SportsDork.com

Eagles Draft: The Myth(?) that the Eagles Suck at the Draft

Feb 23, 2009 Eagles Draft

You hear the complaint all the time, even if it’s been tempered ever so slightly by mini-man Jackson — “the Eagles don’t know how to draft”.  The notion that the Birds are somehow worse than the rest of the NFL on draft day has been debunked by many people, but the belief lingers like a stale you know what.

So allow me a personal attempt at an honest study.  This will kind of be like the post from last week where I compared the Birds receivers to several other guys in the ‘09 playoffs.  But this time I’m going to compare Andy Reid’s draft classes against the rest of the “final four” — the Steelers, Cardinals, and Ravens.

If the Eagles’ drafts are sub-standard, it would make sense that the “best” teams in the league ( or at least those that advance the farthest in the playoffs since that is sort of the goal) should compare most favorably against the Birds.

Here are some of the questions I hoped to answer:

• Did the Eagles draft significantly worse, better, or about the same in recent history as the other teams playing in the championship games?
• Who drafted the most “elite” guys?
• Were the Eagles better or worse in the earlier or later rounds than the other teams?
• How much of an impact did the ‘07 and ‘08 classes have on their teams?

The most arbitrary decision to make here is when to start the study — 3 years back?  5?  What is recent history, exactly.  I decided on four years. Since this is the average contract length for a rookies nowadays, it seems like a reasonable period of time to decide upon.

To be able to quantify success or failure for each pick, I’m going to classify players into five groups and assign each classification a value on a point system.  This idea is robbed entirely from the meanguy’s work, I’m hoping he doesn’t mind.

Players drafted but who have never started or have no significant impact on their team get a 0.  Players who have had spot starts, contributed in a small way and are still on an NFL roster get a 1.  Players who are certifiable NFL starters or otherwise contribute heavily to their team get a 2, and players who are “playmakers” or elite level guys get a 3.

Before we begin, a few things to consider.  First, it wasn’t easy to classify some of the guys.  Keep in mind this is totally subjective, and for a guy like Omar Gaither I could understand the reasons for classifying him both a “1″ and “2″.  I evaluated each guy on his merits and simply made my own call.

Next, I know it’s especially difficult to render judgements on the ‘08 class.  But that’s kind of the whole point.  Which teams are finding guys who make an impact immediately?

Let’s start with the Birds:

Now, the Ravens:

The Cardinals:

Finally, the Steelers:

Let’s start answering some questions:

Who drafted the most “elite” guys?
By my subjective ratings, the Steelers had one (Woodley), the Ravens one (Ngata), and the Eagles one (Cole).  The Cardinals had none.

Did the Eagles draft significantly worse, better, or about the same in recent history as the other teams playing in the championship games?
This isn’t entirely clear.  Here is what we know.  The Eagles had more picks (37) than any of the other teams.  The overall average per pick was .65, better than the Steelers (.62) and Cardinals (.54), but worse than the Ravens (.71).

The Eagles drafted 16 bonafide NFL players (non-zeros).  That is more than the rest of the teams.  Of those 16 players, 9 rated as “1’s” — marginal players.  The average score for these 16 was 1.5.  The Steelers drafted 12 “non-zeros” with a rating of 1.67.  The Ravens drafted 15 with a score of 1.6.  The Cardinals drafted 11 for a score of 1.2.

What this tells you is the Eagles have a respectable “hit-rate” with players — they don’t whiff on many picks.  But they draft at least a few more players of marginal talents than the Ravens or Steelers.  This might make sense given the extra picks the Birds have had and that in two of our four years they didn’t draft in the first round.  These decisions are open for criticism, of course.

Did the Eagles draft better or worse in the earlier/later rounds than the other teams?
The Eagles appear to be measurably better in the later rounds than the other teams.  They were the only team to grab an elite player in rounds 4-7 (Cole).  They had 7 “non-zero” players in the later rounds, more than any others (Ravens 6, Steelers 4, Cardinals 4).

On the other hand, their average score for players selected in the first three rounds is .93.  The Ravens average score for their early round draftees is 1.13.  The Steelers score was 1.08.  The Cardinals were terrible.

How much of an impact did the ‘07 and ‘08 classes have on their teams this year?
The Eagles got vital contributions from Stewart Bradley (’07) and DeSean Jackson (’08).  The Ravens got it from a guard (Grubbs ‘07) and of course, Joe Flacco (’08).  The Steelers drafted both Woodley and Timmons in ‘07, and the Cardinals got help from Steve Breaston (’07) and Rodgers-Cromartie (’08).

It looks to me that the Eagles hold their own, but have some interesting problems.  They clearly have a strategy of acquiring as many picks as possible, and whatever manipulations (compensatory picks, trades, etc) they are using to achieve that goal are being executed well.  They are as good as anyone at identifying NFL talent.  You would think with all of the extra players the Birds would whiff more than other teams, but that does not appear to be the case.

On the other hand, the strategy of trading out of the first round has had predictable consequences.  The Steelers and Ravens have gotten more bang out of the first few rounds than the Birds.

That all hopefully turns around this year with the two first round picks.