How Players Can Be Misevaluated - Patriots Perspective
This article is in response to a Michael Lombardi (NFL Network) article which categorically lays out the ways in which a team can misevaluate a player's talent. Lombardi explains succinctly these reasons, and claims that these follies contribute to the sudden stardom of misevaluated players like Jeremy Lin, Kurt Warner, Arian Foster, etc.
The major reasons why talent goes unnoticed are as follows:
1. "The Agenda" - occurs when a decision-maker or a mock drafter falls in love with one player, and thus causes unfair evaluations of every other player. The love for one player blinds the decision-maker to the merits of the "other" players.
I think this pre-determination might apply to QBs most of all. What would happen in Andrew Luck turns out to be a bust? We could blame "the agenda" for promoting him as the obvious #1 pick. I think that such thinking also allows great players to slip off the radar entirely (Tom Brady).
2. "Sponsorship" - occurs when someone within an organization (scout/coach/GM) selects a player as "an answer" and this affects other (potentially better) players negatively. The coaching staff wants their selected player to develop, and sponsors him through ups and downs. However, the players behind the sponsored player are not given enough practice reps to develop. Often, these depth players are cut.
Sometimes these cast-offs can find the right team, find playing time, and look better than the man they had played behind. In hindsight, Sterling Moore probably could have contributed in Oakland, but it likely that a "sponsored player" was stealing his reps. The coaching staff sponsored their draft picks (Van Dyke and Chekwa), while Moore (undrafted) was overlooked.
3. "The Pedigree Mistake" - occurs when a team fails to believe what they are seeing on the practice field. A coaching staff will assume that since a player has been cut many times before, there must be "something wrong" with him. Even if that player is performing well in practice, the coaching staff assumes that it is luck or that the player will not be able to perform well consistently.
I think that Bill Belichick is rarely a victim to this folly. I am hard pressed to find a Patriot to whom this applies, but please comment if you can think of someone I am forgetting. Perhaps a case could be made that Chad Ochocinco's pedigree made him seem more desirable that he turned out to be, but this doesn't fit the description perfectly - its more like the opposite.
4. "Everyone's the GM" - occurs when positional coaches have too much say in player personnel. This is a folly of shortsightedness on the part of coaches that only work with a small portion of the roster. A WRs coach is going to want the best WRs, specifically those who can contribute immediately and make an impact. Often, an underdeveloped player will be cut because there are veterans that are better at that moment. If no one is thinking about the long-term goals of the club, a valuable young player might be cut before he has had a chance to come into his own. This folly is usually a product of other instances of misevaluation, but is mostly due to a shortsighted and narrow outlook of the team's needs
As far as the Patriots, this has not been an issue in the Belichick era. I think that Belichick has done a good job making some tough decisions in cutting veterans to allow younger players to develop, (i.e. Brandon Meriweather and James Sanders). Although the defensive backfield was not as strong as it likely would have been in Belichick had kept these two Safeties, Belichick and director of player personnel Nick Caserio were thinking long-term (player development, cap room).
Overall, I think that the Patriots have maintained success for over 10 years because of their approach, which inherently avoids most of these follies of misevaluation. The draft history of the Patriots is not stellar, but the Patriots consistently find undrafted players that make big impacts on the team (Kyle Arrington, BenJarvus Green-Ellis, Danny Woodhead, Wes Welker, Kyle Love, etc, etc). This is evidence that Belichick rarely falls victim to "The Pedigree Mistake."
Likewise, the Patriots never fall in love with a specific prospect, and this gives them flexibility on draft day to select the highest valued player. Belichick does not play attention to the media "agenda"to grab the first pass rusher that shows promise. The Patriots scouts and coaches trust their own evaluations, and never get desperate for a certain player. Belichick plays the big board as it develops.
Finally, and I think most importantly, the Patriots are never afraid to trade/cut a Pro-Bowler just because he is a Pro-Bowler. It's better to be a year early than a year late. Think of Richard Seymour being traded, or Lawyer Milloy. In hindsight, I am much more comfortable with these controversial moves now than I was at the time.
Sure, players will continue to be misevaluated, even by Belichick. Draft picks will still bust. However, I attribute much of the Patriots' success to Belichick's ability to steer clear of these follies (for the most part). The Patriots do a good job of ignoring fan/media "agendas," ignoring expectations when evaluating drafted vs undrafted players, and keeping the future in mind when building a roster. I trust that this will continue, so don't get too angry when the Patriots pass up the opportunity to grab a player that "everybody wants" because they probably will.
