how to build a playoff team

[OLD FAN MAN]

what is the best way to build a playoff team? draft, free agents, trades, or a little of each. how do regular playoff teams build? seems like the bronks build with free agents, pats trades and free agents, anyone have ideas? or do different positions require different methods?

[bestQBever]

First you sign good free agents. Then you draft good players.

[shakedownstreet]

get a great quarterback

 

[/thread]

[HGRekks]

Draft good to great, sign competent to good. You shouldn't want to rely too much on big name free agents, as they can bust just like any draft pick but at a much higher cost. Don't fear system only players in free agency.

[Warhorse]

Acquire players that fit your system above all else...regardless if they come from the draft or through FA.

 

Make sure your staff can coach up the players they do draft. 

 

Really take into consideration health and availability while drooling over talent and upside. 

 

Cross your fingers and hope that things roll your way for an extended period. 

 

Ignore everything fans post in your teams forums.

[The Fish]

make sure you add sugar, not flour. 

[ColtsHoosiersBB]

Build the O and D lines and defense.

[Yoshinator]

Successful teams build through the draft. Rarely does a team win a SB or even consistently make the playoffs through free agency. There is a reason those players are let go, and the majority of the time it's because they aren't elite players. Usually you'll overpay for guys in FA that underperform for their cost. Draft well, use your picks wisely, and when those players pan out, keep them for their career. We should be keeping Luck, Hilton, Allen and Fleener for their whole careers. Chapman too if he shows his potential this year. Same with the 2013 class of Lineman and Werner if they work out. 

 

Draft picks are the main ingredients, free agency are just the sugar that makes it all a bit sweeter.

[Caleb3502]

Hire Grigson as your GM

[21isSuperman]

Any means necessary.  Take a look at Seattle.  They've built through the draft (Sherman, Chancellor, Earl Thomas, Wilson), trades (Lynch, Harvin), and free agents (Cliff Avril, Micheal Bennett).  Use everything at your disposal to acquire the best available talent for your team.  It's not possible to say exactly what percent of each you should use, but there is nothing wrong with any of them as long as you are getting talented players, improving your roster, and getting guys that fit your system

[KokomoCorona]

Play in the NFC East. The first to win 4 games in that division probably makes the playoffs

[Indianapolis-Colts-Fan]

I got "how to build a playoff team for dummies"

[wig]

get a great quarterback

[/thread]

This.

To win a SB you have to keep winning in the draft, and have a solid coach.

[Superman]

http://www.rosterresource.com/nfl-how-assembled-charts/

 

This site breaks down how every team has acquired every player on their roster, and shows the balance between drafted players, free agents, waiver acquisitions, etc. 

[ProblChld32]

IMO must be a combination of both with more emphasis on building through the draft , get some ESTABLISHED vet's one's you have already witnessed there body of work and know what they are capable of. and also build through the draft as well. You can find some gems in the draft and via UDFA for very cap friendly discount. 

[NFLfan]

http://www.rosterresource.com/nfl-how-assembled-charts/

This site breaks down how every team has acquired every player on their roster, and shows the balance between drafted players, free agents, waiver acquisitions, etc.

Very useful resource. I will check it out again after the final cuts are made. The current numbers show high numbers of "free agents" (FAs) who will not be on active rosters at the start of the season.

What do you make of the numbers? A few teams have a very high number of FAs (40+), with the Bears having the most (44) and only 23 players that they drafted. Tampa Bay has similar numbers (42 FAs & 21 drafted by them). Conversely, the Packers have 18 FAs and 40 players that they drafted. The Bengals currently have 20 players acquired via free agency and 39 via the draft. The 49ers also have 39 players that they drafted and only 26 FAs. Given some of the injuries the 49ers have sustained, I expected to see a higher number of FAs, similar to the Colts numbers (42 FAs and 21 drafted by Indy). Many of the Colts free agents seem to have been signed to address recent injuries and will not be with the team come Game 1.

Anyhow, I think most successful teams build through the draft and add free agents to fill holes here and there. You can look at the Super Bowl winners of the past 10 or so years as evidence. Most of their core players are those that they drafted.

[Superman]

Very useful resource. I will check it out again after the final cuts are made. The current numbers show high numbers of "free agents" (FAs) who will not be on active rosters at the start of the season.

What do you make of the numbers? A few teams have a very high number of FAs (40+), with the Bears having the most (44) and only 23 players that they drafted. Tampa Bay has similar numbers (42 FAs & 21 drafted by them). Conversely, the Packers have 18 FAs and 40 players that they drafted. The Bengals currently have 20 players acquired via free agency and 39 via the draft. The 49ers also have 39 players that they drafted and only 26 FAs. Given some of the injuries the 49ers have sustained, I expected to see a higher number of FAs, similar to the Colts numbers (42 FAs and 21 drafted by Indy). Many of the Colts free agents seem to have been signed to address recent injuries and will not be with the team come Game 1.

