convertedpatsfan

The Patriots have mentioned the combine doesn't impact their ratings on players much. Based on Matthews's career (1 year as a starter, 10 total starts, 5 sacks total), was he worth a 1st rounder? Probably not, and not anywhere close.

And I do think the Packers having the 9th pick in that draft set them up well to take a bit of a gamble. Not only do they have a top 10 pick, but it's not much of a trade-up to get back into the 1st round. It was a bold move, and they deserve full credit for it, but there are plenty of teams who didn't trust the combine vs. what they saw on tape.

Sure, OL are a bit safer to project, but that doesn't mean they haven't reached for some of those players. Taking anyone not at the combine in the second round shows they are willing to take risks so long as they trust the grade they have on the guy.

plk

Absolutely. That is why people buy lottery tickets. I think some people invest their money in lottery tickets. Some people do win big.

Yes. Of course, that is usually the case with busts as well.

Ironically, hitting on a very risky investment can be a dangerous thing to do. It can lead a person to overestimate his skill and underestimate his luck. I would not be surprised if this happens in drafting as well. (I'm just making a general point; I'm not thinking of anyone in particular.)

ay-yo

I don't think any well run organization functions this way. You have to try to maximize every asset you have. Instead I believe the Packers simply believed that trading for Matthews had a better risk / reward (or value if thats what you want to call it) than staying put and making their picks.

convertedpatsfan

I agree, that's probably GB's thought process. But I also think having the 9th overall pick helped set them up to take a bit more risk in the back-end of the round. They didn't have to give up as much to trade back into the round, and they already secured a potential stud for their defense.

If they only had say the 20th pick in the 1st round, would they be willing to take such a risk? Maybe they would, and maybe they were sold on him being a star all along. But he felt like a gamble to me, and though they won, it's not exactly what I'd have wanted us to do with our only 1st. Then again, we had the second pick in the 2nd round so maybe it was worth the risk, and we could have gotten a safe player with that pick.

Sfpat

About Mathews, all I can say is the Pats steam-rolled him when we played GB. I don't remember his name ever being called, unless it was in reference to pancake blocks (Vollmar, et al). He reminds me of a former Charger LB who was an overachiever for a few years then faded away ............once he had to stop using the 'roids.

Sciz

Just rewatched that game a few days ago! He was doubleteamed twice on passing plays (3-man rush and 5-man protection, 4-man rush and 6-man protection), yet his only pressure came inside untouched on a stunt. He got literally no pressure against Vollmer. None.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

BritPat

Matthews was never a top prospect or even first round pick based on his college career.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Creator of the Pats must draft Jason Verrett in 2014 no matter the cost fanclub.

SunnyDenmark

Great post and I like the analogy of throwing darts. And aquiring more darts (picks) is especially important when you are pretty good at throwing darts.

Put it this way - if you know you are a better dart player than your opponent, you should try to have more games vs them rather than less games. ex. a 3 out of 5 competition would be smarter for the better player (Belicheck) rather than a one game format. Because in the one game format - the lesser player could get luck (good fortune) on their side. Whereas when playing more games - luck will tend to 'even out' and skill becomes the more deciding factor.

Since BB is pretty good at picking talent to fit NEP scheme (and also credit to the scouts and FO) - better to give him more shots at hitting a bullseye than less.

Not to mention when BB stockpiles more picks -it opens up even more possibilites for further trading. Say that 1/3 of the teams (at the bottom of the round) are not interested in expending too much ammo to move up into the top half of the particular draft round. But if you have multiple picks in the round -and some are in the top half and one in the bottom half -then you are opening yourself up to potentially trade with virtually all of the other teams. And BB will usually only take the trades he sees as favorable (taking Ras -I Dowling instead of trading). Sure - he can sometimes be wrong about a player-but more times than not he is right.