The Athletic reports the obvious

[Dcat]

Invite Friends

Following Real Time NFL Draft Cities NHL MLB NFL NBA CFB CBB Soccer Betting • • •

 

What can an NFL team’s draft class tell us about that franchise’s vision for the future? A whole lot

By Robert Mays May 4, 2021 34 

The weeks leading up to the NFL Draft are often defined by misinformation. As teams around the league try to dupe one another and gain any tiny advantage they can, fake stories and false narratives run rampant. Just think about how many times you heard Mac Jones connected to the 49ers since mid-March.

It’s only when the draft picks start rolling in that we can know anything for certain, and that’s part of what makes the draft so compelling. After weeks of rampant speculation, the mystery is finally solved. But draft weekend doesn’t just provide answers about which players these teams are after. It also provides insights into how these teams view themselves.

Every year after the draft, I like to study the hauls from each team and try to decipher what we’ve learned about their team-building approaches and their visions for the future. Sometimes, those visions can be a bit muddled. But there are plenty of instances where it’s possible to see where teams are trying to go and how they’re trying to get there, if we listen to what their draft plans are telling us. Here’s a look at some of those messages:

The Jets are committed to surrounding Zach Wilson with the right supporting cast

History often informs the way NFL general managers build their teams. Past mistakes influence plans, and it’s clear that Jets GM Joe Douglas is going to make sure he doesn’t make the same missteps that torpedoed the previous regime in New York.

It’s been only three years since the Jets picked a QB at the top of the draft, and what followed was a masterclass in how not to surround a highly drafted quarterback. After drafting Sam Darnold with the third pick, former Jets GM Mike Maccagnan consistently fell short in providing Darnold with proper protection or pass-catching help. As a rookie, Darnold was pressured on 35.9 percent of his dropbacks, the eighth-highest rate in the league among 26 qualified QBs, according to PFF. Over the past two years, it was even worse. Darnold finished with the highest pressure rate in the league in 2019 (41.9 percent) and 2020 (42.1 percent). Darnold’s support on the outside wasn’t much better, with Robby Anderson (94) and Jermaine Kearse (76) leading the Jets in targets during the quarterback’s rookie season in 2018. Even without the two second-round picks included in the trade up for Darnold, Maccagnan still had significant resources he could dedicate to the offense. Instead, the Jets spent three of their four top-100 picks (including the No. 3 pick in 2019) on defense and handed out top-of-the-market deals to defenders like Trumaine Johnson and C.J. Mosley.

Douglas dipped into the piggy bank for pass rusher Carl Lawson last month (three years, $45 million), but almost all of his energy the past two offseasons has been dedicated to building a hospitable environment for the Jets’ QB of the future. The Jets used their first two picks of the Douglas regime on left tackle Mekhi Becton and wide receiver Denzel Mims. Last month, Douglas signed receiver Corey Davis to a three-year, $37.5 million deal to be the 1A option in first-year coordinator Mike LaFleur’s offense. And when last week’s draft rolled around, Douglas continued to show his commitment to building up his offense.

After selecting Wilson with the No. 2 pick, the Jets traded the equivalent of a third- and a fourth-round pick to move from No. 23 to No. 14 and snag USC offensive lineman Alijah Vera-Tucker. Trading a pair of mid-round picks to move up for an interior offensive lineman might not be a sound process, but it’s easy to understand Douglas’s thinking.

“I think for us, this really came down to having a player in our top 10 sitting there and us having the ability to have the picks to go get this player, someone we feel like can help us for a long time here,” Douglas said after making the pick. “We’re always going to try to be strong up front, both sides of the ball, so this goes into that.”

Two of the picks included in the deal (No. 23 and No. 86) were acquired from Seattle in exchange for Jamal Adams, and Douglas likely saw those selections as bonus ammunition on draft night. The result will hopefully involve Vera-Tucker playing next to Becton on the left side for years to come, protecting a young QB whose college offensive line dominated virtually every opponent in its path last season.

