Late Rounds-6th and 7th Theories

[casmith07]

Seriously. Like there are great solid can''t miss guys in these rounds just sitting there.

Every one of the other 31 teams always hits on their 6th and 7th rounders. #TRUTH.

 

[Idgit]

FWIW, right after Garrett made those comments, Stephen chimed in and mentioned the first two players they took in the 6th were players they had 4th round grades on. Garrett backtracked to say that they take the players with higher round grades who were left on the board first. When those were gone, they go with the guys they think are fliers who might be more difficult to convince to come in via UDFA.

Conceptually, I don't have a problem with the idea that not much, or nothing at all, really separates a 6th or 7th rounder from a street free agent. I think all the teams tend to clump players in tiers anyway, and the idea that the clumps get bigger as you get to the smaller schools or the players with physical or other limitations makes sense to me. At some point you throw them in the bulk bin and rummage around to see if you can find something you think you can use. Does that happen at pick 200, instead of at 230? Who knows. It's probably something that varies quite a bit from year to year, anyway.

 

[Miller]

I'm just speaking generally, not to any specific poster. You might not get that upset about it but you have to admit that it's funny to see.

There is a craziness that comes with the draft, yes!! We don't know what will happen with there guys. That's why I was tying to talk philosophy but rarely works

 

[casmith07]

There is a craziness that comes with the draft, yes!! We don't know what will happen with there guys. That's why I was tying to talk philosophy but rarely works

It's a gamble. Literally none of these players we know will do a damn thing at the pro level. That's the exciting part. And also why I just don't get it when people freak out about draft picks, haha.

Teams passed like 225 times on Tony Romo. We never know who will be great and who won't.

 

[Risen Star]

I would say when you've been so unsuccessful in the mid to late rounds for years you might want to re-examine your philosophy instead of smugly filing into the war room every year like you've got everything figured out.

But that's just me.

 

[Common Sense]

Our policy has definitely been effective. Look at all those 6th and 7th rounders who have turned into super stars in Dallas over the past 10 years.

The top two players drafted in the 6th and 7th rounds over the last 10 years were Dwayne Harris and James Hanna. Not exactly superstars.

 

[BigStar]

I don't think anyone is saying there are guys that are can't miss just sitting there. But do you attempt to use your scouts and pick guys that may fill needs, even as backups, or just flyers where a majority will never sniff the field? There are teams that seem to have a better batting average sniffing these guys out. I just don't think we are deep as Jerry thinks we are so would rather take D chances than Rico/RB chances.

People will just use straw man theory on ya non stop here. Too logical and all, etc.

 

[Doomsay]

1/4 of all starters originate from 6th round and below. To suggest that the category is irrelevant, is curious at best.

 

[AbeBeta]

Every one of the other 31 teams always hits on their 6th and 7th rounders. #TRUTH.

I stand corrected!

 

[Floatyworm]

Personally...I'd take a shot @ someone @ a position of need.....unless someone is on the board that clearly has fallen...and shouldn't be there. Case in point...Why we didn't take Tyvis Powell SS Ohio St. late... to give Barry Church some competion is beyond me.

The only theory I can come up that makes any sense is the league is fixed...and it doesn't matter who is on your team.

 

[arglebargle]

I would say when you've been so unsuccessful in the mid to late rounds for years you might want to re-examine your philosophy instead of smugly filing into the war room every year like you've got everything figured out.

But that's just me.

Yep, it's just you. As always, feel free to show us the teams that consistently hit on bunches of their late round picks.

There are always a couple of guys who do well out of that pool, but it's even more of a crapshoot than usual.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

I would say when you've been so unsuccessful in the mid to late rounds for years you might want to re-examine your philosophy instead of smugly filing into the war room every year like you've got everything figured out.

But that's just me.

Who are all these teams that are so successful in the late rounds? I've always wondered about that. It seems to be a commonly known truth but somehow I missed it.

Also Will has only been in charge with two drafts now. Let's see how he does.

 

[BAT]

Personally...I'd take a shot @ someone @ a position of need.....unless someone is on the board that clearly has fallen...and shouldn't be there. Case in point...Why we didn't take Tyvis Powell SS Ohio St. late... to give Barry Church some competion is beyond me.

The only theory I can come up that makes any sense is the league is fixed...and it doesn't matter who is on your team.

