Did the Patriots pass on trading 2nd rounders for 2010 First Round Picks?

[JoeSixPat]

I was intrigued by this passage in Reiss's mail bag and wish he might have expanded on the logic and implictions of BB's presumed passing on turning 2009 second round draft picks into 2010 first rounders:

Ask Reiss: Still a hole to fill - Boston.com

Q. Mike, did the Pats get any offers to move into the 1st round next year?

A: Andy, I'm not 100 percent sure on the answer to this, but my hunch is yes.

After watching Patriots All-Access and seeing/hearing that the Saints were one of the potential trading partners for one of the Patriots' first-round picks, I assume that meant New Orleans was willing to part with their top pick next year. The Saints didn't have a second-rounder this year so my assumption is that their best ammo in a possible deal was a first-rounder in 2010.

Also, Denver (37) and Carolina (43) both traded 2010 first-round picks with other teams and I'm assuming that the Patriots had a similar offer from at least one of them for the 34th overall pick.

I wish he had embellished and explored the thinking there a bit more. Of course as far as #34 was concerned it could well be that they knew Chung was a high value pick there and would be gone soon after. Perhaps they considered trading that for Seattle's 2010 #1 like Denver did but if they felt Chung was first round talent in the 2nd round THIS year, why defer? (1st round talent, now rather than later and lower price)

Why they might opt to hold onto BOTH #40 and #41 instead of trading one to San Fran - which gave up its 1st rounder in 2010 for Carolina's 2nd rounder at #43 is intriguing for different reasons.

One has to assume that #1 - BB really valued Brace and Butler HIGHER than giving up one of them for a 1st round pick (which at worst would be swapping a draft value pick of 490 for 590 (assuming San Fran won the Super Bowl!))

What may be more intriguing here is that the fact that San Frans draft pick may very well wind up being on the high side - and perhaps BB didn't want to take that "risk" - as we've clearly seen that in this draft he didn't see value at 23 - let alone in the teens or top ten.

So since its a reasonable assumption the Patriots had a chance to turn as many as 2 second round picks this year into 1st round picks next year, I just find a lot of food for thought in the reasons WHY Belichick would not take such an offer.

In the end my guess is that he both liked the players and the value available at the picks he could have traded - likely looking them as players that would be as good as first round picks next year but at a lower price and available now rather then later - and perhaps he has an outright aversion to taking the risk that those 1st round picks would be HIGHER rather than lower, given the high cost of paying those players (even in an uncapped year).

 

[RayClay]

I was intrigued by this passage in Reiss's mail bag and wish he might have expanded on the logic and implictions of BB's presumed passing on turning 2009 second round draft picks into 2010 first rounders:

Ask Reiss: Still a hole to fill - Boston.com




I wish he had embellished and explored the thinking there a bit more. Of course as far as #34 was concerned it could well be that they knew Chung was a high value pick there and would be gone soon after. Perhaps they considered trading that for Seattle's 2010 #1 like Denver did but if they felt Chung was first round talent in the 2nd round THIS year, why defer? (1st round talent, now rather than later and lower price)

Why they might opt to hold onto BOTH #40 and #41 instead of trading one to San Fran - which gave up its 1st rounder in 2010 for Carolina's 2nd rounder at #43 is intriguing for different reasons.

One has to assume that #1 - BB really valued Brace and Butler HIGHER than giving up one of them for a 1st round pick (which at worst would be swapping a draft value pick of 490 for 590 (assuming San Fran won the Super Bowl!))

What may be more intriguing here is that the fact that San Frans draft pick may very well wind up being on the high side - and perhaps BB didn't want to take that "risk" - as we've clearly seen that in this draft he didn't see value at 23 - let alone in the teens or top ten.

So since its a reasonable assumption the Patriots had a chance to turn as many as 2 second round picks this year into 1st round picks next year, I just find a lot of food for thought in the reasons WHY Belichick would not take such an offer.

In the end my guess is that he both liked the players and the value available at the picks he could have traded - likely looking them as players that would be as good as first round picks next year but at a lower price and available now rather then later - and perhaps he has an outright aversion to taking the risk that those 1st round picks would be HIGHER rather than lower, given the high cost of paying those players (even in an uncapped year).

They like the value of 2nd rounders in a deep draft. Unless they have a target (seems they didn't) Butler and Chung seem to be great values they might have spent a low #1 on.

 

[Dr Pain]

I get the feeling that the Patriots consider 2 round picks more valuable overall that 1st round picks. This is based on a formula of talent vs. cost.

 

[IcyPatriot]

So since its a reasonable assumption the Patriots had a chance to turn as many as 2 second round picks this year into 1st round picks next year, I just find a lot of food for thought in the reasons WHY Belichick would not take such an offer.

September cannot come fast enough ... :attention:

 

[jsull87]

from a purely. we don't know what they needed this year point of view/madden point of view. it would have bees very interesting if all those trades played out for both the 2010 1sts and the 2010 2nds. imagine 3 1st next year and 3 2nds. the only difference is we woudn't have chung or brace. I wonder what people on this board would prefer if we layed it out like that... and what a draft 2010 would be hahaha specially if denver and san fran finnished round about sam possition as this year or worse imagine 2 top 15 picks and the patriots one at 32 lol

 

[CoachK]

True nose tackles like Brace aren't usually available in the second round, and with 3-4 teams picking in 5 of the next 11 slots, he certainly wasn't going to last much longer. Butler seems to have been a late first rounder on many boards and was again to much of a value to pass up.

I think given a different set of players available, most times BB takes the future first rounder.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

I get the feeling that the Patriots consider 2 round picks more valuable overall that 1st round picks. This is based on a formula of talent vs. cost.