The next day, Douglas used the 34th pick on Ole Miss wide receiver Elijah Moore, a dynamic pass-catching threat who profiles as a slot option alongside Davis and Mims in the new-look Jets offense. When the Jets came on the clock again at No. 107, Douglas selected North Carolina running back Michael Carter, who immediately profiles as the top option in LaFleur’s zone-heavy scheme.

With Jamison Crowder already on the roster, a No. 3 receiver didn’t look like a need from the outside, but the Moore pick — and, to a lesser extent, the choice to select Carter — was a declaration from Douglas that he’s going to do everything in his power to set up Wilson for success. Some GMs look at the financial flexibility afforded by a rookie QB’s contract and see it as an opportunity to stockpile defensive talent. But so far, Douglas has used the resources at hand, both cap space and the excess draft capital acquired in the Adams deal, as a way to surround his young quarterback with the best supporting cast available. A move like the Vera-Tucker trade might be a poor value proposition, and the Moore pick might seem superfluous, given the rest of the talent on the roster. But Douglas clearly came into this draft with a mission to give his QB help.

[sec101row23]

The contrast between what JD has done when drafting a QB in the top 3 and what Maccagnan did is night and day.   I’m not sure a GM in this league had a worse 5 year run than Maccagnan did, it truly was an embarrassment.  

[Lith]

Just now, sec101row23 said:

The contrast between what JD has done when drafting a QB in the top 3 and what Maccagnan did is night and day.   I’m not sure a GM in this league had a worse 5 year run than Maccagnan did, it truly was an embarrassment.  

The difference is there for all to see:

• First three picks after selecting QB in 2018: Nathan Shepherd, Chris Herndon & Parry Nickerson
• Compared with what we did last week: Alijah Vera-Tucker, Elijah Moore and MIchael Carter

Don't know yet how htese players will work out, but the approach makes so much more sense now.

[jgb]

5 minutes ago, sec101row23 said:

The contrast between what JD has done when drafting a QB in the top 3 and what Maccagnan did is night and day.   I’m not sure a GM in this league had a worse 5 year run than Maccagnan did, it truly was an embarrassment.  

Darnold and Macc were similar in that no one could perform worse for longer. 1% worse and they'd never make it in their relative positions as long as they did on any NFL team.

[Jetsfan80]

Can't wait to see Darnold with improved weppinz.....such as.....Robby Anderson....

 

Darnold’s support on the outside wasn’t much better, with Robby Anderson (94) and Jermaine Kearse (76) leading the Jets in targets during the quarterback’s rookie season in 2018. 

[sec101row23]

Just now, Lith said:

The difference is there for all to see:

• First three picks after selecting QB in 2018: Nathan Shepherd, Chris Herndon & Parry Nickerson
• Compared with what we did last week: Alijah Vera-Tucker, Elijah Moore and MIchael Carter

Don't know yet how htese players will work out, but the approach makes so much more sense now.

Agreed.  Maccagnan never had a plan as to how to build a roster and where to allocate his resources.   It was such a scattered approach that made little sense.  

[Doggin94it]

I think it's crazy for this piece to suggest that Crowder being on the roster would make the Moore pick "seem superfluous" when Crowder is in the last year of his deal

[JustInFudge]

3 minutes ago, Lith said:

The difference is there for all to see:

• First three picks after selecting QB in 2018: Nathan Shepherd, Chris Herndon & Parry Nickerson
• Compared with what we did last week: Alijah Vera-Tucker, Elijah Moore and MIchael Carter

Don't know yet how htese players will work out, but the approach makes so much more sense now.

Becton and Mims last year too. Davis, Coleman and Cole in the offseason in prep for this decision too? It's like there is a plan and a vision in place.  

CRAZY!!!!!!!!!!1

 

[genot]

4 minutes ago, sec101row23 said:

The contrast between what JD has done when drafting a QB in the top 3 and what Maccagnan did is night and day.   I’m not sure a GM in this league had a worse 5 year run than Maccagnan did, it truly was an embarrassment.  

It pisses me off every day. I also feel like a complete moron for posting my feelings about the Mac criticism being a little overboard. Feel like pouring a cup of hot coffee over his head.