The major reasons why talent goes unnoticed are as follows:
1. "The Agenda" - occurs when a decision-maker or a mock drafter falls in love with one player, and thus causes unfair evaluations of every other player. The love for one player blinds the decision-maker to the merits of the "other" players.
I think this pre-determination might apply to QBs most of all. What would happen in Andrew Luck turns out to be a bust? We could blame "the agenda" for promoting him as the obvious #1 pick. I think that such thinking also allows great players to slip off the radar entirely (Tom Brady).
2. "Sponsorship" - occurs when someone within an organization (scout/coach/GM) selects a player as "an answer" and this affects other (potentially better) players negatively. The coaching staff wants their selected player to develop, and sponsors him through ups and downs. However, the players behind the sponsored player are not given enough practice reps to develop. Often, these depth players are cut.
Sometimes these cast-offs can find the right team, find playing time, and look better than the man they had played behind. In hindsight, Sterling Moore probably could have contributed in Oakland, but it likely that a "sponsored player" was stealing his reps. The coaching staff sponsored their draft picks (Van Dyke and Chekwa), while Moore (undrafted) was overlooked.
3. "The Pedigree Mistake" - occurs when a team fails to believe what they are seeing on the practice field. A coaching staff will assume that since a player has been cut many times before, there must be "something wrong" with him. Even if that player is performing well in practice, the coaching staff assumes that it is luck or that the player will not be able to perform well consistently.
I think that Bill Belichick is rarely a victim to this folly. I am hard pressed to find a Patriot to whom this applies, but please comment if you can think of someone I am forgetting. Perhaps a case could be made that Chad Ochocinco's pedigree made him seem more desirable that he turned out to be, but this doesn't fit the description perfectly - its more like the opposite.
4. "Everyone's the GM" - occurs when positional coaches have too much say in player personnel. This is a folly of shortsightedness on the part of coaches that only work with a small portion of the roster. A WRs coach is going to want the best WRs, specifically those who can contribute immediately and make an impact. Often, an underdeveloped player will be cut because there are veterans that are better at that moment. If no one is thinking about the long-term goals of the club, a valuable young player might be cut before he has had a chance to come into his own. This folly is usually a product of other instances of misevaluation, but is mostly due to a shortsighted and narrow outlook of the team's needs
As far as the Patriots, this has not been an issue in the Belichick era. I think that Belichick has done a good job making some tough decisions in cutting veterans to allow younger players to develop, (i.e. Brandon Meriweather and James Sanders). Although the defensive backfield was not as strong as it likely would have been in Belichick had kept these two Safeties, Belichick and director of player personnel Nick Caserio were thinking long-term (player development, cap room).
Overall, I think that the Patriots have maintained success for over 10 years because of their approach, which inherently avoids most of these follies of misevaluation. The draft history of the Patriots is not stellar, but the Patriots consistently find undrafted players that make big impacts on the team (Kyle Arrington, BenJarvus Green-Ellis, Danny Woodhead, Wes Welker, Kyle Love, etc, etc). This is evidence that Belichick rarely falls victim to "The Pedigree Mistake."
Likewise, the Patriots never fall in love with a specific prospect, and this gives them flexibility on draft day to select the highest valued player. Belichick does not play attention to the media "agenda"to grab the first pass rusher that shows promise. The Patriots scouts and coaches trust their own evaluations, and never get desperate for a certain player. Belichick plays the big board as it develops.
Finally, and I think most importantly, the Patriots are never afraid to trade/cut a Pro-Bowler just because he is a Pro-Bowler. It's better to be a year early than a year late. Think of Richard Seymour being traded, or Lawyer Milloy. In hindsight, I am much more comfortable with these controversial moves now than I was at the time.
Sure, players will continue to be misevaluated, even by Belichick. Draft picks will still bust. However, I attribute much of the Patriots' success to Belichick's ability to steer clear of these follies (for the most part). The Patriots do a good job of ignoring fan/media "agendas," ignoring expectations when evaluating drafted vs undrafted players, and keeping the future in mind when building a roster. I trust that this will continue, so don't get too angry when the Patriots pass up the opportunity to grab a player that "everybody wants" because they probably will.
Comments
Post a Comment