How far ahead do the scouting team look?

[kernowboy]

Coming up to the 2009 draft, I was just curious to see how far ahead the scouting team and front office look when weighing the merits of players at each position.

Thinking of two positions of potential need, LT and TE, we have a range of players in both the 2009 and 2010 drafts.

If we were to pass on the LT position in 2009 and go with Walker whilst seeing what we had in Bell, there is still some top quality available at this position in 2010.

TE is even more clear cut where I think the class in 2010 with Gresham, Rob Gronkowski and Pitta is deeper at the top than in 2009.

As we cannot address all positions of need with starters and free agency in one year alone, does the scouting team weigh up the various merits and depth at a position, and think that it is better not to over pay in one draft but have a bandaid because the team will get more value next year?

Whilst I appreciate that teams close to the SuperBowl would look for a final immediate fix, what should be the approach of team who are two or more years away from potentially making a deep playoff run?

[LifetimeBillsFan]

If you listen to some of Tom Modrak's comments in his appearances on BB.com where he discusses the draft, etc., he pretty much has said, on a couple of occasions, that the scouts focus their attention on the seniors when they are scouting and that they will go back and look at the juniors who enter the draft once they commit to leaving.

Now, there are a couple of caveats that you have to take into consideration when you hear him say something like that.

First is that the NFL people do not want to step on the toes of the colleges and to say that you are looking at underclassmen anticipating that they will leave school is something that they must realize would upset a lot of coaches at the college level. And, they do not want to upset the college coaches because they need them not only for developing players, but also to get honest information and assessments about players and to get access to the players as well. There have been times and specific situations where the colleges (or specific schools) have been very concerned about NFL scouts influencing their players to leave schools, etc.--to the point where the NCAA has threatened not to allow NFL scouts and coaches on campus and some schools have refused to allow certain teams to have access to coaches and/or players.

So, you can't expect Modrak to say anything that he feels the NCAA or certain schools might take umbrage with and lead to him or his scouts not having full access to coaches and players.

Secondly, I don't know how a scout--or anyone else--can watch a game and not notice a player who is doing an outstanding job in a game and make a mental note of his name. I know that I do. And I'm sure that, while a scout may be focusing on the seniors (maybe even specific ones) who are playing in a game that he is watching, the Bills' scouts are also noticing those underclassmen who stand out in the game as well.

That having been said, I can also see some truth in Modrak's comments about the scouts not focusing on underclassmen.

First of all, players get better or regress from year to year, so the kid who looked like a world-beater as a freshman may not look so good by his junior or senior year. Or, like a couple of players in this year's draft, a kid who may not even get much playing time his first couple of seasons may suddenly blossom as a junior or senior. So, you can waste a lot of time looking at underclassmen, anticipating what kind of player they may become, and, in the process, miss out on a player who blossoms or does a lot of the barely noticeable dirty work that makes others look good.

More importantly, there are a lot of technical aspects of the game that, unlike the fans, a scout has to focus on and look for when he is watching a game or game-tape. There's simply no way that a scout can see all of these things in every player on enough plays in a game to make a solid evaluation of each player--the scout has to focus in on the players who are going to be in the draft (or are likely to be in the draft--although he can't say that).

For example: Let's say that each team plays eight offensive linemen, making a total of sixteen to look at. How can a scout focus in on all 16 on enough plays in the game to determine who is a "waist-bender" and who isn't; who uses his hands well and who doesn't; etc., etc. And, that's just one position group. He's got to narrow it down so that he can see a given player on enough plays to make a technical evaluation of that player.

The fan, on the other hand, doesn't care if the offensive tackle is a "waist-bender" so long as the guy pancakes the guy he is supposed to block. He doesn't care if the WR rounds off his routes so long as he makes a lot of big catches. But, the scout not only has to care, he has to watch the guys he is there to see enough to write a technical evaluation of a number of different aspects of each player's game. And, there are only so many plays in a game and so much time for him to do that...and he only has one set of eyes as well. So, he has got to limit what he is looking at.

Now, this is where having access to the college coaches comes in. Because when a scout is talking to the coach about certain players that he is looking at, the coach can clue him in on a guy that he should look at as well or on someone who he has on his list who may not be worth spending much time on.

And, the scouts are human, too. So, they are going to notice an underclassman who stands out from the other players. And, they are going to take some notes on that guy. But, they can't afford to give him the same amount of attention that they will give to a guy who is going to be in the draft for certain because the job is to evaluate players for each year's draft.

Fans, on the other hand, watch games in a different way and will see an underclassman in much the same way that they look at a senior--from a fan's perspective. They are not breaking him down like a scout would have to. So, when an underclassman does things that look good, they say, "This guy is going to be a good prospect, etc." The fan might be right. Or, the fan might be wrong: because even though the guy looks good, he might be doing so despite the fact that he is out of position or doing a lot of things wrong technically.

