NFL Draft: Are Safeties Worth a Top Five Draft Pick?

[BernietheKid]

NFL Draft: Are Safeties Worth a Top Five Draft Pick?



Atlanta and Kansas City general managers Thomas Dimitroff and Scott Pioli worked together in New England. This March during the NFL Owners' Meeting, the two were discussing the Chiefs' options at No. 5.

Dimitroff brought up Berry in a conversation logged by Peter King.

"Scott, this guy's your pick," Dimitroff said.

Pioli apparently didn't agree. "You know how I feel about safeties that early."

Pioli's not the only one. There has been only one safety chosen with a top-five NFL Draft pick since 1992 (Sean Taylor). The last time a safety was selected in the top three was Eric Turner back in 1991.



Ironically, the two top safeties in recent memory, Ed Reed and Troy Polamalu, weren't even taken in the top 15.

Why is this? Why do safeties fall on Draft Day? Quite simply: The safety position is not really that important. In fact, it's quite insignificant when compared to quarterbacks, left tackles and pass-rushing defensive ends.

Of course, we'll need numbers to back this claim up. Let's take a look at every single safety drafted in the top 15 picks since 1991. I'm going to list whether each player was a hit or bust, as well as the original team's record with each player on the roster. These players are listed chronologically, starting from the most recent:

Safety/Draft No./Team/Original Team's Record/Hit, OK or Bust

LaRon Landry/ 2007, No. 6/ WAS/ 21-27 /OK - Has played fine at times, but blows tons of coverages. Not nearly the player the Redskins thought they were getting at No. 6.

Michael Huf/2006, No. 7/ OAK/ 16-48 /OK - Has had an up-and-down career, but he's been benched in the past. Again, not the great player the Raiders were expecting at No. 7 overall.

Donte Whitner/ 2006, No. 8/ BUF/ 27-37 /OK - A decent strong safety, but not anything special.

Sean Taylor/ 2004, No. 5/ WAS/ 26-33/ Hit - What a shame his life ended so early.

Roy Williams/ 2002, No. 8/ DAL/ 55-44/ Bust - Became famous with his hard hits, but was torched in coverage week in and week out.

Patrick Bates/ 1993, No. 12/ OAK /27-21 /Bust - Not a great pick by Al Davis; lasted only four years in the NFL. Amazingly, there were no top-15 safeties from 1994 to 2001.

Eric Turner/ 1991, No. 2/ CLE /36-44/ Hit - A 2-time Pro Bowler.

Stanley Richard/ 1991, No. 9/ SD/ 34-30/ OK - A solid safety who played eight years. No Pro Bowls.

Totals /242-284/ Hits: 2; OK: 4; Busts: 2

No team that drafted a safety in the top 15 since 1991 has won a Super Bowl with that player on its roster. And as you can see, teams that spent top-15 picks on safeties were 242-284 (.460) with that prospect on the roster.

Furthermore, if you exclude the records of Roy Williams and Patrick Bates, who didn't contribute much to their team's success (Williams struggled when the Cowboys went 13-3 in 2007 - thus his bloated record), teams that used top-15 picks on safeties were 160-219 (.422) with that prospect on the roster. And here I thought top-15 picks were supposed to help each team improve.

But wait a second. Eric Berry is obviously going to be better than Donte Whitner and LaRon Landry, correct? We can only speculate, but it's pretty much safe to say that Berry will be a great safety in the NFL. Does that change things?

Well, let's look at the two hits. The (both) late Sean Taylor and Eric Turner were Pro Bowl-caliber safeties. The Redskins and Browns were a combined 62-77 (.446) with them on the roster. Moreover, Taylor and Turner helped their teams reach only two playoff appearances in nine combined seasons in Washington and Cleveland, respectively.

Now, you may exclaim, "It's not Taylor's fault the Redskins were 21-27 with him on the roster; they had tons of other holes!" And that's precisely the point of this article - as good as Taylor was, he just didn't impact the result of Washington's games. The safety position is just not important.

For Kansas City fans who still want their team to select Berry: If you're content with the Chiefs winning 44.6 percent of their games, then by all means, ask Pioli to change his mind about taking safeties that early.

