The New Orleans Saints Roster Broken Down by Draft Position
by Dave Cariello on Sep 7, 2009 6:00 AM CDT
Email
PrintOne of the aspects of the Sean Payton era that most Saints fans can all agree has been positive is the coaching staff's ability to find undervalued, overlooked football players who surprisingly turn into production machines and worthy of a starting position.
Most of us would agree with that, right?
Pierre Thomas, Lance Moore and Marques Colston are all great examples of players who have overcome expectations and draft status to become major contributors; Rod Harper appears to be the next generation to continue that trend. This was a fact that my friend and I were discussing during the Saints final pre-season contest against the Dolphins last Thursday night when we realized something: All of those aforementioned players are on the offensive side of the ball. Aren't there any defensive diamonds in the rough that have pleasantly surprised Who Dat Nation and become invaluable members of this team?
At first glance, it wouldn't appear so. Only Jo-Lonn Dunbar and Jonathan Casillas initially come to mind and neither has yet to play a significant role. So does this mean anything? With the final roster now set and the regular season about to get underway, what better time to dig a little deeper, analyze the roster and find out if there really is any disparity between the overall draft pedigree of both the offense and defense.
To start figuring it out, I came up with my own system of measuring. All players were assigned a number equal to the round they were drafted. Hence, Reggie Bush would be a one and Marques Colston is seven. Any undrafted player entering the league was assigned the number eight. Therefore, the higher the number the better the player if we were to work under the assumption that the relationship between draft position and talent is directly proportional. With twenty five players on each side of the ball (not including Carney, Morstead and Kyle) the average draft position for both offense and defense are as follows:
Offense: 4.92
Defense: 4.88
On the whole, the offense and defense are almost dead even. Nothing peculiar about that accept it's lack of peculiarity.
But let's take it a little further and break it down for just the starters. When using the official depth chart from the New Orleans Saints official website with Reggie Bush as the running back, the draft position breakdown works out like this:
Offense: 3.45
Defense: 3.00
It makes sense that the numbers here are lower than above, assuming your higher drafted players are better and more likely to be starters. But there is still only a slight difference between the offense and defense but not really enough to warrant any conclusion.
Change out Reggie Bush for Pierre Thomas and Devery Henderson for Lance Moore, however, and the difference becomes much more significant:
Offense: 4.64
Defense: 3.00
These results are most interesting. It's amazing that Payton and Co. have put together such a potent offense comprised, on average, of players chosen from the second half of the draft yet the defense has struggled even with players of higher average draft position. Given that the offense is easily the better half of this football team, it's safe to say they get more done with less.
All of this, however, begs the question: Why? What accounts for this apparent difference? Are the coaches just a better judge of offensive talent? Does this say anything about the teams past drafts? Can it just be pure luck and coincidence? Is this a bad time to judge the defense, as they're trying to rebuild, and will this change as the team heads into the future with Gregg Williams? Lots here up for discussion and thought. Go ahead and dig in.
40 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
what this model doesn't explain
is why our early-round offensive talent is out-performed by our late-round guys. Marques Colston was awesome by his second year, while Meachem has done zilch in comparison; Pierre Thomas doesn’t even make it on our radar during the draft, but clearly is a superior RB to 2nd-overall-pick Reggie Bush; Andy Alleman (early 3rd rd) isn’t even with the team anymore, but Carl Nicks (late 5th) is a solid starter; Antonio Pittman, whom we traded up to get, wasn’t even in the discussion as a potential 4th RB because we had undrafted guys that were loads better.
I mean, should we (a) only spend early picks on defensive players or (b) trade away all our picks in rounds 1-4 to get tons of late round guys that we can make into an awesome squad? I’m joking, but only half-so—are we lucking into these offensive gems or is our scouting system somehow flawed?
I think where we draft players accourding to where they will be drafted by other teams as well
For instance, if we think Carl Nicks could go in the 7th to someone else, we get him in 5. Even though you think he might do better than another prospect that will get drafted in the 3rd.
Besmirching the reverence of the sport of customer service since Aug 26, 2009
oh
but great post— i’m glad you brought this issue up, and i’m not trying to criticize your analysis—just raising questions about the nature of our success with drafting offensive players
This post raises an interesting question
And one that is much broader than just the Saints.
The entire NFL draft “science” is a crapshoot. No one really knows how a drafted player will actually perform on the field for their career.
A detailed breakdown of all individual teams draft “successes” by round vs. UFA percentages might yield some interesting stats, but we’d still be lacking the elusive answer of “why?”
Correlation can be easily found, but the most useful piece, causality is much, much harder to nail down.
Then you get into which players on our current were drafted by Has-Loo, Mue-Has, or even Ku-Dit…
Another factor is the scouting/acquiring good talent vs. actually coaching that talent. Can we assume that now that we have Mis-Wil-Pay in place, we will draft and coach well on both offense and defense from here on out?
