When is a Player Drafted a Bust?

[Krabs]

At what position in the draft do you start considering the pick a bust? Is it round 5 and above? Round 4 and above?

I'm going to say that round 6 and 7 are a bit of a guessing game. Round 5 seems to be more of an investment. However, I'm going to say that any player taken in the draft round 4 and up would be considered a bust if they don't make the team.

What says you?

 

[tynimiller]

Bust is when expectations are grossly underachieved or not even approached. The round selected influence this but doesn't have a hard line of where bust is or isn't an option for player judgement.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I would consider any player that is drafted and fails to make the 53 man roster or PS a bust candidate. Now the level of "bust" increases, decreases or is zero, depending on the round they were taken, what year they don't make the team and if they at least contributed something while in GB.

One notion I and some posters disagree on is when a player "busts" out for the Packers and goes on to have a decent career with another team. I call this player an equal bust as one that leaves the NFL after being waived by Green Bay. Since he did nothing or under achieved for the Packers, who invested a draft pick, money, coaching and a roster space. If anything I might call that player a "double bust", since the Packers either didn't figure out a way to utilize this players skill sets or failed to see the hidden talent. An example could be Josh Jackson. If he goes on to become a decent player, I would call him a double bust. Right now, he is just a bust in my opinion.

 

[Mondio]

I can't call any player outside of the first 3 rounds a bust unless there are some surrounding circumstances. IE they show potential but like hookers and ******* too much and can't stay in the league.

I won't call a player a bust because of injury, ala Sherrod. The guy destroyed his leg that will affect him in a big way the rest of his life before he ever got a chance. Bust has too much of a negative meaning to me to give it to someone like that. It certainly wasn't a pick that worked, but not a bust IMO.

There's a lot of gray area for me concerning circumstances like injury, coaching, and what round they're in. I'd consider Jackson a bust. Thought we got a really good player, but he contributed almost nothing from a high round.

 

[Mondio]

Coke weather ane is a censored word?

 

[tynimiller]

Kamal Martin might be a good example...here's a guy that was drafted late round (5th) - but one would expect him to have at least stuck around even if just practice squad for a couple years...however won't label him a bust due to injury really set him back + Day 3 pick.

I've said numerous times, Day 3 Picks at MOST should be expected as depth guys for a year...they begin to see year two, more playing time and especially if they see NFL roster their entire rookie contract they are IMO a big success for Day 3.

 

[Poppa San]

Subtract from 9 the round drafted for the number of training camps they should be in. That is how long their career, barring injury or stupidity, should work out to.
IMO over the course of their career:
1st round picks are HOF material, should be consistent All-pro candidates and go to multiple Pro bowls.
2nd round picks should be pro bowlers and a career year all-pro.
3rd round picks are solid starters with an occasional pro bowl nod.
4th rounders should be a starter you are always looking to upgrade or a journeyman.
5th rounders are solid backups and spot starters and core ST players. Always looking over their shoulder.
6th rounders are solid depth. They are the bubble guys year after year.
7th rounders are the churn and just look to make the final roster or are almost guaranteed a PS slot.

Anything above these is gravy or a steal, anything much below two rounds lower is a bust. Based on this AJ Hawk was not a waste. Nor is Oren Burks just yet.

 

[Krabs]

Subtract from 9 the round drafted for the number of training camps they should be in. That is how long their career, barring injury or stupidity, should work out to.
IMO over the course of their career:
1st round picks are HOF material, should be consistent All-pro candidates and go to multiple Pro bowls.
2nd round picks should be pro bowlers and a career year all-pro.
3rd round picks are solid starters with an occasional pro bowl nod.
4th rounders should be a starter you are always looking to upgrade or a journeyman.
5th rounders are solid backups and spot starters and core ST players. Always looking over their shoulder.
6th rounders are solid depth. They are the bubble guys year after year.
7th rounders are the churn and just look to make the final roster or are almost guaranteed a PS slot.

Anything above these is gravy or a steal, anything much below two rounds lower is a bust. Based on this AJ Hawk was not a waste. Nor is Oren Burks just yet.

I like that equation. It makes it less subjective. I can get behind that.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

It's pretty obvious that after just a few posts that the term "bust" is probably not a very accurate term to use as a blanket label to describe players. Mainly because it varies and is dependent on quite a few variables. Maybe a number (1-10)/letter (A-F) should be assigned to it to indicate the degree of a bust that said player is. For example, Josh Jackson was a Bust8 or a BustD. With 8 or D being rather high when considering the round and what he gave the Packers in return.

