It's draft day.
Teams must decide who they will take. It's a decision that will either make or break a team for the future. But another question poses itself. Do I take a player who'll help me win now or who will not necessarily help now but will be a key contributor in the future?
In recent years the decision has naturally been to win now. But is that really the right decision?
Say an NFL team has a veteran player who is comng to the back end of his career. He was a star at one point, yet he's not what he used to be. You decide to take an up and coming star with raw talent.
If you pick this player and allow the veteran to start while at the same time mentoring this player is that the better decision?
Most teams pick players that they feel will help them now, but what if that player doesn't work out. Where does that leave you? If you pick for the future rather than now you may be in better luck. A prime example of working towards the future is Matt Leinart.
He's been under the watchful eye of Kurt Warner since being selected by the Arizona Cardinals. He will without a doubt be a playmaker once Kurt Warner finally retires.
It all comes down to taking a gamble. Pick for now and risk disaster or pick for the future and allow the young player to develop?
What's your move?
comments (9) write a comment »
write a new comment
2 months ago
Nice article. It completely depends on the team and the situation when you are making this decision.
Good work, Matt
2 months ago
Good article, and agree with Andrew but feel it should be taken a step further. A big piece of it lies in the player who's drafted. You look at Peyton Manning who was picked to become the future of his franchise and not was an immediate starter but has become arguably one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time, and from that same draft a guy like Ryan Leaf he was picked to help his team win and in all honesty set his team back years. The Colts have had one quarterback since 1998 and have a superbowl win to show for it, where as the Chargers have had 5 different qb's and no championship. Now or later is always the question and the wrong answer can be devestating to any team.
2 months ago
Good article, and I agree in principle with the concepts.
But I'm not crazy about the Matt Leinart example of a player who was picked for the long-term.
The evidence actually points to Leinart being chosen as a short-term marketing ploy by the Bidwills (the worst owners in professional sports history) as they moved into their new stadium.
As for his promise or lack thereof, Leinart's suffered two season-ending injuries in his last 5 sacks (fragile), was on pace for a 5 TD/12 INT season before his most recent injury. Also, Leinart has a weak throwing arm, and was the 32nd rated passer in 2008 (61.9). Last year proved that Leinart lacks the ball velocity and accuracy to make all the NFL throws.
And then there's the problems with his maturity and off-field focus. He was reputed to be more into partying than football, and the last 12 months have done nothing to dispel this notion.
I'm afraid that he's going to be a bust on a par with Ryan Leaf.
from 2 months ago
Personally i see where your view of Leinart is as a bad example, but In a sense the Cardinals picked Leinart with an intention of having Kurt Warner mentor him for 1-2 possibly 3 years before allowing Leinart start. His on and off field woes as of now go to show that he wasn't the immediet nor the future star they wished of him.
2 months ago
I can see where your point of veiw is stemming from. Personally i think that the Bidwills had every intention of picking Leinart and allowing Kurt Warner to mentor him for 1-2 possibly even 3 years before allowing Leinart to step on the field as starter. Leinart's off and on the field woes just go to show that he hasnt become the immediete nor future star they wished he would be
2 months ago
It all depends on what you mean on a pick for now. If you mean a pick that effect immediately and for a long time then go with that. But one that only effects for a year just isn't worth it.
2 months ago
Matt Leinart is a great example but he is just making a bad team into an ok team not a bad team into a great team
2 months ago
Matt Leinart isnt doing anything at all. He's been garbage. The Cardinals are considering letting Warner start.
2 months ago
Dacher, your article sucks
write a new comment