It’s a complicated question, and I haven’t even mentioned injuries yet…
Now I’ll admit that I have done no research on this post, but just thought through aspects of the question(s) posed by Dave, and put up my initial ideas in response.
"I like our back end." -- Mickey Loomis, to Solomon Wilcots and Tim Brando during a press box interview in the 4th Quarter of the Saints-Bengals preseason game.
There aren’t any players left over from the Ditka regime. I believe Willie Whitehead was the last of those Mohicans. At last count, there were six from the Haslett regime:
Jammal Brown
Charles Grant
Devery Henderson
Jamar Nesbit
Will Smith
Jon Stinchcomb
"It feels like a tiny prick " -Reggie Bush
I had a feeling you'd be the first to pony up the facts for that point
thanks
"I like our back end." -- Mickey Loomis, to Solomon Wilcots and Tim Brando during a press box interview in the 4th Quarter of the Saints-Bengals preseason game.
by Hans Petersen on Sep 7, 2009 3:25 PM CDT up reply actions
The task of figuring out the answer is the job of football GMs and coaches
each and every day, and if anyone solves it, then they’ll have the recipe for continued and enduring success. (See Pittsburgh Steelers)
"I like our back end." -- Mickey Loomis, to Solomon Wilcots and Tim Brando during a press box interview in the 4th Quarter of the Saints-Bengals preseason game.
What about the will of the player?
We have all seen early draft pics come into the league with a swelled head. I think when someone is taken late in the draft or especially when picked up undrafted, that they try to be better.
I’m sitting at home the Monday after the draft. My phone rings and it is the Saints calling me. Hell yeah!!! I’m going to go into that camp and play harder than I have ever played. I am going to listen in team meetings like I’ve never listened before, and I am going to study my playbook and my position like I’ve never studied before.
I honestly believe it isn’t the talent but how hard to the players work.
Welcome to CSC!!!
Wanna say something? Sign up! It's free!
by Dave Cariello on Sep 7, 2009 10:41 AM CDT up reply actions
Read this
Scroll down to what Drew Brees says about Pierre Thomas. http://www.nola.com/saints/index.ssf/2009/09/new_orleans_saints_quarterback_22.html
read that...
hope Pierre’s knee isn’t too bad
Wanna say something? Sign up! It's free!
by Dave Cariello on Sep 7, 2009 11:27 AM CDT up reply actions
It's the age old debate,
talent vs. scheme. You can load up every position (hypothetically) with first-rounders and get your lunch money taken every Sunday. However, you can load up with late-rounders and a great scheme and be the bully on the block, i.e. Steelers, Patriots. So to end the debate I have just two words: Gary Gibb.
It’s both talent and scheme. If in the same best-suited scheme, the more talented player is going to outperform the less talented one. Keywords: same, best-suited. Not all players are best-suited for a particular scheme. It varies, based on their individual strengths and weaknesses, physical stature, etc. Of two players with equal talent in different schemes, the one in the better-suited scheme is going to outperform the other. There’s really no debating that.
"It feels like a tiny prick " -Reggie Bush
just ask JD
he was good in a zone scheme but when he came here to a man to man scheme he faltered.
Superbowl bound!!!...I hope? Go Saints! :D
Very true. That’s something that’s very hard to predict, without being around the players day in and day out. Ty Law has excelled in and out of the Cover 2. Had Ronde Barber been an UFA a few seasons back, I guarantee you, no DC in the league would have thought twice before signing him, despite having played in the same scheme for the majority of his career. It’s a leap of faith a lot of times. Not even the most experienced NFL scout out there can predict what player best fits where without fail.
"It feels like a tiny prick " -Reggie Bush
Yeah but ...
if you’re an established coach you bring in players to fit your scheme. JD shoulda never been signed.
If your a coach brought in, you tend more to twist and tweak your scheme to optimize your personnel. That is if you’re on a one, two or three year plan. If you’re on a five year plan you slowly weed out the players who can’t/won’t succeed in your scheme.
The only successful coach I can remember to contradict this was Don Shula with the 70’s 80’s Dolphins. In the seventies with Kiick and Czonka, they were a running team (mostly). In the eighties with Marino, they passed. Each system taking them to the SB.
by WhoDat_OH on Sep 7, 2009 5:59 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Jason David
didn’t play the Cover 2 at Washington State. What UFA would you have signed that offseason that was a proven starter at the NFL level in man-to-man coverage? Most of those guys are typically retained. The elite ones that aren’t, you wind up breaking the bank for a la Nate Clements. Bottom line is, they rolled the dice, played for value and lost. One year later, they tried again with Gay and a 2nd round pick on Porter. One year later, Greer and a 1st rounder on Jenkins. I don’t think their failures in the secondary are stemming from a lack of error recognition or an effort to correct them. They’ve tried to shake things up and better themselves every season.