I also think one has to be on the same page as to the 2 ways you are looking at said player to determine bust. Are you looking at it from the Packers perspective and taking into account their investments and returns on player? Or are you strictly looking at it from the side of how successful of a career said player has in the NFL. Because those 2 viewpoints can vary dramatically. Casey Hayward pops into my mind. If Josh Jackson goes on to become a NFL Pro Bowler, I wouldn't change his "bustD" grade for the Packers. Might even bump him up to a bustF, since the Packers not only lost a lot on their investment, but that investment paid off for another team.

I tend to view it from the standpoint of what the player did for the Packers while in Green Bay. Each team is given 7 picks in every draft, wasting any of those on a player that does very little or nothing for your team, is at some level a bust of your investment(s).

So a bad fit with the Packers, multiple injuries or even a career ending injury may not necessitate labeling the player himself a bust, but I would say he was a bust of an investment at some level.

EDIT: I see that Poppa has already started the ball rolling on this while I typed away.

 

[tynimiller]

I also think one has to be on the same page as to the 2 ways you are looking at said player to determine bust. Are you looking at it from the Packers perspective and taking into account their investments and returns on player? Or are you strictly looking at it from the side of how successful of a career said player has in the NFL. Because those 2 viewpoints can vary dramatically. Casey Hayward pops into my mind. If Josh Jackson goes on to become a NFL Pro Bowler, I wouldn't change his "bustD" grade for the Packers. Might even make him bump up to a bustF, since the Packers not only lost a lot on their investment, but that investment paid off for another team.

I grade the NFL player when reflecting on a draftee personally. I do agree, one should clarify if they ONLY review a draftee by whether they succeeded for the initial team that drafted them. That is two very different ways of reviewing that cannot mix at all.

 

[Krabs]

Subtract from 9 the round drafted for the number of training camps they should be in.

(1-10)/letter (A-F) should be assigned to it to indicate the degree of a bust that said player is. For example, Josh Jackson was a Bust8 or a BustD. With 8 or D being rather high when considering the round and what he gave the Packers in return.

So, overall, trading Hollman is pretty much a wash. He lasted 2 years in Green Bay and according to the scoring system should have lasted 3. I'd say he was a BustA. A bust, but best case scenario bust.

I would agree on Jaskson that he is a BustD. He should have lasted 7 years and we had him for 3, which were all lackluster.

I like this scoring system. I'm using it from now on.

 

[Mondio]

Subtract from 9 the round drafted for the number of training camps they should be in. That is how long their career, barring injury or stupidity, should work out to.
IMO over the course of their career:
1st round picks are HOF material, should be consistent All-pro candidates and go to multiple Pro bowls.
2nd round picks should be pro bowlers and a career year all-pro.
3rd round picks are solid starters with an occasional pro bowl nod.
4th rounders should be a starter you are always looking to upgrade or a journeyman.
5th rounders are solid backups and spot starters and core ST players. Always looking over their shoulder.
6th rounders are solid depth. They are the bubble guys year after year.
7th rounders are the churn and just look to make the final roster or are almost guaranteed a PS slot.

Anything above these is gravy or a steal, anything much below two rounds lower is a bust. Based on this AJ Hawk was not a waste. Nor is Oren Burks just yet.

It's posts like this that make me question the long standing belief that Moderators are mindless.

I like it

 

[Poppa San]

It's pretty obvious that after just a few posts that the term "bust" is probably not a very accurate term to use as a blanket label to describe players.

I prefer disappointment over bust. Hawk was a disappointment, not a bust. Jamal Reynolds was a bust. He wouldn't have been if drafted 2/3 round. Swap draft positions for Hawk and Clay maker and see how expectations change. Not to hijack this into defending Hawk but he was drafted for an entirely different defensive scheme. Tony Man-I'm-rich was a bust for the 2nd pick but he had an OK career in Indy after the PEDs left his system.

 

[Krabs]

Tony Man-I'm-rich was a bust for the 2nd pick but he had an OK career in Indy after the PEDs left his system.

Still a bustF for the Packers.

 

[RicFlairoftheNFL]

I can't give a specific formula for it, but what I can tell you is this. There is a SIGNIFICANT difference in BJ Raji and Justin Harrell. Both Packers 1st rounders, both D-Linemen. Raji was a force, Harrell was probably TT's biggest bust no matter what round you look at. I also think for a bust to happen it has to be a 1st rounder or 1st pick of a draft for a team.

 

[Budman]

I can't give a specific formula for it, but what I can tell you is this. There is a SIGNIFICANT difference in BJ Raji and Justin Harrell. Both Packers 1st rounders, both D-Linemen. Raji was a force, Harrell was probably TT's biggest bust no matter what round you look at. I also think for a bust to happen it has to be a 1st rounder or 1st pick of a draft for a team.

