RussFrancis

The arm chair draft generals are funny. Getting so caught up in "value". Its understandable that some would be perplexed with the Wheatley pick or the Slater and O'Connell picks because you were likely, like myself and many others, unfamiliar with these kids and just how good they are. And of course there are far more factors that go into talent evaluation than any of us consider. But you look at the GMs that supposedly get the most "value" out of the draft. Polian, AJ Smith, Jerry Jones. All worked the board. All stole "value" away from other teams. They do it every year. AJ Smith robbed us our '08 3rd for his '09 2nd? Really? We'll need to remind people of that next year, when theyve once again lost a big playoff game to our team, and at next year's draft, we're sitting on their 2nd round pick and grabbing a future TE or offensive lineman "too early" once again. And what is Jerry Jones' drafting for value doing for that team? Its certainly not resulting in playoff wins. They havent tasted a post season win in 12 years. And Polian has been putting together championship teams for years and years. But in all his years, theyve only won a single title.

Maximizing value is certainly a good way to assemble a quality team. But you win championships with specific players that embody exactly what it takes to win big football games. Who really cares if you take him in the 2nd vs. the 3rd round? or the 5th vs. the 7th? VALUE does not win titles. Players do.

spacecrime

This is a dumb question if you think about it.

The only possible answer is that the Pats thought he would NOT be around.

Otherwise you are suggesting that BB turns to SP and says, "Hey I don't think that anyone else wants this guy. We could easily get him with our next pick, but let's draft him anyway and lose whatever guy we have rated higher."

Think, man, think.

Can you say to yourself, "BB and SP saw something in this guy, perhaps something they saw in the many man-days of research they put into analyzing this kid, that I did not see in the ESPN Draft Guide."

If not, you will be forever puzzled by this choice.

spacecrime

They also risked losing Crable by taking Mayo and leaving Crable on the board. And they risked losing Crable by taking Wheatley and leaving Crable on the board.

They risked losing him every pick they did not trade up to get him.

They risked Mayo by trading down to ten. They risked Mayo by not trading up to get him.

They were calculated risks designed to maximize value, getting the best players they can while spending as little as possible for them so they can sign FAs with the money saved, and/or drafting additional players.

Half the people on this board are complaining that the Pats reach for players and the other half say the Pats must not have liked that player because they waited to draft him.

Teams that work the draft board are trying to maximize value. The Pats and Ravens and others do better IMO that those who sit and wait and just take was is available when it is their turn to pick.

DW Toys

Cousins,
I see it this way. BB and Pioli do not scout these players, the paid scouts do. They recommend certain players and put the values on them. Yes BB and Pioli have the final say BUT.....a bad scout can make a bad choice and make the F.O. look tainted.

It's like these "Presidential" candidates that say they can do this or that. We all know they can do crap. It's Congress and the Senate that actually do these things. We don't believe the "new jobs" or "change" (change could be going to meet major world dignitaries in your Jockey shorts) etc. promises garbage. Well the F.O. here is the "President" and it's the array of scouts that are the Congress and actually push for their own agenda that will get approved if they can b.s. to get their own way. The scouts and congress all influence the decision in both cases.

BB doesn't have but a few occasions before a draft like visits etc, where he will work out or chat with a kid. We also know the teams also do that for smoke screens too. So BB relies on scouts. Last year in 07 the scouts did a terrible job. We'll see about this year.

It also has to do with marketing. BB or Pioli must market the picks or pick when they move up or down the draft to get a "buyer". They buy and sell. If a scout says that Matt Slater is a "By-God" fifth round draft choice, then the F.O. drafts that way, BUT....if they get duped into thinking "so in so" is a true fifth rounder because "X" team is "hot" on him if you don't take him, and then chuckle as the Pats draft that kid. The other team wins by default because they suckered us into drafting him. It's poker.

There is enough information out there today for the fans to get a reasonable temperature on a player. We do not have the whole story though, it's true. But some of the moves are still puzzling. Look at the success rate in the NFL for draft choices. What are they, less than 20% per year, per draft class? It's all scouts. Someone told BB that Slater is worth a trade-up to a higher fifth round position. BB approved the move because he trusts (and pays) that scout who put Slater on the draft board to begin with.

What I am saying is that the fans (or talking heads) could generate probably within a few percentage points, within the success rate of the majority on the NFL teams. I really believe that. There are other factors such as CAP and present roster status and quality that are caveats to my theory.

So by saying a fan is out of touch today or does not really know what a team should do or what the value of a player is, may not be a fair statement.
DW Toys

spacecrime

Yeah, I read that BB spends his entire off-season surfing the web and doesm't look at any film of any player or talk to anyone or work anyone out.

He just asks the scouts to put the draft choices in numerical order and just picks off the top player off the list.

Get real.

We all have our favorites based on the SI draft magazine and watching ESPN and NFLN. To say that this provides one millionth of the knowledge that the Pats FO has is ludicrous. Not to mention that we don't know what the plan is. Fans say, "We have to replace so-and-so who left." Teams don't do that. They draft players to fit a plan/scheme they have for the future.

It is like when we get upset because a "player was out of position." Like we know where he is supposed to be. Remember when the entire board went ape**** because Randall Gay got beat by Plaxico. Had a feeding frenzy of *****ing for four days, and then in an interview Rodney says he was out of position on that play and the TD was his fault.

Pedrorocks458

I would be extremely surprised if Lee was even on their draft board.

Metaphors

Agreed. I had Lee as a Pats target for the draft contest but soon after started second-guessing myself. Lee is talented and was productive at Auburn, but he really is better suited for a zone/cover 2 scheme. I think that the Pats were looking for a different type of CB and hopefully they hit gold with Wheatley and Wilhite.

ctpatsfan77

Actually, I would suggest a slightly different but more encompassing answer: they didn't want to risk that he might not be there. Given that three of the six intervening picks were CBs, they might well have been correct.

__________________
"Momentum was quickly snatched away by New England, who once again proved that any Patriot, at any moment, can make a play." —Inside the NFL, Packers v. Patriots

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

Patslifer

Total insanity....

captain stone

Maybe...maybe not. Brock Williams, Kenyatta Jones, Jabari Holloway, Bethel Johnson, Dan Klecko, Marquise Hill (RIP), Guss Scott, Dexter Reid, Cedric Cobbs, PK Sam, Ryan Claridge, Garrett Mills, Kareem Brown and Clint Oldenburg, plus all the 6th and 7th-round duds, are living testimony that this FO is not infallible.

If anyone before the draft suggested that NE select a QB at #94, Jonathan Wilhite with its 4th-rounder, trade its 7th-rounder to move UP to take Matt Slater in the 5th round, and Bo Ruud with its 6th-rounder, would have been laughed off the thread, and justifiably so. So why should the ridicule be any less severe, when the FO does what no sane poster would have suggested?

We have not won the last 3 SBs partly because of poor decisions on draft weekend. The idea of giving this FO, or any FO, or any organization in a decision-making position, a free pass without accountability, because of past - but not most recent - success is naive at best, suicidal at worst.

As for lil' Terry Wheatley, I would have taken Oklahoma's Reggie Smith at #62. Of all the available CBs remaining, Smith is the best combination of size, durability, fluid hips and production.

At #78, I would have chosen Cliff Avril over Shawn Crable.

At #94, I would have chosen Tyvon Branch, or Mike McGlynn.

There are other rounds, and players not named Wilhite, Slater and Ruud to select. But it's late, and I'm tired. Good night now.

__________________
Question Authority.