[jgb]

1 minute ago, sec101row23 said:

Agreed.  Maccagnan never had a plan as to how to build a roster and where to allocate his resources.   It was such a scattered approach that made little sense.  

This is where BAP leads you. No strategy, no plan. Set the player rankings and go take a nap.

[sec101row23]

Just now, genot said:

It pisses me off every day. I also feel like a complete moron for posting my feelings about the Mac criticism being a little overboard. Feel like pouring a cup of hot coffee over his head.

Don’t be so hard on yourself.  

[Lith]

3 minutes ago, sec101row23 said:

Agreed.  Maccagnan never had a plan as to how to build a roster and where to allocate his resources.   It was such a scattered approach that made little sense.  

It was the approach of a scout.  He knew how to scout players and it seemed as if he evaluated them as individuals without regard for how to build a team.  H never learned that there is a difference between scouting players & building a team.

[Jetsfan80]

3 minutes ago, genot said:

It pisses me off every day. I also feel like a complete moron for posting my feelings about the Mac criticism being a little overboard. Feel like pouring a cup of hot coffee over his head.

@Pac

[Jetsfan80]

3 minutes ago, jgb said:

This is where BAP leads you. No strategy, no plan. Set the player rankings and go take a nap.

BAP:  Fine strategy.

BAP without taking into account premium positions / positional importance:  Terrible strategy.

[Jetsfan80]

1 minute ago, Lith said:

It was the approach of a scout.  He knew how to scout players and it seemed as if he evaluated them as individuals without regard for how to build a team.  H never learned that there is a difference between scouting players & building a team.

I struggle to locate evidence of even the bold...

[genot]

2 minutes ago, sec101row23 said:

Don’t be so hard on yourself.  

BS. Should have seen it coming.

[jgb]

13 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

BAP:  Fine strategy.

BAP without taking into account premium positions / positional importance:  Terrible strategy.

What other strategies are there beyond:

1. take the best player considering need; or 

2. take the best player without considering need.

Is there some third-way I'm not aware of? Taking the worst player at a position of not-need? If we agree these two categories capture the entire universe of draft strategies, then only one can be "BAP" -- #2. Everything else is... everything else. Once you start considering factors other than relative player grade, you're outside of BAP.

[Dcat]

5 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

I think it's crazy for this piece to suggest that Crowder being on the roster would make the Moore pick "seem superfluous" when Crowder is in the last year of his deal

Crowder is 27 and could easily be signed to a longer contract if JD wanted it.  It was "superfluous" in the literal sense in that we had more dire needs than an inside-WR.  At first the failure to trade down in rd 2 drove me crazy.  Took 24-48 hrs to see that Moore can be a very special pick and was worth it despite bigger needs elsewhere.

[sec101row23]

1 minute ago, Lith said:

It was the approach of a scout.  He knew how to scout players and it seemed as if he evaluated them as individuals without regard for how to build a team.  H never learned that there is a difference between scouting players & building a team.

True.  Each evaluation was in a vacuum.  He also used so many resources on interior players (S, ILB, RB, DT)  and never really invested or addressed the higher priority positions.  

[sec101row23]

1 minute ago, genot said:

BS. Should have seen it coming.

The signs were definitely there.  

[Jetsfan80]

5 minutes ago, jgb said:

What other strategies are there beyond:

1. take the best player considering need; or 

2. take the best player without considering need.

Is there some third-way I'm not aware of? Taking the worst player at a position of not-need? If we agree these two categories capture the entire universe of draft strategies, then only one can be "BAP" -- #2. Everything else is... everything else. Once you start considering factors another than relative player grade, you're outside of BAP.

 

You're right.  BAP with positional importance considered is the only correct approach.  I'm not sure what these other numbskulls have been doing but its not proper drafting. Preaching to the choir here.

You must have noticed by now that no self-respecting, decent GM has ever uttered the words "best available player" when justifying a pick.  There's a good reason for that.  Because no other approach to drafting makes sense.  You always take the BAP, preferably at a premium position, and go from there.

[jgb]

2 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

You're right.  BAP with positional importance considered is the only correct approach.  I'm not sure what these other numbskulls have been doing but its not proper drafting. Preaching to the choir here.