"It feels like a tiny prick " -Reggie Bush
Asante Samuel
Hopefully you get what you pay for. Bang for the buck. You want an established shutdown corner it’ll cost ya.
by WhoDat_OH on Sep 7, 2009 7:42 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Different year
Asante Samuel wasn’t a FA until last offseason. David was acquired in 2007. Nate Clements was out of our price range and hasn’t exactly been an textbook example of “bang for the buck” as you put it, in Frisco. For what anyone definitively knew about Jason David at the time, there was nothing wrong with the move. He was a quality player at a position of need and most Saints fans were elated with the acquisition at the time. It would be a little different had they traded Mike McKenzie for him the year prior. The only real knock I have on the Saints regarding Jason David is how long it took them to cut their losses. 32 games is far too long to dance around a multimillion dollar liability.
"It feels like a tiny prick " -Reggie Bush
agreed
everyone thought JD was going to come in and be the best CB we’ve had in a while. I will say that I was elated at the time but after the first season, maybe season in a half he should have been cut even if we did have starters hurt. cut him and grab someone else or let the young guys play.
Superbowl bound!!!...I hope? Go Saints! :D
by skinnykinney on Sep 7, 2009 10:41 PM CDT up reply actions
ok, enough . . .
I’m tired of hearing PT is better than Bush. It’s complete BS. PT may do ONE aspect of running back a little better, but that’s not completely proved yet either. Before you all start spouting 4.8 ypc and all that garbage, read the rest of this post.
Let me start by saying it’s to early and there hasn’t been sufficient evidence on PT’s part to prove or disprove he is a better, more effective runningback than Reggie. Why? Because he hasn’t actually been tested. Everyone will point out the 6 game stretch at the end of last season where he appeared to shine. During that time there was only one team that actually decided it was going to gameplan for stopping the run, and the result was PT rushing for a whopping 34 yards. Don’t believe me . . .
The Saints had 398 rushing attempts last year for an average of 24.9 attempts a game, which ranked them 26th in the league. They had 636 pass attempts for an avergage of 39.8 a game and ranked first in attempts in the league. That means they passed 62% of the time! Prior to PT starting and taking the focal point for those 6 games at the end of the season, the numbers were even more pass oriented at 40.2 attempts a game.
Do you honestly think PT was being gameplanned for? Do you honestly think opposing defenses were concentrating on stopping the run? There were 37 pass attempts a game those 6 games PT played and did “well”, and he averaged 15 rushes a game. Defenses were living in the nickel, or when they were in the 4-3 it was a passing package. There were numerous times he had gigantic holes and was getting to the second level untouched . . . and he’s slow. Defenses aren’t afraid of him, because he’s not a real threat to take it to the house. Bush is, and if he were given the same looks that PT did, he may or may not have shown it.
That being said, my take is the Bush is FAR more talented but Pierre appears to have a better rushing IQ. This year they should TRULY split carries, which will probably shed light on who is the better back, but I honestly think you can’t tell from the current information. From what I’ve seen, the best of Bush is still to come, Pierre won’t make it through the entire season without getting injured, and Mike Bell will probably replace him and never look back. Vegas odds on all that? Probably 120-1, but then, I like longshots . . . I’m a Saints fan afterall.
The people who say, "Winning isn't everything," don't win very often.
Well . . .
If people keep bringing it up, it will keep being revisited. It would be a pretty boring site if we all just agreed.
The people who say, "Winning isn't everything," don't win very often.
I agree
But one point regarding Pierre Thomas: his rushing average in 2007, when he only got 52 carries, was 4.8. His rushing average in 2008, when he got 129 carries, was 4.8. He has been remarkably consistent, and there’s no reason to believe that he wouldn’t continue at that level. And if other teams don’t game plan for him…well, sucks to be them.
"Tell all the killjoys to pound sand." -- Ralph Malbrough
The point is
in that post and yours, we have the same information.
We can revisit it when more games have been played so the sample size is increased for both PT and Reggie. If BOTH can stay healthy enough to amass stats.
by Steve the fan on Sep 7, 2009 3:28 PM CDT up reply actions
It always does seem to my untrained, anecdotal observation that high-round defensive picks produce more quickly and consistently in the NFL than offensive ones. I guess this is kind of an inverse comparison that fits my assertion without proving it.
Maybe the “dark horse with something to prove and nothing to lose” analogy that Dan brought up makes the difference. It makes sense in a street level view way. I don’t know, but it always does make me wish we took those D-linemen and linebackers and safeties that are predicted to go high every year.
Maybe it’s that the offensive high picks always come in with a ton of pressure, and get new systems that are often catered specifically to their skills, that makes it take longer to develop, whereas defensive high picks are brought in to fit into an established system, so they’re usually just filling a hole in a package that everyone is already trained for. For example, if you get a shiny new qb or rb or wr, it changes the way you run your offense, whereas if you get a new de, you just expect to get more pressure out of your existing packages.