A couple of good examples of this are Demetrius Bell, the Bills OT, and Johnson, the DE from Ga.Tech. Bell was a dominant player in college and looks quite impressive on the YouTube video that was posted here. But, he was dominating lower level talent in college purely on his huge physical advantages over his opposition. He has a lot of talent, but there are a lot of technical holes to his game that he had to improve on before he could make it in the NFL. Watching him, a fan would see his dominance, etc. But, a scout would have to break down his technical strengths and weaknesses and then try to factor in the level of competition in making his evaluation of him. Similarly, Johnson is a freakish physical specimen. He made a lot of plays in college and showed the capacity to turn games around with his unique physical ability. But, he also disappeared a lot in games and there are a lot of holes in his game technically, including some that shouldn't have been there (like being out of position when he lines up at times, which he should know better than to do). A lot of fans, seeing Johnson making big plays, might not understand why he isn't a cinch to go in the first round. But, it is a scout's job to see those holes in his game and it is because they did see them that Johnson is considered a likely second round pick despite his exceptional athleticism.

Finally, when it comes to pro level scouting, Pat Kirwin wrote an article a couple of years ago describing what he did as a pro scouting director for the Jets some years back that was very insightful. One part of the job that he talked about was knowing well ahead of time who was going to be a free agent--not just on his own team, but on every team in the league--and anticipating what players around the league might be cut or become available for various reasons during the year or the next year or two.

Kirwin made it quite clear that teams do think and plan ahead. They do anticipate what positions might be open or need to be upgraded on their own team and which players might be available to address those positions. I think you saw that kind of thing with the Bills the last two offseasons: when everyone was going crazy that they didn't appear to be going after a DT last year, the Bills were working on a deal to get Marcus Stroud. Jeff Hangartner might not have been a household name, but it is obvious from the way that the Bills jumped to get him at the beginning of free agency this year that they had targeted him to replace Fowler and Preston (they did this for some reason, even if the fans don't know what that reason is).

Now, I'm sure that the Bills do that on the college level to a certain extent, although perhaps not as much as they do it on the pro scouting level--or as much as I would like to see them do it. I would be willing to bet that their scouts already have a list of players to look at this coming season and that the notes that they have on some of those players are already a lot more extensive than those that they have on some others. It wouldn't surprise me if they have been making the rounds of the Spring football practices gathering information on players already and that some of their notes are about underclassmen to pay special attention to in the future. Because so much can happen--players have grow-spurts and get bigger and stronger or have injuries that can rob them of their abilities or love for the game, etc.--I doubt that they are paying particularly close attention to freshman and sophomores, yet. But, I'm sure that they have a pretty good idea of who the players are in this Fall's junior class who are likely to be coming out in next year's draft. And, while they may not focus on them the way that they would on a senior, I'm pretty sure that they will be paying pretty close attention to them at times as well.

[Ingtar33]

they scout anyone with talent.

I know i had notes on players dating back to their first significant playing time... if they looked to have promise at least.

Modrack's right, in the sense pretty much all of the time for draft prep was spent on seniors, until the underclassmen declare. but trust me, scouts watched many of the underclassmen who declare for a long time, well in advance of the draft.

so scouts would have a "book" on most of the underclassmen before they declare.

[kernowboy]

What I'm wondering is if the team ideally wanted a TE, but saw that next years class was better than this, would they think we'll apply a bandaid solution and rather than reach this year, use that pick somewhere else and then draft their ideal TE next year?

For example, would they spend a high pick this year on Jared Cook when they really, really like Jermaine Gresham? Wouldn't the good pick be better spent elsewhere?

[Nighthawk]

What I'm wondering is if the team ideally wanted a TE, but saw that next years class was better than this, would they think we'll apply a bandaid solution and rather than reach this year, use that pick somewhere else and then draft their ideal TE next year?

For example, would they spend a high pick this year on Jared Cook when they really, really like Jermaine Gresham? Wouldn't the good pick be better spent elsewhere?

This year's TE class is very deep and it is deep with the type of players that this organization has needed for years. That is a TE who can catch the ball and make plays. They need to take a TE this year...there are some really good players who will be available in the 3rd round.

[Ingtar33]

What I'm wondering is if the team ideally wanted a TE, but saw that next years class was better than this, would they think we'll apply a bandaid solution and rather than reach this year, use that pick somewhere else and then draft their ideal TE next year?

For example, would they spend a high pick this year on Jared Cook when they really, really like Jermaine Gresham? Wouldn't the good pick be better spent elsewhere?


that type of thinking should get someone in the FO fired.

you don't know where you'll draft "next year", you don't know how a prospect will develop... to sacrifice your needs now for the promise of "next year" is a good way to end up unemployed.

[kernowboy]

OK,

You have one pick and you need a LB and a TE?

You know the TE this year is slightly better than the LB, but next year the LB class is shockingly weak whilst the TE class has significant depth.

Do you draft the TE and say to hell with the LB or do you draft the LB and think we can last until we get better value next year? In both cases you have a LB and TE currently on the roster who need replacing