Good points. I haven't really thought of a bust outside of say round 1 or maybe round 2.
That round 1 pick comes with so many expectations but I do like Poppa's formula. It made me think a little deeper after applying those terms.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Tony Man-I'm-rich was a bust for the 2nd pick but he had an OK career in Indy after the PEDs left his system.

A perfect example of someone I would label a 10point Bust. I don't really care what he did once he left Green Bay, because he cost the Packers the #2 pick in the draft and gave them very little in return. There has to be a picture of Mandarich if you Google "Biggest NFL busts of all time"

Another level of a bust is the position drafted. While Kamal Martin was kind of a bust at ILB, had the Packers used that pick (#175) for a punter or kicker, that would be even a bigger bust. A 5th round QB on the other hand wouldn't get much attention.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Good points. I haven't really thought of a bust outside of say round 1 or maybe round 2.

I would call Vince Biegel a round 4 bust. Some might say "well he got injured his rookie year, that doesn't count", but the Packers kept him around for year 2 and cut him before the final 53. He never played one real game snap for the Packers and his foot injury was a lingering one from college that the Packers probably knew about.

 

[Curly Calhoun]

At what position in the draft do you start considering the pick a bust? Is it round 5 and above? Round 4 and above?

I'm going to say that round 6 and 7 are a bit of a guessing game. Round 5 seems to be more of an investment. However, I'm going to say that any player taken in the draft round 4 and up would be considered a bust if they don't make the team.

What says you?

I would say it is by degree - A fifth rounder who ends up getting cut is not quite the same as a first or second rounder.

I assume this all has something to do with Kemal Martin, who obviously didn't work out here. That's too bad, but our new DC, who is supposed to be a linebacker whisperer, apparently didn't like what he saw.

I wish the young man well.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I assume this all has something to do with Kemal Martin, who obviously didn't work out here. That's too bad, but our new DC, who is supposed to be a linebacker whisperer, apparently didn't like what he saw.

This is a really good point, that is often lost. Whether it is a new head coach, OC, DC or even positional coach, some players are going to find themselves the odd man out with that new coach and/or system. If Pettine was still the DC, maybe a guy like Martin sticks around longer.

 

[OldSchool101]

I’m kinda of opinion that anyone day 3 level can’t really bust. That’s an area where it’s largely a revolving door, but with some good starter potential for a few years. Occasionally day 3’s turn into high production guys (thinking Martinez, Linsley, Aaron Jones etc.. but we go through dozens to solidify a few of those.

3rd round is on the fence and into the latter half of the round our success drops off a cliff. Nearly anyone drafted inside Round 1 or 2 excelled at a high level or has an incredible and impressive athletic projection. Josh Jackson, Datone Jones, Jason Spriggs or Quinton Rollins we’re recent examples of guys who busted for us because we should expect far better long term production given their draft capital. Those are top 50 picks that should’ve earned big second contracts. We definitely don’t spend a top 50 selection on a guy who we think will get sent packing for lack of production after 4 years or less.
I’m with Poker on that idea about them not deserving credit playing for our competition. I could care less what Datone does for Dallas etc.. matter of fact! Detract points if they’ve played for our enemy those bass turds ! (Said that shaking my fist and with my best Billy Crystal comedy voice)

 

[Krabs]

I would say it is by degree - A fifth rounder who ends up getting cut is not quite the same as a first or second rounder.

I assume this all has something to do with Kemal Martin, who obviously didn't work out here. That's too bad, but our new DC, who is supposed to be a linebacker whisperer, apparently didn't like what he saw.

I wish the young man well.

Also, the Hollman and Jackson trades.

 

[OldSchool101]

Tony Man-I'm-rich was a bust for the 2nd pick but he had an OK career in Indy after the PEDs left his system.

Sounds so cold and calculating

 

[Krabs]

I'm sticking with @Poppa San and his equations. Definitely not error free, but close enough for a schlub like me to use.

 

[mradtke66]

I can't give a specific formula for it, but what I can tell you is this. There is a SIGNIFICANT difference in BJ Raji and Justin Harrell. Both Packers 1st rounders, both D-Linemen. Raji was a force, Harrell was probably TT's biggest bust no matter what round you look at. I also think for a bust to happen it has to be a 1st rounder or 1st pick of a draft for a team.

Complicating that--Harrell was injured in college, but it was something like a biceps tear or similar.

What killed his career was apparently a back injury related to lifting. I have a hard time entirely labelling that a bust. (I've even heard rumors that the FO blamed the S&C pushing him too hard during recovery. And that pushing potentially caused that back injury. if that's true, ouch.)