Serious draft thoughts

[PatsFanInVa]

To me, this draft has crystalized some things I think we think, to use MMQB/Peter King talk. Every now and then, a Pats' draft puts an exclamation point on the actual draft style/thinking. You can't read much into it, but here's what I think you can read into it.

1. Stockpiling Picks: General value principle, augmented by "target-richness" of environment.

2010 was a target-rich environment, as our friends in uniform may say. Regardless, the Pats worked the hell out of the phones, and even pushed some picks into '11.

With the depth of this draft, this confirms that the value approach is not predicated on the richness of any one environment. Situationally it may happen in any given draft that the guy we want is there and is the best value at exactly that spot, for many spots. However, the value approach will continue to come into play.

It is unlikely that there will ever be a draft in which the Pats don't drive us nuts in this way.

1a. Underlying principle: low probability of payoff = long-term wisdom in multiplying number of picks, recovering some position of picks by one-year offset premium.

In a word, we're not desperate. Some other teams are. They will gladly pay us two dollars on tuesday for a one-dollar cheeseburger today.

With even the most blue-chip prospects subject to wash-out - the state of affairs in the NFL draft - the underlying principle is that you have twice as many shots in the crap shoot with twice as many draft picks. You also pay less if you don't draft in the top 10.

2. The McCourty Pick: Special Teams don't just matter. They are 1/3 of the game, as BB continually says. We're so used to Billspeak that we gloss over references to "all three phases of the game," and the like. McCourty and to a lesser extent Mesko (and earlier, Gotskowski) picks underline this.

Now: the Bethel Johnson slow-burn washout tells us just how much stock we can put in this principle. We the fans are slightly off-base in thinking "if he can't produce you stash him on special teams until he can." Just a hair. The reality is, BB seems capable of drafting a professional special teamer, with the added bonus of positional depth. BUT a high-pick professional special teamer that stays that way had better be a monster talent or he's gone. He's expected to grow into an offensive or defensive contributor within his rookie deal. So if McCourty sees only spot action in the D don't be too surprised. Starting the "run on Punters" by punking the Ravens on the Mesko pick reinforces my impression of this thinking.

3. Department of Urban Development. This draft more than any before underscores the Florida Connection. To a fan, the question is why. I think it says a lot about the relationship, which is obvious. But without any back-end fleshing out of what's happening, the relationship is a necessary but not sufficient condition for this year's outcome.

I can nearly guarantee that it is virtually impossible that 3 Gators, out of all the programs in the country, were the best available for those specific draft slots. However, what I cannot do is tell you who's better (I know, I know, you can. But you're likely wrong.)

The outcome of this little statement of the obvious tells us something about how BB/the Pats view the draft: It's not that they're extremely good or extremely bad about player evaluation. They are just extremely good about the importance and validity of talent evaluation.

BB knows the odds too. He knows how many programs there are in the country. The Pats are certainly thorough in their scouting depatment. But Meyer represents depth of knowledge of one program. Bill weighs Urban's information on the "pipeline" players he has that year, because a head coach knows more about his guys than the scouts can find out in a few months.

This doesn't point to believing Florida's players are that good. It points to BB finding another way to up the odds of turning up good players - not necessarily superstars, good players. Yes, I know it didn't work with CJack. The theory is it will work more often than not.

The principle upheld is that the draft is a crapshoot, and that the Pats' philosophy is to beat the odds. Nature abhors a vacuum, and BB abhors a vacuum of information.

Addressing Need Via The Draft. The style of this draft was an excellent lesson in the Need/Value continuum. If it's extremely unlikely a guy will pan out at a position of relative need, and your roster is stocked with guys you think are extremely good, you look for value, without regard to position. Just because you have 52 "10s" and one "9" doesn't mean you abandon value to replace the 9 with a 10.

