PDA

View Full Version : Spending High Draft Picks on Younger Players



flippy
10-07-2010, 04:06 PM
Tomlin's track record of selecting younger players that need time to develop is starting to pay off with guys like Timmons and Mendy. These 2 are turning into 2 of the best at their respective positions.

But at the same time, have we overpaid on their rookie contracts? And will this in turn force us to overpay on their second contracts?

Right now it seems like a good problem. And the 20 year olds from the current draft have good entrenched starters in front of them.

But would it be better for our picks to develop faster than they have so we get more value/contribution out of them sooner?

Or is there a method to this madness in taking guys behind good starters and giving them time to develop?

It's probably going to be a few more years until we fully understand the economics of this strategy. Will it be for the best?

The way Tomlin in sticking to this strategy, there could be a new dynamic in play that gives the Steelers a competitive edge.

Shawn
10-07-2010, 04:13 PM
I don't think we overpaid for these guys contracts. They were in line with their respective draft picks. With that said, if you don't need immediate impact position players its a smart move to roll with the 20 yos. They generally have less wear and tear and can play longer at a high level. It adds increased value to your draft picks because you have to replace players less often.

sentinel33
10-07-2010, 04:23 PM
The Steelers have been drafting young players with high picks for years. You can go all the way back to when pittsburgh drafted Troy. We have drafted an underclassmen with the first pick in every draft EXCEPT '09 when we took Hood. This years draft was particularly excessive drafting underclassmen. While i dont advocate taking youth over talent and experience, the 5 players we drafted that were underclassmen(Pouncey,Worilds,Gibson,Dwyer and Brown) all made the team. And if they havent contributed to the team yet, they will. each one of these guys should be around for contract number two. Colbert and company set the standard along with a few other teams when it comes to the draft.

Oviedo
10-07-2010, 04:48 PM
I think there is a major advantage in that the team controls their development both physically and technique wise for a couple of years versus trusting a hundred different colleges to do it and then likely having to do the same development once they got to the Steelers as a 22 or 23 year old.

Dee Dub
10-07-2010, 07:35 PM
Tomlin's track record of selecting younger players that need time to develop is starting to pay off with guys like Timmons and Mendy. These 2 are turning into 2 of the best at their respective positions.

But at the same time, have we overpaid on their rookie contracts? And will this in turn force us to overpay on their second contracts?

Right now it seems like a good problem. And the 20 year olds from the current draft have good entrenched starters in front of them.

But would it be better for our picks to develop faster than they have so we get more value/contribution out of them sooner?

Or is there a method to this madness in taking guys behind good starters and giving them time to develop?

It's probably going to be a few more years until we fully understand the economics of this strategy. Will it be for the best?

The way Tomlin in sticking to this strategy, there could be a new dynamic in play that gives the Steelers a competitive edge.

Flip, the objective has been for the Steelers to draft the best player on the board. Age wasn’t a factor. And the contract and overpaying is what is wrong with the current CBA. Based on the slot system each first round pick is paid accordingly. Right or wrong.

Dee Dub
10-07-2010, 07:39 PM
The Steelers have been drafting young players with high picks for years. You can go all the way back to when pittsburgh drafted Troy. We have drafted an underclassmen with the first pick in every draft EXCEPT '09 when we took Hood. This years draft was particularly excessive drafting underclassmen. While i dont advocate taking youth over talent and experience, the 5 players we drafted that were underclassmen(Pouncey,Worilds,Gibson,Dwyer and Brown) all made the team. And if they havent contributed to the team yet, they will. each one of these guys should be around for contract number two. Colbert and company set the standard along with a few other teams when it comes to the draft.

Again…the age factor wasn’t the objective. You can be sure on draft day when the Steelers traded up to get Troy…they weren’t saying…”Hey lets trade up to get Troy because is an underclassman.

Best player on the board.

Chadman
10-07-2010, 07:42 PM
While Dee Dub is right- BPA is certainly the 'catch cry', it's somewhat 'coincidental' that so many draft choices are such young players.

Do you believe in coincidence?

Chadman doesn't.

One other factor to keep in play- if you get the player younger, it means that the dreaded 'Contract 3' which usually coincides with overpaying for players on the downside of their career, is actually a viable option. You don't want to give a 33 year old a 5 year deal, but if that same player is 30 or 31? suddenly it's not as big a risk.

And the Steelers rarely lose a player they don't want to lose.

papillon
10-08-2010, 06:57 AM
While Dee Dub is right- BPA is certainly the 'catch cry', it's somewhat 'coincidental' that so many draft choices are such young players.

Do you believe in coincidence?

Chadman doesn't.

One other factor to keep in play- if you get the player younger, it means that the dreaded 'Contract 3' which usually coincides with overpaying for players on the downside of their career, is actually a viable option. You don't want to give a 33 year old a 5 year deal, but if that same player is 30 or 31? suddenly it's not as big a risk.