You must have noticed by now that no self-respecting, decent GM has ever uttered the words "best available player" when justifying a pick.  There's a good reason for that.  Because no other approach to drafting makes sense.

You just wanted to prove me wrong about changing minds on the internet. You sly devil.

[Augustiniak]

19 minutes ago, sec101row23 said:

The contrast between what JD has done when drafting a QB in the top 3 and what Maccagnan did is night and day.   I’m not sure a GM in this league had a worse 5 year run than Maccagnan did, it truly was an embarrassment.  

Mccagnan is just another failed gm who couldn’t understand that when he became a gm he was no longer a true scout, that he had to make decisions that would help the entire team.  Mccagnan’s mindset appears to have been to draft players in round 1 who had a low bust potential and sign expensive FAs to appease the media and fan base.  He had no concept of how to assemble talent to improve chances of winning.  

[Jetsfan80]

Just now, jgb said:

You just wanted to prove me wrong about changing minds on the internet. You sly devil.

[Larz]

Giving a rookie QB help?  
 

[genot]

14 minutes ago, Lith said:

It was the approach of a scout.  He knew how to scout players and it seemed as if he evaluated them as individuals without regard for how to build a team.  H never learned that there is a difference between scouting players & building a team.

How can you draft a QB with the expectation he'll be the face of the franchise for 10+ yrs and not have a plan to build around him. The one thing i'll say is that in some of the drafts Mac was involved in, the o-line talent wasn't as rich as it has been the last two years. Irregardless, he needed to find a way to get some real talent in front of his newly drafted QB.

[jetsons]

30 minutes ago, jgb said:

This is where BAP leads you. No strategy, no plan. Set the player rankings and go take a nap.

BAP works when your team is already set like KC... their GM did just that this year... but a team on a rebuild it just spells disaster. 

[nycdan]

27 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

BAP:  Fine strategy.

BAP without taking into account premium positions / positional importance:  Terrible strategy.

It's not just that.  It's that when BAP on your board never comes up OL for 3 consecutive years, and as a result, you never draft one, then you have to accept that you're a complete f*king idiot.

One 3rd round OL in 3 years of drafting.

Complete....f*king.....idiot

[JohnnyLV]

30 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

I think it's crazy for this piece to suggest that Crowder being on the roster would make the Moore pick "seem superfluous" when Crowder is in the last year of his deal

Also in terms of the offensive scheme there was a big hole with a lack of a big YAC guy which is key to our offense, will open up the outside and the more skilled players and outlets for Wilson will speed his development.

[Doggin94it]

31 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

BAP:  Fine strategy.

BAP without taking into account premium positions / positional importance:  Terrible strategy.

 

28 minutes ago, jgb said:

What other strategies are there beyond:

1. take the best player considering need; or 

2. take the best player without considering need.

Is there some third-way I'm not aware of? Taking the worst player at a position of not-need? If we agree these two categories capture the entire universe of draft strategies, then only one can be "BAP" -- #2. Everything else is... everything else. Once you start considering factors other than relative player grade, you're outside of BAP.

Yes. Take the best player without considering need when the talent gap is huge or the player plays a premium position (for example, if Lawrence Taylor is on the board, you take him even if your current edge rushers are pro-bowlers and you badly need a safety; you take Peyton Manning even if you already have a competent starter at QB).  For anything else (moderate talent gap or non-premium position), you factor in need

27 minutes ago, Dcat said:

Crowder is 27 and could easily be signed to a longer contract if JD wanted it.  It was "superfluous" in the literal sense in that we had more dire needs than an inside-WR.  At first the failure to trade down in rd 2 drove me crazy.  Took 24-48 hrs to see that Moore can be a very special pick and was worth it despite bigger needs elsewhere.

Yes, for this season, Moore won't add much over and above what Crowder would have. But Moore on a rookie contract (2.2M per or so, at his slot) vs. a re-signed Crowder at 10M per is a huge difference moving forward, and that's without even considering that Moore's floor is probably Crowder and his ceiling is way higher. Yes, need is important. But if you're building a team, and not a SB contender right now, "need" means more than "for this season"; these picks get 4-year contracts, that's the window of "need" to evaluate.