If you have a couple of 6s, then you get concerned - draft and free agency are the main way to address those concerns. We've seen in prior years that BB likes to fix areas of need with FA acquisitions. But like everything, those too are subject to uncertainty. Obviously, I'm thinking of OLB especially.

Sure, he tried the veteran FA route. We don't know the situational calculus that brought A.T. here - seemed a good fit, but did not pan out. But with that "find" now judged a miss, BB is back to taking more shots, this time through the draft. Moral: it's a mix. Value doesn't mean you never address a need. It means getting the most bang for the pick.

Perenniel > 1 year, or even 3. My main critique of draftniks is that year after year, they become enamored of a given year's crop (or believe that what they think they know about 1 or in extreme cases 2 years out defines draft strategy.)

As many here have put it, BB is "rebuilding" this team. You wouldn't know it by playoff appearances. We the fans get panicky about Life After Tom. It likely won't be pretty, especially compared to Life With Tom. A mini-concern is Life After Randy.

But once again, panic is not the way to keep a team at or close to the top in multi-year increments.

Your favorite binky receiver is not earth-shatteringly important. The young developmental QB is not screamingly important. We'd like the kid to be ready (O'Connell, at this writing,) if needed. We'd always like more possible future Randys. But the fact is, you can't draft Randy again. You can draft Dez Bryant, or you can draft Taylor Price in the third round, with the fifth pick you use. But you can't draft Randy. In effect, the principle is that Brady can make a serviceable receiver out of Reche Caldwell. We'll be okay. Better a new Randy (not to mention an extra Wes) than not, but the sky won't fall if any given need is not immediately addressed. That is the other side of "value": If you're good already, you can be calm in the draft. Calm is not complacent. It's calm. Calm people make better decisions than panicky b1tches. This is why pros handle the draft rather than fans.

I don't think anybody on the Pats' staff is unaware of Brady's significance. I also don't think anybody on the Pats' staff is likely - even in Brady's twilight - to start thinking "the future is now."

Now is now. The future is the future. Bearing this in mind seems an important building block to ensuring that there is a future.

Final coda: I know I write too long, and I know in stating what principles I think I'm observing, I'm stating the obvious and often restating others' observations. To anybody who I'm echoing here, consider it force multiplying rather than plagiarism.

To anybody who disagrees, fu(k you. But I mean that in the most fraternal "we're all patsfans here" way.

PFnV

 

[patfanken]

Ah, a man after my own heart. Thanks for taking the time to flesh out your ideas, even those I don't agree with, or have a different slant. To often posters make blanket statements without explain how they got to that position. Here a few brief comments on what you wrote

1. I think you over estimate the special teams aspect of McCourty. IMHO, he will be the starting CB opposite Boddin next season. This isn't an indictment on Butler, but an acknowledgment that McCourty has a better skill set to be outside, while Butler has a better skill set to be in the slot. McCourty's CB skills were right up there with Haiden, Wilson, Robinson, etc.

That's not to say that his special teams skill might have been the reason they chose him over Wilson, or took the pass rusher prospect. Because of his special teams skills to go along with his CB skills, he is more likely to make a bigger impact THIS season, than any of the pass rush prospects that were available.

BTW- there is a great post on the draft page which compares all the top CBs in a lot of ways. After you read it you will really feel good about the pick.

2. What I don't think most fans appreciate is the fact that we started out in this draft with NO 3rd round pick and ended up with TWO of them. What makes this more of a notable event is that in doing so we NEVER had to give up any of our picks in the round. In other words, we started with 1 first and 3 seconds, and STILL ended up with 1 first, 3 seconds, and 2 thirds

BB recognizes, in fact better than most fans, that he messes up on picks just as regularly as everyone else. What makes the difference is that he usually has more shots at the target than everyone else.

Just take the Jets. They had 4 picks over the weekend, and lets assume ALL of them will work out. That's 4 guys who will contribute to the long term success of their team. OTOH, BB had 12 picks, and if he misses on HALF of them, he'll still add 50% more contributing players than the Jets in this draft.