And the Steelers rarely lose a player they don't want to lose.

This is an excellent point that I haven't thought of at all. It's at this time that sentimentality sets in and teams feel obligated to retain players and pay them for past performance rather than what they can do now. Good thinking Chadman you get one of these anyhow. :moon :P

Pappy

Chachi
10-08-2010, 08:30 AM
I would say we haven't overpaid. Tomlin's picks are guided, somewhat, by the very nature of our teams style of play and current roster. Most of it is Tomlin's understanding of how this team works.

High (top 2) Defensive picks of Tomlin era: Timmons, Woodley, Hood, Worlids. 3 player to be LBs and one DL. It is the nature of our 3-4 "zone blitz" defense that these positions purposely need development in order to do it right. So, by definition, any player we pick for these defensive positions require a heavy stage of development, so, I wouldn't consider these picks as a "draft tendency" so much as a requirement of the system we employ. The fact we had more than capable starter in front of them, which allowed for the development to take place and not be rushed, made the picks all the more smart.

High Offensive picks: Mendy, Sweed, Urbik, Pouncy. Mendy and Sweed were considered great picks, some even said at the time, steals of the draft, and picked for immediate contribution. Mendy didn't seem to need development so much as recovery time from a busted shoulder. Sweed, well, he turned out to be a bust but he was also seen as an immediate impact player. Urbik and Pouncy were both seen as immediate impact guys especially with the lack of a quality OL.

TL;DR- LB and DL are developmental by nature in our system and were smartly picked with starters already in position; offensive picks were chosen for immediate contribution though it did not always work out accordingly.

flippy
10-08-2010, 01:07 PM
Some interesting points throughout this thread. I hadn't thought about the 3rd contract Chadman - interesting thought.

I know we're typically going for BPA and if it's at a position of need, great. But it's interesting how many youngsters we're getting these days. And it's also interesting how long it's taking for guys to come in and contribute.

I guess now that we're a couple years into this drafting style, we should hopefully start seeing dividends year in and year out.

feltdizz
10-08-2010, 01:21 PM
Some interesting points throughout this thread. I hadn't thought about the 3rd contract Chadman - interesting thought.

I know we're typically going for BPA and if it's at a position of need, great. But it's interesting how many youngsters we're getting these days. And it's also interesting how long it's taking for guys to come in and contribute.

I guess now that we're a couple years into this drafting style, we should hopefully start seeing dividends year in and year out.

When you have a ton of talent on D it makes sense to develop players. I think 17 teams our using the 3-4 right now. I bet you at least half go back to the 4-3 in the next 2 years.

I think bringing guys in this young actually saves us money... I think most players are willing to take a little less to stay with our team. You get a Plax or a Santonio every once in a while but most first round WR's are b!tches.

Shawn
10-08-2010, 01:30 PM
While Dee Dub is right- BPA is certainly the 'catch cry', it's somewhat 'coincidental' that so many draft choices are such young players.

Do you believe in coincidence?

Chadman doesn't.

One other factor to keep in play- if you get the player younger, it means that the dreaded 'Contract 3' which usually coincides with overpaying for players on the downside of their career, is actually a viable option. You don't want to give a 33 year old a 5 year deal, but if that same player is 30 or 31? suddenly it's not as big a risk.

And the Steelers rarely lose a player they don't want to lose.

$$$

Oviedo
10-08-2010, 02:23 PM
Some interesting points throughout this thread. I hadn't thought about the 3rd contract Chadman - interesting thought.

I know we're typically going for BPA and if it's at a position of need, great. But it's interesting how many youngsters we're getting these days. And it's also interesting how long it's taking for guys to come in and contribute.

I guess now that we're a couple years into this drafting style, we should hopefully start seeing dividends year in and year out.

When you have a ton of talent on D it makes sense to develop players. I think 17 teams our using the 3-4 right now. I bet you at least half go back to the 4-3 in the next 2 years.

I think bringing guys in this young actually saves us money... I think most players are willing to take a little less to stay with our team. You get a Plax or a Santonio every once in a while but most first round WR's are b!tches.

Another benefit of bringing in a player on defense early is that with 17 other teams playing the 3-4 we beat them to the punch getting talent because we can afford to develop players and many of them need immediate impact players.

Chachi
10-08-2010, 06:32 PM
I think the age issue is more realted to, IIRC, more underclassmen than ever declaring for the draft. So, by just the sheer numbers, odds are we draft younger. The money is there and they are getting smarter every day. If you can go early, go early. There is not one single example of a player staying for their senior year and drastically improving their draft status (i.e. from a top 20 to top 10). I could be wrong, but I don't think there is an example.

Can anyone think of one?

NJ-STEELER
10-08-2010, 09:50 PM
i've wondered what may have been had the underclassmen we drafted played another year of school. i think this has helped us tremendously over the last everal years.


can you imagine where guys like troy, ben, mendy, timmy, and heath would have been drafted had they played their senior year