I doubt it, maybe in this draft but only because of the talent level. They lose a year on the rookie contract which is something I think they place a higher value on.

 

[alvinnf]

I doubt it, maybe in this draft but only because of the talent level. They lose a year on the rookie contract which is something I think they place a higher value on.

I'm pretty sure the money has a higher value......

 

[xmarkd400x]

I have a feeling that some of this has to do with the talent level of the current team. I think that if the Pats were in a situation more like the Chiefs, they would have taken higher draft picks. The fact of the matter is, if the Pats take a player high in the draft, he will probably be a backup.

The long and the short: I think that the Pats typically like the 2nd round picks, and the current talent level of the team slants the team's bias even more so.

 

[Rob0729]

I get the feeling that the Patriots consider 2 round picks more valuable overall that 1st round picks. This is based on a formula of talent vs. cost.

Based on this mixed bag of second round picks, I doubt it. The Pats have always said the sweet spot in the draft is in the late second half of the first round. That is where the talent to cost of signing ratio is at it's best. I don't think they were afraid to trade into the first round next year.

 

[PatsChowder]

I get the feeling that the Patriots consider 2 round picks more valuable overall that 1st round picks. This is based on a formula of talent vs. cost.

This is it in a nutshell. Talent/Production vs. Cost of player. Why move up into the first round if you feel you can get relatively equal talent for far less money.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

This is it in a nutshell. Talent/Production vs. Cost of player. Why move up into the first round if you feel you can get relatively equal talent for far less money.

Because the talent level is not equal. Maybe they felt like it was this year but that is not the norm.

Pats 1st rounders from 2000-2008
Seymour
Graham
Warren
Wilfork
Watson
Mankins
Maroney
Meriweather
Mayo

Pats 2nd rounders from 2000-2008
Klemm
Light
Branch
B.Johnson
Wilson
Hill
C.Jackson
Wheatley

 

[Jimke]

from a purely. we don't know what they needed this year point of view/madden point of view. it would have bees very interesting if all those trades played out for both the 2010 1sts and the 2010 2nds. imagine 3 1st next year and 3 2nds. the only difference is we woudn't have chung or brace. I wonder what people on this board would prefer if we layed it out like that... and what a draft 2010 would be hahaha specially if denver and san fran finnished round about sam possition as this year or worse imagine 2 top 15 picks and the patriots one at 32 lol

What the Pats would do in this instance is trade some of the 2010 picks

into 2011.

 

[VJCPatriot]

Pats 2nd rounders from 2000-2008
Klemm
Light
Branch
B.Johnson
Wilson
Hill
C.Jackson
Wheatley

Branch was a successful pick even if he did backstab the Pats for the $$$. He did win a superbowl MVP award after all. Eugene Wilson was also a succesful pick for the Pats and was a contributor for a few years until he got hurt and became a shell of himself. Wheatly is still an unknown factor.

 

[Double G]

What difference would it make in the end with this team anyway; they'd just trade the picks away to keep stockpiling picks for future drafts so they can then trade those away too.

The next time this team actually uses all of it's picks in a particular draft will be the first time......................

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

Branch was a successful pick even if he did backstab the Pats for the $$$. He did win a superbowl MVP award after all. Eugene Wilson was also a succesful pick for the Pats and was a contributor for a few years until he got hurt and became a shell of himself. Wheatly is still an unknown factor.

Graham, Watson and Maroney have also had their moments. I was bolding players who are core members of the team now, maybe I should have specified that or not bolded them at all. The point is that only in a unique situation such as this years draft would they prefer 2nd rounders to first. The talent level is clearly much higher in the first as is the probability of them working out. That is where the true value is.

 

[JoeShmoe]

Butler was a first round corner .. just fell to us because teams had other needs either all trying to get to 3-4 defenses or falling over themselves getting WR's

Chung too may well end up being a pro bowl S - who knows? It was a team need and all the top S were taken at the top of the second

Brace -great pick up in the second again

I think if BB had seen a perfect NEP OLB at #23 or if Jenkins fell he may have taken him but he didn't (sorry Barwin fans)

Next year tho I think we may well look OLB and/or LT

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

So basically in the Belichick's first nine drafts 8 of 9 (89%) first round draft picks are still on the team and all of them are starters/contributers. Only 2 of 8 (25%)second round draft picks are still with the team and only one is a starter/contributer. What Wheatley or this years four picks might do in the future is unknown.

Belichick stated before the draft that there wasn't much difference (in this draft) between players ranked in the 20-40 range which is why the were comfortable moving down and had three picks in the first 41. That is not the case every year and I think is a silly basis for making a blanket statement that they prefer second rounders over firsts , or that their value is better.

 

[WhiZa]

I'm happy to say that was my question

With all the FAs next year the Pats will need a first round pick who can start right away if it becomes a mass exodus. The thinking may have been that they wanted as many 2nd round picks this year who can spend one year in the system and start next year. It may have been more valuable to BB. Really it doesnt matter to me. Second round picks this year with one year under their belt, or first round pick neophyte next year.

 

[Jimke]

I'm happy to say that was my question

With all the FAs next year the Pats will need a first round pick who can start right away if it becomes a mass exodus. The thinking may have been that they wanted as many 2nd round picks this year who can spend one year in the system and start next year. It may have been more valuable to BB. Really it doesnt matter to me. Second round picks this year with one year under their belt, or first round pick neophyte next year.

I think there is a good possibility for a mass exodus. I believe that

there will be a new CBA before 2010. Players will not want to play 6

years before free agency. The Patriots protected themselves by finding

possible replacements for Wilfork, Kaczur, and Mankins/Neal. Gostowski

can be franchised very inexpensively.