3. "Department of Urban Development" - what a great phrase. I'm pissed I didn't think of it myself. More importantly knowning the guy you draft well increases the possibility him fitting into your system. Who knows, if CJackson had been drafted by another team, he might have a more success. Clearly it wasn't his physical skills that were in question.

4. I think the Pats are reloading on the fly. I think they look at the draft in relationship to FA. If the FA market is deep, then they will willingly trade picks for proven players. Players they have seen on tape against NFL players. If the market is thin, then they will try to load up on picks.

Next years draft looks to be thin, while the FA market will be deep. That is why the Pats are concentrating their picks at the top of that draft to get what quality exists, while its still there. Next year they have a great chance to come out of those first 2 rounds with an impact RB, Pass rusher, and WR. Which will be all they need to add to vast talent of "good" players they are accumulating.

 

[stinkypete]

Excellent observations (and screamingly true). These principles that made the Patriots a perennial contender are the same principles that cause the board to go into uproar when Belichick "reaches" for a McCourty whith such an obvious need at OLB. Some thoughts to piggyback on yours.

The result of stockpiling picks and drafting for value is the phenomenal competition that we will see in camp. Look at the results when you combine the prospects of this draft class with some of the unproven members of the 2009 and 2008 groups.

WR - Tate/Price
TE - Gronkowski/Hernandez
OLB - Cunningham/Crable
ILB - Spikes/MacKenzie
CB - McCourty/Butler/Wheatley

This is a boatload of talent. There are future stars in this list. Make no mistake, there are eventual busts in this list too. Conceivably, this team needs 1 player from each group to develop into a starter. Those are pretty good odds. Without Belichick's wheeling and dealing, accumulating value picks both in current and future drafts, this young depth does not exist, which means that there is less camp competition, which means that there is no "bust insurance" so to speak.

Drafting Price takes the pressure off of Tate to succeed, drafting Spikes takes the pressure off of MacKenzie to succeed, etc.

2. The McCourty Pick: Special Teams don't just matter. They are 1/3 of the game, as BB continually says.
PFnV

Special teams will be the area in which the Patriots are most improved in 2010. It's unsexy as hell but special teams cannot be ignored. The 2009 coverage units were poor, IMO, and starting field position was a problem.

I think part of the initial adverse response to the McCourty pick was that he was viewed as primarily a special teamer in 2010. It's not much to get excited about. The truth is that McCOurty has excellent speed, instincts, leadership, and is a sound tackler the likes of this secondary hasn't seen in a long, long time. McCourty's a far better CB prospect than Butler was a year ago, and his special teams play is just icing on the cake.

Addressing Need Via The Draft.
PFnV

As Patriots fans we are spoiled from having such a stable group of perennial starters. In recent years we have been reminded what it is like to have a perennial question mark position. The fanbase's demands for an elite pass rusher are the result.

This team had needs everywhere. Depth at WR and TE, redzone offense, nickel corner, special teams coverage units and interior run defense were all needs too. Addressing a "lesser" need still improves the team. Choosing a solid system fit at a position of lesser need improves a team much more than compromising your standards to reach for the "greater" need.

The worst mistake a team can make is to sacrifice system needs to fill positional needs. Cunningham isn't the sexy splash pick that Kindle would have been. He'll probably never be Demarcus Ware. There is a good chance that Graham and Hughes will be better players, but Graham will be a better Eagle and Hughes will be a better Colt. Cunningham will be the better Patriot.

And, we can't forget, that the great defense of mid-decade were anchored by several good pass rushers, not one elite one.

 

[BradyBranch39]

I just want to point out that Meyer coached CJack for just two years.

This was a good read, though.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

I think to get into the Pats' collective "heads" about players: just give them football players, guys serious about the game with the physical tools to make it (really sorry, Mr. Klecko ) and the work ethic/character to maximize those tools. They'd better be good, but nobody is counting on great. You shoot for great and cross your fingers.