But Eric Berry Is Supposed to Be the Next Ed Reed! I've received a few e-mails about this, so I feel this should be addressed as well. Yes, Berry is being compared to Reed. Two problems with this though:

1. There is no guarantee that Berry will be as good as Reed. Wasn't Glenn Dorsey supposed to be the next Warren Sapp? Wasn't Vernon Gholston supposed to be the next DeMarcus Ware? Wasn't the late Gaines Adams supposed to be the next great pass-rusher? There are no guarantees in the NFL Draft. None. Anyone who believes otherwise is fooling themselves. Any prospect can bust.

2. Let's say Berry is the next Reed. How has Reed done for the Ravens? Well, since he was drafted in 2002, Baltimore is 70-58, which is a winning percentage of 54.7 - equating to something less than a 9-7 average (9-7 is 56.3 percent).

It's worth noting that Reed's record with the Ravens before they added Joe Flacco (i.e. a franchise quarterback) was 50-46 (.521).

In other words, if the Chiefs draft Berry, and Berry actually becomes the Hall of Fame player he's expected to be (which is definitely not a guarantee; see those busts I've mentioned), Kansas City will average anywhere between eight or nine wins with him on the roster.


WalterFootball.com: NFL Draft - Are Safeties Worth a Top Five NFL Draft Pick?

[DawgFan]

I don't know who wrote this (Walterfootball.com, but WHO?) but they have done the classic TEAM RECORD to justify a particular pick.

The thing is, EVERY PLAYER TAKEN IN EVERY POSITION DURING THAT TIME COULD HAVE THE SAME THING SAID ABOUT THEM!!!

The teams that took these players had HUGE HOLES in other areas of their team. Like, name me the Washington QB. How about their CB's that weren't getting torched. Etc...

Same goes for the Ravens and the Raiders. These were teams that, while they addressed the S position, failed to address other areas of the team FOR YEARS.

I could sit here and find similar stats on nearly any position...and PROVE the same thing. This reeks of using stats to prove a point the writer had already decided. Notice...not one stat about ACTUAL PERFORMANCE on any player.

For all we know, these teams could have been exponentially WORSE without these guys on the squad.

[NW Ohio Brownie]

This is a very narrow-minded article. While it is interesting to note that no team has won a Super Bowl with a safety in the top five/ten or whatever, let's look at what the Browns need at #7. No question, safety is at or near the top of the list.

That being said, I hope KC draft coordinators have this article taped to their office bulletin boards because I would love to see Berry slide to us at #7.

[YtownBacker]

I would just like to point to who (what positions) are getting all the money in FA and trades this offseason.

Sorry to all the people that think it's all about the passing game but the Safety and Corner positions are getting all the love and big bucks. Just need to look at Rolle and Dunta Robinson as examples.

Smart teams are looking to combat the passing game with pass rushers and a safety that can play cover two, over one, man up against a #2 and provide run support. As much as pass rushers make the job easier for DBs, good DBs certainly help the pass rusher also. Make a QB go through his progressions and you have more time to get to him. Let WRs run free and you just negated your pass rush.

[Danamal]

I can see a few regulars here jumping up and down about this article but if Berry is there when we pick we take him.

[DawgFan]

Originally Posted by YtownBacker

I would just like to point to who (what positions) are getting all the money in FA and trades this offseason.

Sorry to all the people that think it's all about the passing game but the Safety and Corner positions are getting all the love and big bucks. Just need to look at Rolle and Dunta Robinson as examples.

Smart teams are looking to combat the passing game with pass rushers and a safety that can play cover two, over one, man up against a #2 and provide run support. As much as pass rushers make the job easier for DBs, good DBs certainly help the pass rusher also. Make a QB go through his progressions and you have more time to get to him. Let WRs run free and you just negated your pass rush.

EXACTLY!!!

If the game is all about the passing game...that means it is also ALL ABOUT DEFENDING THE PASS...which puts a premium on S's, cover CB's, and rush DE/OLB's.

You can't have one without the other.

[YtownBacker]

Originally Posted by DawgFan

EXACTLY!!!

If the game is all about the passing game...that means it is also ALL ABOUT DEFENDING THE PASS...which puts a premium on S's, cover CB's, and rush DE/OLB's.

You can't have one without the other.

