Last-Minute Draft Notebook

We're almost on the clock so it's time for some last minute thoughts on the latest draft news and buzz. This is the first draft I've missed in about 10 years because it's the first one that's fallen on my son's birthday since he was born six years ago. There's always Tivo.

I did a draft spot on ESPN radio last night and decided to forward some late rumor I heard about the Texans offering Mario Williams more guaranteed money than Reggie Bush. We'll forget that I also said it was still more likely than not that the Texans would draft Bush.

This led to a discussion on the sanity of passing on Bush, who I've said all along would be a bad No. 1 pick for anyone, but especially for the Texans. Clearly, when push came to shove, the Texans agreed that you can't put that kind of money down on a running back who is not even an every-down player.

There are some football people I respect who insist that Bush is the best player in this draft because of his game-changing ability. But most GMs and former GMs would have taken Mario Williams. In fact, Gil Brandt said it was the first year ever where the six he polls all tabbed the same player: Williams.

The biggest matchup problems Bush causes are as a receiver. This requires some really inventive play calling. And defenses in the NFL will adjust by blitzing the crap out of the QB, forcing the back to block. If you split him up wide to get out of this, you've taken a receiver out and now have Bush matched up against a corner, both of which whittle away at the advantage. If you have a really stout line and a blocking tight end, you could maybe get away with keeping Bush in the backfield, where he gets to work against linebackers and safeties. But this is the Texans we're talking about.

Now, the Saints are on the clock and they have to be bluffing about taking Bush, which would be a disaster for them. They gave about $15-$20 million of guaranteed money to Deuce McAllister just last year. They signed Michael Bennett last week. Now, they're going to give another $25 million in guaranteed money to Bush? No way. They made their bed with McAllister, who is coming off the ACL but still a major cap liability.

Should someone trade up? Why? You can't pay a running back that kind of money. He's the Saints problem now. Let's say, for argument's sake, that Bush becomes a Hall of Fame-caliber back. You'd just be getting what you paid for right out of the gate with him because he's going to always be the league's highest paid back. And he's always going to be one hit away from the cart (see: McAllister, Deuce); and once you cart off a running back, he's never the same.

Gary Myers in the Daily News here in New York cracks me up. First, the Jets were skewered for bypassing Leinart. Now, they're being skewered for bypassing Bush. Trading up is nuts. You're guaranteed to pay for a difference that is highly speculative. Economists Massey and Thaler demonstrated very clearly that the higher drafted player has a barely better than coin-flip (53 percent) chance of being better than the next player picked at that same position. And when you trade up, you are giving up those golden late first-round and early second-round picks (and sometimes thirds and fourths, too). So, you're paying for the certainty that you've identified a clearly superior player. And you're paying draft-pick compensation that also assumes this certainty. The game is rigged and plays into every general manager's overconfidence in himself and his scouts and information. It ignores the reality that much of the draft is pure guesswork.

So how can we assess a draft in the near-term? I'll grade the teams after the draft on how they've addressed the needs clearly identified in the Stat Power Index (see the link on the left). Of course, we look at the component stats, too. But the big picture is always those highly correlative net stats that we note each week in the SPI.

END OF POST