtain four or more non-busts during the period he examined. That clearly demonstrates that the Bills have been among the league's worst when it came to evaluating talent in the first round.

 

Couple of things: re the 30 percent issue, that only applyies to guys who reached year 5, not third year players. Hence, it doesn't apply to Whitner or Lynch. Also, read his criteria again and see my point above about Evans. As to whether McGahee was a bust, that's for him to decide, but to me it's pretty a stupid criterion and I'm certainly not going to abide by it. He averaged 1100 yards for the Bills in the three seasons he played, after all.

 

For those who haven't looked at the criteria, here's the accurate, verbatim rendering:

 

Criteria #1--Are they a starter by their 3rd season?

Criteria #2--If they were a starter during their 3rd season are they still a starter during the last year of their original contract? (Generally the 4th or 5th season)

Criteria #3--If they met criteria from #1 and #2 were they in the top 30% at their position?

[Fezmid]

Obviously, Whitner was not even close to being in the top 30% among strong safeties, so he didn't meet criterion 3.

Obviously how? What's being measured?

[dave mcbride]

Obviously how? What's being measured?

Don't worry - the point doesn't even apply given the author's own logic.

[Meark]

I understand it really doesn't matter if you're winning games, which Buffalo isn't, but

how many teams in the NFL have as many 1st and 2nd round picks not starting?

 

I see:

 

1. Lynch 1st

2. Maybin 1st

3. McLuvin 1st

4. Hardy 2nd

 

Are there others?

 

Honestly who cares who starts.. as long as they all make an impact. I think everyone listed will make an impact this year except McKelvin.. er McLovin..

[San-O]

The writer said that when judging whether someone was in the top 30 percent, he picked their best year to judge. Evans finished sixth in yards in 2006, and since there are roughly 180 receivers in the NFL, that certainly puts him in the top 30 percent.

 

 

And where was he last year?

[dave mcbride]

And where was he last year?

That's not the point. I'm measuring it by the writer's own standards. Moreover, last year was year 6 of Evans' career, so it doesn't factor in.

[justnzane]

Honestly who cares who starts.. as long as they all make an impact. I think everyone listed will make an impact this year except McKelvin.. er McLovin..

 

 

McKelvin will be the nickel back dude. I think that is some impact. Hardy is struggling to stay on the roster right now, FWIW.

[San-O]

That's not the point. I'm measuring it by the writer's own standards. Moreover, last year was year 6 of Evans' career, so it doesn't factor in.

 

 

He's not in the top 30 % at his position?

[Orton's Arm]

Obviously how? What's being measured?

If you wish to make the case that Whitner was or is among the top 30% at his position--or anywhere close--the onus is on you to explain why he hasn't made the Pro Bowl even as an alternate, and why he spent most of last season as a backup while George Wilson started. I'm not trying to suggest that you necessarily want to argue that Whitner was among the top 30% at his position. Only that his benching and the lack of Pro Bowl invitations are both things which need to be addressed if that argument is going to be made.

 

A person who wanted to make a strongly pro-Whitner argument could claim that Perry Fewell had made a serious error in benching Whitner for George Wilson. Alternatively, that person could try to argue that George Wilson is himself among the top 30% of starting strong safeties. That person could try to explain away Whitner's lack of Pro Bowl appearances through some combination of lack of name recognition, stiff competition from other AFC safeties, politics, stuff like that.

 

A heavily pro-Whitner argument could be made. But making that argument would be an uphill battle. Perry Fewell began as a secondary coach. He later became the Bills' defensive coordinator, and then the interim head coach. He'd seen years of Whitner's play. If, after watching those years of game tape, he'd concluded that Whitner was among the top 30% at his position, do you really think he sends Whitner to the bench for George Wilson? Fewell's opinion is valuable here, because it's based on his own personal area of expertise (the secondary), and on years of Whitner's game tape as a starter.

[Orton's Arm]

That's not the point. I'm measuring it by the writer's own standards. Moreover, last year was year 6 of Evans' career, so it doesn't factor in.

It's possible that the author made an error in excluding Evans from his list of non-busts. I would have to look at the raw data to confirm that for sure, but have no plans to invest that time right now. But even a record of one non-bust, and six busts, still puts us on the same level as the Detroit Lions. So the overall point remains that the Bills have done a very poor job of drafting in the first round.

 

One thing I especially liked about that guy's analysis was that it fully captured the Bills' failure to find any difference-makers in the first round. Sure, there have been some solid starters: guys like Evans and, to a significantly lesser degree, Whitner. But not even Evans is what I would call a difference-maker. To be considered a difference-maker, a WR should be able to consistently produce at a reasonably high level despite double coverage. He should be able to be a threat everywhere on the field, and not just on deep routes.

[BuffaloBill]

Let's just look at the top two picks by the Bills since 2002 - not all are 1st and second round - they are simply the first two chosen by the bills in the draft.

 

I use the following abbreviations:

 

B= Bust

T = too soon to make final judgement

MR = Made roster with some contribution to the team but nothing noteworthy

AV = average player / contributor

SC = Solid choice

E = Elite player

 

2002

Mike Williams - B

Josh Reed - SC (almost picked AV)

 

2003

Willis McGahee = MR

Chris Kelsay = MR

 

2004

Lee Evans = SC (had the potential to be E)

JP Losman = B

 

2005

Roscoe Parrish = B (at his "position" of WR) / E as a punt returner so net out as AV?

Kevin Everett = B (no fault of his own - just based on contribution)

 

2006

Donte Whitner = AV

John Mccargo = B

 

2007

Marshawn Lynch = AV

Paul Pozluzney = AV

 

2008

Leodis McKelvin = AV would be my first choice but absent injury or maybe SC

James Hardy = B

 

2009

Aaron Maybin = T

Eric Wood = SC

 

2010

too soon to assess Spiller or Troupe

 

You would be hard pressed to rank any of the picks as elite and far too many are simply average.