Football's the ultimate team sport and every one of these guys has a role. Much better to be good at every position and have great at 1 or 2 positions, than to have stars at 10 positions and JAGs at 43.

That's the heart of what separates a fan from the Pats' coaches, and that's the understanding that has made the Patriots the class of football in the combined salary cap/free agency era (whether that era will continue in the future is another subject altogether.)

More stating the obvious.

 

[patsfaninpa]

I just want to point out that Meyer coached CJack for just two years.

This was a good read, though.

Not to nitpick, but he only coached CJack in 2005 at Florida. We all know the value BB puts on defense. Don't even want to talk about those guys. To me, the two key players are the te's. I think we might see both of them on the field a lot. Even, at the same time. I'd like to become a more balanced team. If Gronk can block, sure as hell looks like he should be able to at that size. And, Hernandez can catch the ball. We will be a more balanced team. The play action pass may actually come back into our gameplan.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Not to nitpick, but he only coached CJack in 2005 at Florida. We all know the value BB puts on defense. Don't even want to talk about those guys. To me, the two key players are the te's. I think we might see both of them on the field a lot. Even, at the same time. I'd like to become a more balanced team. If Gronk can block, sure as hell looks like he should be able to at that size. And, Hernandez can catch the ball. We will be a more balanced team. The play action pass may actually come back into our gameplan.

I think there's some wisdom here, along with the fact that just 1 panning out fixes half of what ails us at TE, maybe even 3/4.

Another point: you don't always have Randy or someone like Randy. Try as you might, you can't count on replacing him. We've had the luxury for 3 years of having an elite #1 receiver. Guess what sports fans? That might be the exception not the rule. That's why they're elite.

So your point's well-taken. We need a vertical threat and we're still trying to catch that lightning in the bottle. But in terms of constructing a team that can score points by grinding you down, we've made good strides of late, adding the surprisingly effective Edelman and a couple of good candidates to give the Pats a TE threat.

TB's favorite receiver traditionally is the one that's open. It's become hard to remember that, because we finally got a couple of incredible talents at the position. Well, one's going away soon. We'd love to replace that threat, but can survive by spreading the field as well as stretching it.

Of COURSE we'll always look for a vertical threat; but if the vertical threat we want is not there, we'll make do with a stallworth-caliber #1 rather than a Moss.

(And much love to Price and Tate, may they both pan out and scare opposing Ds for a decade!)

 

[Ring 6]

I think there's some wisdom here, along with the fact that just 1 panning out fixes half of what ails us at TE, maybe even 3/4.

Another point: you don't always have Randy or someone like Randy. Try as you might, you can't count on replacing him. We've had the luxury for 3 years of having an elite #1 receiver. Guess what sports fans? That might be the exception not the rule. That's why they're elite.

So your point's well-taken. We need a vertical threat and we're still trying to catch that lightning in the bottle. But in terms of constructing a team that can score points by grinding you down, we've made good strides of late, adding the surprisingly effective Edelman and a couple of good candidates to give the Pats a TE threat.

TB's favorite receiver traditionally is the one that's open. It's become hard to remember that, because we finally got a couple of incredible talents at the position. Well, one's going away soon. We'd love to replace that threat, but can survive by spreading the field as well as stretching it.

Of COURSE we'll always look for a vertical threat; but if the vertical threat we want is not there, we'll make do with a stallworth-caliber #1 rather than a Moss.

(And much love to Price and Tate, may they both pan out and scare opposing Ds for a decade!)