[jgb]

11 minutes ago, jetsons said:

BAP works when your team is already set like KC... their GM did just that this year... but a team on a rebuild it just spells disaster. 

I will grant that if your team has no holes going BAP won't destroy it.

[jgb]

4 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

 

Yes. Take the best player without considering need when the talent gap is huge or the player plays a premium position (for example, if Lawrence Taylor is on the board, you take him even if your current edge rushers are pro-bowlers and you badly need a safety; you take Peyton Manning even if you already have a competent starter at QB).  For anything else (moderate talent gap or non-premium position), you factor in need

 

Is this situation you are still considering need. You're just assessing that the talent gap tilts the balance so much that you go for the more talented player despite it not being a need position.

[Long Island Leprechaun]

34 minutes ago, jgb said:

What other strategies are there beyond:

1. take the best player considering need; or 

2. take the best player without considering need.

Is there some third-way I'm not aware of? Taking the worst player at a position of not-need? If we agree these two categories capture the entire universe of draft strategies, then only one can be "BAP" -- #2. Everything else is... everything else. Once you start considering factors other than relative player grade, you're outside of BAP.

Well, there's a difference between a generic BAP in Kiper world and BAP that fits a particular system. So as long as by "need" you are nuancing that wrinkle you are correct. Also, because of system differences, your allocation of draft resources changes (i.e., zone CB vs. man CB). The puzzle is a lot more complicated than just picking the best overall rated player for a position. 

[Dcat]

8 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

 

Yes, for this season, Moore won't add much over and above what Crowder would have. But Moore on a rookie contract (2.2M per or so, at his slot) vs. a re-signed Crowder at 10M per is a huge difference moving forward, and that's without even considering that Moore's floor is probably Crowder and his ceiling is way higher. Yes, need is important. But if you're building a team, and not a SB contender right now, "need" means more than "for this season"; these picks get 4-year contracts, that's the window of "need" to evaluate.

Agree with this.  Moore's ceiling is way higher than Jamison Crowder's.  But Crowder, nevertheless, is a fine NFL inside WR with a year left on the contract.  Re-upping him with all the cash and cap space the jets have and will have for the next few years would have been easy.  It was NOT a position of need. But it was BPA at a premium position with the potential to replace a good player with a stud.  My initial reaction (that lingered for a couple of days at least) was that unless it was a dire need, JD should have traded down in round 2 hopefully recouping a mid-late 3rd rounder. Not sure why, but it took me too long to acknowledge that he was in JDs top 25 and at that point no one else came close at 34.

[C Mart]

1 hour ago, sec101row23 said:

Agreed.  Maccagnan never had a plan as to how to build a roster and where to allocate his resources.   It was such a scattered approach that made little sense.  

IIRC after he was fired it was reported Mcc wouldn’t let the position coaches give their input to scouts which makes no sense. 

Correction: Mccagnan didn’t want the HC input. Makes no sense. 
 

From that former DN reporter may 2019:
 

The dynamic between Maccagnan and Gase during the team’s pre-draft meetings was odd. Gase badly wanted to share his opinions on what types of players he was looking for in his system during these organizational discussions, but remained quiet, according to sources. Maccagnan didn’t ask the coach to share his evaluations during those sessions.

The reason? The general manager didn’t want Gase to adversely influence his scouts’ evaluations, according to sources.

It was a curious approach that understandably angered Gase, who simply wanted to provide more information and depth on player prototypes that made sense for his schemes so that he would be on the same page with the guys who had spent the past year or so studying college players.

“It pissed Adam off,” a team source said. “Mike didn’t want him to speak up too much. It’s a weird philosophy.”

Gase shared his thoughts on players to Maccagnan in smaller meetings, but the notion that scouts, by and large, were kept in the dark about how the head coach felt about draft prospects should have ticked him off.

Maccagnan, who had the same philosophy with Todd Bowles, was bent on not having the scouts swayed by the head coach. It was a counterproductive approach that only served to alienate Gase, who expressed his frustrations in myriad ways to many people in league circles.