Anyhow, I think most successful teams build through the draft and add free agents to fill holes here and there. You can look at the Super Bowl winners of the past 10 or so years as evidence. Most of their core players are those that they drafted.

 

It's kind of hard to make heads or tails of it this time of year. As you say, there are a lot of players on rosters right now that won't be in a couple weeks.

 

I think the Colts are unique, in that the roster has been almost totally redone since 2011, with only a handful of holdovers from that season. You can only draft so many players in three years, and late round picks don't always stick, so we don't have quite the number of drafted contributors as other playoff teams. Especially playoff teams that have had the same management for several seasons already. It will probably take another 2-3 years for our drafted:FA ratio to balance out more like the Bengals, Packers and Niners.

 

Another thing about the Colts, we have two starters that we traded draft picks for. I'd count those among "drafted" players, given how young they were when we acquired them.

[BOTT]

Hire a good coaching staff and acquire talented players....easy peezy. I don't really care how the players are acquired.

[NFLfan]

It's kind of hard to make heads or tails of it this time of year. As you say, there are a lot of players on rosters right now that won't be in a couple weeks.

I think the Colts are unique, in that the roster has been almost totally redone since 2011, with only a handful of holdovers from that season. You can only draft so many players in three years, and late round picks don't always stick, so we don't have quite the number of drafted contributors as other playoff teams. Especially playoff teams that have had the same management for several seasons already. It will probably take another 2-3 years for our drafted:FA ratio to balance out more like the Bengals, Packers and Niners.

Another thing about the Colts, we have two starters that we traded draft picks for. I'd count those among "drafted" players, given how young they were when we acquired them.

You make good points regarding the Colts. Most of the teams with high number of free agents have had recent regime changes (Arizona was one that I had not mentioned -- 41 FAs to 28 drafted players). I believe the only team with 40+ free agents that has had stability in coaching (head coach) and the front office is the Giants. This is the first time in many years that I could remember that the Giants have signed so many free agents. Every year Giants fans complain about not having signed enough free agents. The fans got their wish this year.

If you traded draft picks for young players, I agree that they could count as drafted players.

[Superman]

You make good points regarding the Colts. Most of the teams with high number of free agents have had recent regime changes (Arizona was one that I had not mentioned -- 41 FAs to 28 drafted players). I believe the only team with 40+ free agents that has had stability in coaching (head coach) and the front office is the Giants. This is the first time in many years that I could remember that the Giants have signed so many free agents. Every year Giants fans complain about not having signed enough free agents. The fans got their wish this year.

If you traded draft picks for young players, I agree that they could count as drafted players.

 

Good point about the Giants. I think that's what happens when a playoff/title contender gets old. The Giants have lost a lot of players to retirement, and other older players to low-level free agency (like Umenyiora). Now they're getting hit by injuries. They do have a LOT of veteran free agents on their roster right now, and a lot of them are name-recognizable guys that I assume have a legitimate chance of making the roster. With how bad their line play was on both sides of the ball last year, it's not surprising that they'd be overhauling. 

[throwing BBZ]

Whatever Ozzie Newsome does works.

It definitely starts with drafting players that develope well.
 

[NFLfan]

Good point about the Giants. I think that's what happens when a playoff/title contender gets old. The Giants have lost a lot of players to retirement, and other older players to low-level free agency (like Umenyiora). Now they're getting hit by injuries. They do have a LOT of veteran free agents on their roster right now, and a lot of them are name-recognizable guys that I assume have a legitimate chance of making the roster. With how bad their line play was on both sides of the ball last year, it's not surprising that they'd be overhauling.

Yes, I was referring to the "name-recognizable" veteran free agents that the Giants signed like Rashad Jennings, Walter Thurman, Rogers-Cromartie, Robert Ayers and others. It is unusual for the Giants to sign so many veteran free agents. That is not how they build their teams.

It seems that teams generally don't do well when they sign so many veteran free agents who have no history with the core players. Washington Redskins' signings of Bruce Smith, Deion Sanders, Jeff George, Mark Carrier and others in one off-season come to mind. All the experts thought the Redskins would make the playoffs that year and go far, but they missed the playoffs. That was more than 10 years ago and times change, but I don't believe teams win when they do that. What are your thoughts on that?

Bringing it back to the Colts, when they were winning 10+ games a year under Polian, I don't recall them signing many high-priced veteran free agents. The only ones I can remember are Corey Simon and Adam Vinatieri.