Because Powell wasn't a Church clone like Frazier.

 

[casmith07]

Who are all these teams that are so successful in the late rounds? I've always wondered about that. It seems to be a commonly known truth but somehow I missed it.

Also Will has only been in charge with two drafts now. Let's see how he does.

All of them. Every other team is successful every single draft in the late rounds.

 

[Nightman]

I would say when you've been so unsuccessful in the mid to late rounds for years you might want to re-examine your philosophy instead of smugly filing into the war room every year like you've got everything figured out.

But that's just me.

It is like they are looking at a different list of players late in the draft

Their flyers aren't even on the radar of most draft-niks and they almost never pounce on guys that slip

They always say "we had a fourth grade" on him

 

[Miller]

Who are all these teams that are so successful in the late rounds? I've always wondered about that. It seems to be a commonly known truth but somehow I missed it.

Also Will has only been in charge with two drafts now. Let's see how he does.

No surprise but the Steelers is one...I'm sure you can easily find them through how consistent they are year after year. As the article points out, you are likely to find a higher percentage of starts in Rds 1-2 but that doesn't mean you don't seriously work the late rounds. I also think it would be foolish to think that ANY team retains a high number of lower picks overall. Teams resign high picks and GMs won't admit mistakes. These guys are supposed to be starters. But the point I was making in the OP was why not go for players late that fit more of our needs...D specifically... and see how you hit vs really taking a massive leap where there is almost no hope for a guy even making practice squad...RB/non football player. I think our current philosophy is so boom or bust that its almost throw away.

http://triblive.com/sports/steelers/8188755-74/rounds-steelers-players

“Time has proven that. ... So it's our job to try to stack them and find them and coach them and develop them, and we hope they turn into great players.”

A Trib Total Media analysis of 10 Steelers drafts from 2003-12 (allowing a minimum of three seasons for a player to show his worth) demonstrated what should be intuitive but nonetheless is enlightening: While the organization was more likely to snag a star player in the first two rounds and its “hit-miss” rate was better, players taken in rounds 3-7 accounted for almost as many starts and 50 percent more NFL games played in the years that followed.

Among players the Steelers drafted between 2008-12, there are more Pro Bowl appearances from those selected after the second round (five) than in the first two rounds (four).

“The odds are against you to get players in those later rounds; that's why it's hard to do,” Casserly said. “The teams that do, they're the ones that win.”

Sounds like a different philosophy

 

[Toruk_Makto]

No surprise but the Steelers is one...I'm sure you can easily find them through how consistent they are year after year. As the article points out, you are likely to find a higher percentage of starts in Rds 1-2 but that doesn't mean you don't seriously work the late rounds. I also think it would be foolish to think that ANY team retains a high number of lower picks overall. Teams resign high picks and GMs won't admit mistakes. These guys are supposed to be starters. But the point I was making in the OP was why not go for players late that fit more of our needs...D specifically... and see how you hit vs really taking a massive leap where there is almost no hope for a guy even making practice squad...RB/non football player. I think our current philosophy is so boom or bust that its almost throw away.

http://triblive.com/sports/steelers/8188755-74/rounds-steelers-players







Sounds like a different philosophy

A few things...this just talks about the Steelers and doesn't add context to how they are the same or different for other teams.

Next, i'd actually be concerned at their lack of production in the first couple rounds. Missing on those picks are most damaging as they are most expensive and you invest in them longer.

I've said this before about the success we've had in the early rounds (specifically round 1)....doing the common thing uncommonly well is a valuable thing that is often overlooked.

 

[Trendnet]

1/4 of all starters originate from 6th round and below. To suggest that the category is irrelevant, is curious at best.

That's more like 15% and not 25%, with the filter set to players drafted in 2009 to 2015 and considered a teams primary starter for 1 season or more.

 

[waldoputty]

Hard to get in FA also means you think if you don't draft him that someone else will.

You certainly do have to weigh that and you likely have several guys you want and need to prioritize.

Look at Rawls last year.
We could have drafted him in the 7th round.
I think Jerry is thinking about Rawls when making this statement.

 

[conner01]

I'm not a fan of drafting need in any round. Grant it weigh need if all else is equal but not as the top factor. Too me the end of the draft is where taking risks have a low price and possibly high reward.