I think you’re right, but I think a whole lot of it has to do with natural instincts. A defensive player is all about reading and reacting. That’s something that’s taught early on and if you’re THAT good at it — i.e., good enough to take your game to the pro level as a first day pick, say — odds are pretty good that you’re going to be ahead of the curve. Offense relies on natural ability also, but there’s a lot more molding going on on that side of the ball, in order to effectively run the plays as they’re being drawn up. And even that varies greatly by position. On top of all of that, “success” as it’s generally perceived, is almost entirely dictated by the offense. For example, suppose you took the best WR and the best CB in the draft and lined them up opposite one another with no practice under their belt whatsoever. The QB would call the plays and the WR would be completely lost. He would have no inclination whatsoever what the terminology meant. He’d likely line up in the wrong position, then take off down the field on some random pattern, waving his hand when he’s even the slightest bit open. Odds are the QB isn’t even looking his way, because he’s not where he’s supposed to be. Meanwhile, the CB is mirroring the WR’s every move. To the untrained eye, he appears to be shutting the WR down. If this went on for roughly 30 minutes, anyone who watched the game would say the WR “looked lost”, but the same would never be said of the CB. Not unless he happened to stumble, the QB recognized it and decided that, even though this rookie is doing his own thing, he’s my best chance at a completed pass. Obviously, no player enters a game that raw, but that’s a microcosm of what you’re dealing with, in terms of offense vs defense, generally speaking. On an even playing field, offensive players are ALWAYS going to be behind the eight ball. Fortunately, different levels of talent, scheme compatibility, intelligence, etc., tend to mask a lot of that early on and the gap becomes narrower over time, based on the honing of skills and general experience.
"It feels like a tiny prick " -Reggie Bush
agreed
also, the best skill position players(QB,RB,WR) have the hardest time transitioning to the nfl it seems. They have to be able to learn the system and find the right reads, run the right routes and play against a much better defensive style than the ppl they play in college. That takes getting use to. Defensive ppl, like CBs and D-lineman have it a bit easier. usually, as a CB you’re going to have few assignments in the playbook. man coverage, zone coverage or blitz. Sure, sometimes you do stunts and stuff but that’s about all you get. With a Dlineman you’re going for the QB or whoever has the ball in the backfield. Sure, the O-lineman are better but if you’re, say Sedrick Ellis, the things you were doing in HS and college pretty much stays the same. Get into the backfield and wreak havoc. Whether it’s bullrush, spin moves, swim moves or whatever, you probably already know it. Whereas a RB has to run routes, mesh with his FB and Oline to know what kind of holes you’ll get and how to best react to them. That’s why, imo, they truly don’t truly start to excel untill at least their 3rd year usually. Matt Ryan this past year was ok but not spectacular. In a couple years, just watching how well he has performed thus far, he could quite possibly be a stud.
Superbowl bound!!!...I hope? Go Saints! :D
and one other thing . . .
Despite Bush underperforming, no one can say he came in here with a big head or doesn’t put forth the effort. The guy obviously kills himself in practice and in games, he’s been oddly humble since he came to New Orleans and has contributed tons to the community. He CERTAINLY has had a far better attitude than most picks at his spot in the draft.
The people who say, "Winning isn't everything," don't win very often.
this sounds like a job for...
Nate Silver and the Statistical Analysis Super Friends! Seriously, though, Nate Silver is incredible at looking at numbers on baseball and political polling numbers. He should be part of the future in which we try and break down football by statistical achievements in order to place better value on players.
by hakimdropstheball on Sep 7, 2009 12:18 PM CDT reply actions
our earlier defensive draft picks
seem to have been better than our early offensive picks. We get better value it seems when we pick defensive players early and can bring in later round offensive talent such as Colston or PT. We haven’t really found any late round defensive gems yet though. I think that comes from Payton being offensive minded more than defensive minded. Hope that GW changes that and says hey, we really need to pick up this LB in the later rounds because he has the ability to be good.
Superbowl bound!!!...I hope? Go Saints! :D
drew brees
i believe the answer you are looking for is drew brees, the entire reason the offense “does more with less” as it was put.
Welcome to CSC!!!
Wanna say something? Sign up! It's free!
by Dave Cariello on Sep 7, 2009 7:21 PM CDT up reply actions
hooahsaint
Do you really think Pierre Thomas won’t make it through the season without getting hurt? I think odds are that Bush gets hurt before Thomas, oh wait never mind, both of them are banged up already….. uh oh
by J Rock on Sep 7, 2009 7:50 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
+1
"WhoDat's coming with me?" -- aSaint
by Hans Petersen on Sep 7, 2009 8:02 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Canal Street Chronicles
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
