Reed's no sure bet at this point. Safeties have trouble getting elected to the HoF and he has not played enough years nor won enough to make him a sure bet. Is he looking good right now? Yeah, but so are a lot of players in their 6th seasons. As an example: Joe Klecko looked like a first ballot hall of famer along about 1985 and then something went wrong.
Because it is impossible to target an actual HOF player. nobody knows who is going to be a HOF coming out of college, so sacrificing picks to try to get one is foolish. yes, if you draft a HOF player, great job! but thinking that has to be your purpose in the draft is going to do more harm than good. and drafting for HOF players was what this topic was about -- not not wanting HOF players. nobody is saying they don't want a HOF player, just that they aren't willing to trade every pick in the later rounds just to get a higher pick where it is more likely you draft one, because 1) there are more first round busts than first round HOF's in the history of the NFL draft so the risks are definitely not worth the rewards, and 2) the benefits of drafting numeorus good players in the later rounds can be just as great as one HOF player in the first round, especially when you throw in the variable of losing picks to draft a 1st round bust.
I think this is looking at this from the wrong direction - when a team wins the Super Bowl, its top players take a big step closer to the Hall of Fame. Win a Super Bowl and the Hall of Fame candidates will follow. And the HoF is still a flawed system based on opinions and preferences - there are no opinions about who won the Super Bowl, just facts.
Is that it? If you think about it you have to look at it vs the amount of people drafted in those rounds and if you do that you get a low Pct.
The quote I used to reply... was so unecessary and so illogical that I had to reply to it. I don't think you get my point, which is causing you to agree with me without even knowing it...
We have a HOF player on our roster right now, his name is Curtis Martin. While he does not play any more, we didn't win the SB with him. Teams are made of many good players playing together. Of course it does not hurt to have your superstars but if the supporting cast does not do their jobs, their can't be superstars. Thus superstars are a product of their team as much as themselves. Mangini creates a syngery that is condusive to superstars. You will see players we draft turn into superstars largely in part to this. To add further fuel to the fire, last year we picked 4th, and our fourth pick was not as good as our later 1st round pick, Mangold. What if we had done something stupid and packaged Mangold's pick to get Bush or Williams? Same goes for this year we need to stay put and try to trade down when we can to get extra picks. The biggest reason Thomas Jones was steal is becasue the pick we gave to get him we essentially got for free by moving a few spots back in our draft last year. I can go on and on about this, but in the end, unless you have a very rare need like a QB, you should almost never trade up. The cap implications and chances of failure are much higher than if you spread your risk with more picks. In the end you get quality players and your financess are managed in a way so that you always have the $$ you need when you need it.
My thought, also. I defer to statjeff, but that seems to me a pretty weak statistical trend to follow. You'd do better to breakdown each championship team and the rounds where each of their starters were taken. It's a larger statistical pool, and, as we know, hall of fame credentials don't equate to championships.
With the exception of Al Toon 82-92 is just horrible. I am throwing Kenny O'Brien in the mix becasue we could have Marino that year. Do not think he would have lasted as bad as the line was, but we could have had him.
Excellent post. Look no further than the Thomas Jones trade for evidence of what our FO is looking to do this year. We won't be trading up for anything, IMO. And the Cap implications are certainly worth mentioning. But even if we had that very special need right now... that Peyton Manning "gotta have" guy, Tangini is still of the mindset that it's totally a team thing that wins championships. So even if we had that one, unbelievable need, you still won't see us giving away the farm to grab that one, "future HOF" guy. Not now and maybe never under this administration. And that's the way I like to see it too, especially right now. The one thing Tangini recognizes is that player evaluation is an ongoing process that goes well beyond what the guy looks like initially coming out of college. Let other teams trip over themselves and squander picks moving up on Draft Day over the extra number of Combine benchpresses, for example, that a player squeezes out, or a split-second faster time in the 40 or all the publicity hype of a Brain Leonard, for example. Let others get caught up in all that bullsh-t. Tangini's evaluation process continues on into TC, Preseason and well into the early part of the player's career. You keep using this constant sifting evaluation process and eventually you begin winning consistently and building your own HOF'ers, not buying them by paying through the nose on Draft Day while at the same time crippling your Cap.
Before you go trading away all our picks to move up please divide that 62 by the total # of top ten picks (400 if you just look at the super bowl era) which gives you only a one in six chance of getting a hall of famer. I wonder how many of those 400 top ten picks were mediocre or complete busts. Looking at some of our picks through Jet history, quite a few.