[2003Contenders]

It is systemic of what I have said all along, which is that the non-scouts, including the coaches (and Jauron in particular) had too much say in what happened with the draft. The fact that the team struck out so many times with 1st and 2nd round picks is highly indicative of this fact, since the decision makers were more apt to leave the late round decisions, where lesser known players could be had, to the scouts. Conversely, it seems that we have had much better luck with our late round picks. Perhaps that is a reprieve for Donahoe, whom I believe would be gone by now if Nix didn't believe he was good at what he does. Also, I believe that Jauron adhered to the philosophy that "younger is better". Hence, his fetish with first round underclassmen. Nix and Gailey appear to have dismissed that philosophy right off the bat.

[Hplarrm]

Let's just look at the top two picks by the Bills since 2002 - not all are 1st and second round - they are simply the first two chosen by the bills in the draft.

 

I use the following abbreviations:

 

B= Bust

T = too soon to make final judgement

MR = Made roster with some contribution to the team but nothing noteworthy

AV = average player / contributor

SC = Solid choice

E = Elite player

 

2002

Mike Williams - B

Josh Reed - SC (almost picked AV)

 

2003

Willis McGahee = MR

Chris Kelsay = MR

 

2004

Lee Evans = SC (had the potential to be E)

JP Losman = B

 

2005

Roscoe Parrish = B (at his "position" of WR) / E as a punt returner so net aoout as AV?

Kevin Everett = B (no fault of his own - just based on contribution)

 

2006

Donte Whitner = AV

John Mccargo = B

 

2007

Marshawn Lynch = AV

Paul Pozluzney = AV

 

2008

Leodis McKelvin = AV would be my first choice but absent injury or maybe SC

James Hardy = B

 

2009

Aaron Maybin = T

Eric Wood = SC

 

2010

too soon to assess Spiller or Troupe

 

You would be hard pressed to rank any of the picks as elite and far too many are simply average.

I find your rankings to fairly reasonable but there are caveats:

 

1. I think ranking any player in his first 2 or 3 years is a pretty dicey proposition in terms of being a meaningful thing. Th exhibit 1 example is Eric Moulds who by virtually all measures is pretty clearly a B in his first two years. However, thank gosh that no action was taken based on this assessment. There really is not other choice besides give a 1st or 2nd round player another chance and work with them to make them the best they can be once the team marches to the podium and a name is called.

 

There is plenty of time to declare the player a bust reasonably after 3 seasons of results but any rating is simply not useful early on.

 

2. The rating is good but why the rating happened is hugely relevant to the extent of the rating alone being potentially very deceiving.

 

Was the problem the quality of the player? Was it something the scouts or FO could know? Was the problem not the scouts but position coaches and development? It probably was a combination and if so how did this dance play out. Just as the writer recognizes the stark case of Kevin Everett, the details matter if you want to think about this with any intelligence.

[dave mcbride]

If you wish to make the case that Whitner was or is among the top 30% at his position--or anywhere close--the onus is on you to explain why he hasn't made the Pro Bowl even as an alternate, and why he spent most of last season as a backup while George Wilson started. I'm not trying to suggest that you necessarily want to argue that Whitner was among the top 30% at his position. Only that his benching and the lack of Pro Bowl invitations are both things which need to be addressed if that argument is going to be made.

 

A person who wanted to make a strongly pro-Whitner argument could claim that Perry Fewell had made a serious error in benching Whitner for George Wilson. Alternatively, that person could try to argue that George Wilson is himself among the top 30% of starting strong safeties. That person could try to explain away Whitner's lack of Pro Bowl appearances through some combination of lack of name recognition, stiff competition from other AFC safeties, politics, stuff like that.

 

A heavily pro-Whitner argument could be made. But making that argument would be an uphill battle. Perry Fewell began as a secondary coach. He later became the Bills' defensive coordinator, and then the interim head coach. He'd seen years of Whitner's play. If, after watching those years of game tape, he'd concluded that Whitner was among the top 30% at his position, do you really think he sends Whitner to the bench for George Wilson? Fewell's opinion is valuable here, because it's based on his own personal area of expertise (the secondary), and on years of Whitner's game tape as a starter.

You do realize that there are somewhere around 100-120 safeties in the NFL, correct?

[oak tree 12]

I understand it really doesn't matter if you're winning games, which Buffalo isn't, but

how many teams in the NFL have as many 1st and 2nd round picks not starting?

 

I see:

 

1. Lynch 1st

2. Maybin 1st

3. McLuvin 1st

4. Hardy 2nd

 

Are there others?

 

mckelvin was very good his first year and got hurt his second,imo he will be a star.

 

lynch has been to the probowl

 

maybin is 22 years old who missed training camp his rookie year and played out of position.the book on him has not yet been written. he was also a sophmore when we drafted him time will tell but its way to early to make any assessements on him as a player.

 

hardy is the only guy you list who i think may be in trouble.

[JohnC]

I was under the impression that Ralph was furious about the Parrish pick and was the last straw for

o'le Whitey?

 

Having our goofy owner involved in any way in player evaluation and drafting is a recipe for disaster, as he has demonstrated. The best thing this owner can do is stay back in his office and count his pile of money. The worst thing this owner can do is to get involved in anything associated with football. Any advice on personnel that the owner has should be smiled at and then ignored.

[Orton's Arm]

You do realize that there are somewhere around 100-120 safeties in the NFL, correct?

There are 32 teams in the league, which means there are 32 starting strong safeties. For Whitner to be in the top 30% of those 32 strong safeties, he needs to be among the ten best at his position.