(This thread probably should be in the general NFL section, as the topic is not Colts-specific.)

[James Ducheteau]

Whatever you do, it probably doesn't hurt to have a terrible season every 5 or 10 years just to get a chance to pick at the top of the draft, i think the pollian/manning years showed you cant expect to have strong depth when continually picking 27th to 31st in the draft...i suppose you could always go the patriot way and trade down, but you know I'm loathe to suggest  doing anything their way..

[chad72]

Build the O and D lines and defense.

 

Pretty much, plus need that playmaking QB, goes without saying .

 

Build an O capable of playing different styles (WRs/TEs capable of playing physical underneath and speedsters to take the top off, play outside in bad conditions with a run game etc.)  and a D capable of defending different styles (whether with a physical DB to get away with contact or coverage DB etc.). That way, you minimize refereeing impact in playoff games, IMO, and can adjust better, I feel.

 

I don't think it is utopian, what I am asking for. You just don't want too much of the same kind of players that fit just one system since coaches are in flux too in the NFL. You need to flexible with your system to take advantage of the players' strengths.

[Superman]

Yes, I was referring to the "name-recognizable" veteran free agents that the Giants signed like Rashad Jennings, Walter Thurman, Rogers-Cromartie, Robert Ayers and others. It is unusual for the Giants to sign so many veteran free agents. That is not how they build their teams.

It seems that teams generally don't do well when they sign so many veteran free agents who have no history with the core players. Washington Redskins' signings of Bruce Smith, Deion Sanders, Jeff George, Mark Carrier and others in one off-season come to mind. All the experts thought the Redskins would make the playoffs that year and go far, but they missed the playoffs. That was more than 10 years ago and times change, but I don't believe teams win when they do that. What are your thoughts on that?

Bringing it back to the Colts, when they were winning 10+ games a year under Polian, I don't recall them signing many high-priced veteran free agents. The only ones I can remember are Corey Simon and Adam Vinatieri.

(This thread probably should be in the general NFL section, as the topic is not Colts-specific.)

 

Typically, signing a bunch of free agents isn't a good thing. You're probably signing older guys (not ancient, but guys in the second half of their careers), and your team probably had some serious faults to begin with. Us Colts fans were discussing this last offseason, because Grigson made a lot of signings, and I think you can probably count on half of your signings not being as effective as you hoped. If you've sunk a lot of cost into those players, then you're really in bad shape, because you still need to fix the problem you hoped they would fix, but now you have less money to do it with.

 

You're right about the Polian years. He was already fidgety about free agency, and then when Corey Simon bombed out, he completely turned away from free agency. I think he was overly rigid in his approach, and it cost our team at the end of the day. He was so opposed to veteran free agency that Colts fans were surprised and excited about us signing guys like Jamaal Anderson and Tyler Brayton in 2011. 

 

I think a good team drafts well, but uses veteran free agency to plug holes on your roster. You can't build your team through free agency, but you can make it better, if you make good decisions. Grigson has made some mistakes, but overall, I like his balanced approach. The signings in 2013 were an outlier; we're not going to be that active in free agency every year. But I think he will go out and grab a couple guys he likes when the opportunity is there.

[NFLfan]

Typically, signing a bunch of free agents isn't a good thing. You're probably signing older guys (not ancient, but guys in the second half of their careers), and your team probably had some serious faults to begin with. Us Colts fans were discussing this last offseason, because Grigson made a lot of signings, and I think you can probably count on half of your signings not being as effective as you hoped. If you've sunk a lot of cost into those players, then you're really in bad shape, because you still need to fix the problem you hoped they would fix, but now you have less money to do it with.

You're right about the Polian years. He was already fidgety about free agency, and then when Corey Simon bombed out, he completely turned away from free agency. I think he was overly rigid in his approach, and it cost our team at the end of the day. He was so opposed to veteran free agency that Colts fans were surprised and excited about us signing guys like Jamaal Anderson and Tyler Brayton in 2011.

I think a good team drafts well, but uses veteran free agency to plug holes on your roster. You can't build your team through free agency, but you can make it better, if you make good decisions. Grigson has made some mistakes, but overall, I like his balanced approach. The signings in 2013 were an outlier; we're not going to be that active in free agency every year. But I think he will go out and grab a couple guys he likes when the opportunity is there.

I am not a Giants fan but I live in NY. I do like the way they have run their team in the past.

I like the way my team, the Vikings, are building the team now. We have had 7 first round draft picks in the last 3 years. You told me once that you did not like Bridgewater's arm but we have hope. We are pleased that we have Coach Zimmer and are optimistic about the future.