I think the CB for the Saints how intercepted Favre and Manning to put away the NFC Championship and Super Bowl if proof positive. those games weren't all about the offense outscoring each other.

You need to put pressure on the QB and you can't without good coverage from the DBs. What makes the cover safety and shutdown corner positions even more important is that offenses have been able to expose the Tampa Two defenses and teams are moving away from it and looking for better man cover guys.

Also, the conventional SS position is becoming obsolete with the new emphasis on passing. Guys like Elam, who can't cover a slot receiver or a good TE aren't the answer. Teams are now looking for two FS to play side by side with the skills to come up in the box when needed. Thus guys like Berry and even Earl Thomas are guys teams will reach for because of their position not inspite of it.

Cover Safety (which to me, is a FS with the ability to cover a WR in man) will become an elite premium defensive position. They are the new impact playmakers on dfense right next to premier pass rushers.

[Alo]

The folks at WalterFootball are a little bit too fond of these positional value arguments. It's rare that you actually see them debate the merits of specific prospects.

[Shep]

"It's worth noting that Reed's record with the Ravens before they added Joe Flacco (i.e. a franchise quarterback) was 50-46 (.521)."

Oh, no he di-in't!

Look, nobody here has ever said a safety or corner impacts the bottom line anywhere remotely close to a quarterback, so I'm not trying to argue against a paper bag in the wind. But a good quarterback is worth two or three GREAT anything else's, given that you have none of the above on your team.

In other words, if you don't have your long-term quarterback AND you need a corner... and you pass on a top-rated quarterback for a top-rated corner early in round one? You damn well better know some very serious shit that accommodates cutting against the wisdom grain that dramatically.

Because a lot of teams are doing just fine (winning Super Bowls and shit) without a Pro Bowl type corner, or an elite corner. Hell, without a corner in the top 10-15 in the NFL. Same could be said for safety, left guard, and so on.

Not at all true at quarterback. Not even remotely true. As Crow said, if you don't have your long-term answer at QB, Job #1 is left undone. You haven't addressed your team's biggest need.

Alo, you know I think the positional argument is VERY valid (as do a lot of GMs). I think it take a bigger beating here than anywhere I've ever debated, actually.

[Sez.EJ]

I have no issues with Berry at #7 or Hayden at #7.. If they guy can play.. take him..

[Sez.EJ]

Originally Posted by Shep

"It's worth noting that Reed's record with the Ravens before they added Joe Flacco (i.e. a franchise quarterback) was 50-46 (.521)."

Oh, no he di-in't!

Look, nobody here has ever said a safety or corner impacts the bottom line anywhere remotely close to a quarterback, so I'm not trying to argue against a paper bag in the wind. But a good quarterback is worth two or three GREAT anything else's, given that you have none of the above on your team.

In other words, if you don't have your long-term quarterback AND you need a corner... and you pass on a top-rated quarterback for a top-rated corner early in round one? You damn well better know some very serious shit that accommodates cutting against the wisdom grain that dramatically.

Because a lot of teams are doing just fine (winning Super Bowls and shit) without a Pro Bowl type corner, or an elite corner. Hell, without a corner in the top 10-15 in the NFL. Same could be said for safety, left guard, and so on.

Not at all true at quarterback. Not even remotely true. As Crow said, if you don't have your long-term answer at QB, Job #1 is left undone. You haven't addressed your team's biggest need.

Alo, you know I think the positional argument is VERY valid (as do a lot of GMs). I think it take a bigger beating here than anywhere I've ever debated, actually.

Shep I 'd lay the Ravens recent offensive success more on Ray Rice's arrival than on Flacco's at this point in their respective careers. you have QB tunnel vision I believe. Flacco has been effective..But Rice put this team on his back last year with over 2000 yards of offense rushing and recieving.. Rice had 78 receptions last year over 1300 rushing, over 700 recieving yards... give credit where credit is due... ray rice.. was the motor in that offense.

[Shep]

But that's the point, Sez: The Rams' Jackson and the Titans Johnson had huge numbers, too... and they didn't get to the playoffs because they didn't have upper-bracket QB play.

Without Flacco, Ray Rice is Stephen Jackson, a good back on a team looking for a QB.