PDA

View Full Version : Interesting Article About 2002 Draft


texasguy346
03-17-2006, 03:27 PM
As a whole, '02 draft class has underperformed

In reviewing any draft, the standard waiting period for making a fair and thorough analysis has historically been three seasons. But in the case of the 2002 lottery, even adding an extra year to the normal review period can't camouflage the reality of how abnormally bad that draft looks when evaluated by any measure.

The substandard quality of the '02 draft was further demonstrated this week when the Detroit Lions signed free-agent quarterbacks Jon Kitna and Josh McCown, two moves that have set the stage for the imminent departure of Joey Harrington, either via trade or attrition. The player selected third overall in the '02 draft, Harrington will join former Buffalo Bills offensive tackle Mike Williams, who was chosen one spot later, as top-five picks from four years ago who went bust with their original franchises.

"There sure were some expensive [mistakes] in that draft," agreed the personnel director from one team whose 2002 first-round selection remains with the club, but has rarely played up to his potential. "A lot of teams threw good money at bad [suspect] players."

...

ESPN (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=2372386)

I found this article very interesting. It discusses the unusual number of flops from the 2002 Draft, and in particular the first round. Definately worth a read.

Texans_Chick
03-17-2006, 03:41 PM
Interesting quote. I would like to read the rest but your link doesn't work.

texasguy346
03-17-2006, 03:45 PM
I just tried it & it worked fine. But just to be sure.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=2372386

bigTEXan8
03-17-2006, 03:48 PM
Didn't work for me either...but I'm afraid I would agree with the little excert. A few picks have reasons for underperforming, but 02 wasn't supposed to be a strong draft class, was it? I don't remember hearing any real clamor about it at least.

texasguy346
03-17-2006, 03:50 PM
Third time is the charm. I hope.

ESPN (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=2372386)

bigTEXan8
03-17-2006, 04:15 PM
I like how there was little to nothing said about Carr. It's like..."what can we say about a guy who has been used as a tackling dummy?"

Vinny
03-17-2006, 04:15 PM
I have discussed how weak the 2002 draft was at other times (mainly at hpf) over the years so this is not an eye opener for me. It really was a bad year to start a franchise, but you can't cherry pick these kinds of things. At least we got the last real legit Tackle in that draft with Pitts. The Tackle prospects after him haven't done well.

Kaiser Toro
03-17-2006, 04:17 PM
I like how there was little to nothing said about Carr. It's like..."what can we say about a guy who has been used as a tackling dummy?"

Or the source was from Houston and the reporter tried to hide Carr later in the article. Distance is one way to protect sources.

texasguy346
03-17-2006, 04:26 PM
Or the source was from Houston and the reporter tried to hide Carr later in the article. Distance is one way to protect sources.

I thought the same thing when I read that quote.

infantrycak
03-17-2006, 05:32 PM
Or the source was from Houston and the reporter tried to hide Carr later in the article. Distance is one way to protect sources.

Protect sources? Where do you get that? There is no claimed source, just a statement of opinion:

Houston quarterback David Carr, the first overall choice in 2002, still might develop into a franchise-type player. But no one will know unless the Texans surround him with an offensive line that can allow him to stay perpendicular once in a while, and upgrade the skill position players around him.

Maybe I missed a source elsewhere, but I don't see one there.

texan279
03-17-2006, 05:38 PM
Or the source was from Houston and the reporter tried to hide Carr later in the article. Distance is one way to protect sources.

Didn't pastabelly write that article?

Blake
03-21-2006, 11:12 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=2372386

I hope everyone knows how week of a draft class, the Texans had to start with. This article details the misses, and few hits, in a game of battleship.

Im surprised that we still have 6 of the 12 total picks we made in 2002. Just not a strong class at all. 2001 was the year to come out.

RD1 Carr - Not a hit, but still has time.
RD2 Gaffney - Not resigned.
RD2 Pitts - Hit.
RD3 Weary - Still with team.
RD3 Hill - MISS! Off the team.
RD4 Wells - Hit, in my eyes, but might not be resigned.
RD5 Baxter - Miss. Off the team.
RD5 Walker - Special teamer. Thats all.
RD6 Faggins - Hit.
RD6 Green - Who cares. Off the team.
RD7 White - Who cares. Off the team.
RD7 Miller - Who cares. Off the team.

Kaiser Toro
03-21-2006, 12:00 PM
Protect sources? Where do you get that? There is no claimed source, just a statement of opinion:



Maybe I missed a source elsewhere, but I don't see one there.

They quoted a nameless personnel director at the start of an article about the 2002 draft. They do not mention the top guy of the draft until later in the article.

As someone who used to be quoted often in anonymity in my former life as a coach, scout and agent. This is one way info was traded for another story or leaked while staying protected.

I am not saying that happened as I do not know. I am just saying that from past experience it looks familiar.

infantrycak
03-21-2006, 12:12 PM
They quoted a nameless personnel director at the start of an article about the 2002 draft. They do not mention the top guy of the draft until later in the article.

As someone who used to be quoted often in anonymity in my former life as a coach, scout and agent. This is one way info was traded for another story or leaked while staying protected.

I am not saying that happened as I do not know. I am just saying that from past experience it looks familiar.

While I see where you are coming from now, in the context of the article the construction makes sense without considering the possibility the source is a Texan. They aren't listing Carr as an underperformer so it doesn't make sense for him to be at the lead of the story. Talking about guys no longer with their teams after busting makes sense for the lead of the story.

F-minus67
03-21-2006, 12:44 PM
You never really notice how many players were busts from that draft until someone writes it up. It was a weak draft, but look how the eagles got 3 good players out of that draft.

texasguy346
03-21-2006, 10:50 PM
Having a good scouting department allows a team like the Eagles to find good players even in weak draft classes. Hopefully the Texans take advantage of this years deep draft, and find some high quality players that can contribute to the team for years to come.