Hernandez seems to be in the mold of Dallas Clark. Just because Welker is so good from the slot doesnt mean we dont need more mismatches on 3rd down.
Thats what I see from him, and HBack, slot receiver who doesnt block much kind of guy, and Gronko is the traditional TE who can do everything you need from a TE well.
Gronko, IMO, has a chance to be what he hoped both Graham and Watson could, but neither ever quite made it to.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Yeah, I'm having something like that discussion in the "biggest impact" thread. I am burned from the Grahambo/Watson experience. I honestly don't think the Pats look at a TE and think "this guy could be an 80-catch TE." They look at him and think "This guy could make the 30, 40, 50 catches we absolutely need the TE to make."

But the future of our WR corps is not necessarily like the present of our WR corps, and the bona fide big-play TE - whether represented by one of these guys or both - would be a hell of a nice surprise if/when that day comes.

Another corollary to all the above musings: mitigate downside risk among positions by complementary skill sets.

If neither Tate, Price, nor future moves add up to a serviceable #1 candidate (and we end up with 2 "#2" receivers plus a monster in the slot,) insurance at TE means you should have at least 1 other option. BB has always emphasized having a TE that can catch and block. I don't know whether to think Graham and Watson "washed out" or whether to think he values TE as a position you must fill, and should fill cheaply and deeply, unless you have a phenom on your hands.

As deep as this draft was at WR, I do wonder at the singificance of the outcome that there was 1 and only 1 candidate for a Pats jersey in the crop.

My thought is that we've had the most success getting these guys off other peoples' rosters, especially speedy elite receivers.

We've had "good enough" luck at TE that drafting a couple a year or at least one has become almost habit.

It's a necessary piece to the puzzle. I don't think Grahambo and Watson were not successes. The calculation seems to be that success in the rookie phase can be replicated through the draft. A phenomenal TE talent isn't even desirable until/unless receivers hit another "low" like in 06, but if a very good TE emerges, he survives past the rookie deal phase. If a phenom emerges, he MIGHT become a career Patriot, with the offense changing (if the timing is right, WR-wise) to accommodate the area in which it excels.

It would be a pleasant surprise, insurance, and we would not even see it until/unless a Dallas Clark is necessary for Brady to succeed. In any given game, of course, Gronk could be in the Dallas Clark role, if good enough, or more likely in the "poor man's Dallas Clark" role. That's just the odds.

 

[Nonentity]

3. Department of Urban Development. This draft more than any before underscores the Florida Connection. To a fan, the question is why. I think it says a lot about the relationship, which is obvious. But without any back-end fleshing out of what's happening, the relationship is a necessary but not sufficient condition for this year's outcome.

I can nearly guarantee that it is virtually impossible that 3 Gators, out of all the programs in the country, were the best available for those specific draft slots. However, what I cannot do is tell you who's better (I know, I know, you can. But you're likely wrong.)

The outcome of this little statement of the obvious tells us something about how BB/the Pats view the draft: It's not that they're extremely good or extremely bad about player evaluation. They are just extremely good about the importance and validity of talent evaluation.

BB knows the odds too. He knows how many programs there are in the country. The Pats are certainly thorough in their scouting depatment. But Meyer represents depth of knowledge of one program. Bill weighs Urban's information on the "pipeline" players he has that year, because a head coach knows more about his guys than the scouts can find out in a few months.

This doesn't point to believing Florida's players are that good. It points to BB finding another way to up the odds of turning up good players - not necessarily superstars, good players. Yes, I know it didn't work with CJack. The theory is it will work more often than not.

The principle upheld is that the draft is a crapshoot, and that the Pats' philosophy is to beat the odds. Nature abhors a vacuum, and BB abhors a vacuum of information.

I think this is a fantastic post, it was a great read all the way through. Don't do yourself down on the post length either - you're looking at someone who did a 6500 word mock draft


There's two huge questions when choosing to draft a player: What is he like on the field, and What is he like off the field? Film is the answer to the first question. Watch film, and lots of it, and work out what the player can and can't do.

But how do you evaluate character? That's where Urban Meyer and the rest of Bill's college brain trust come in. I recall reading Meyer saying that Bill doesn't ask about production at all. They talk about character, work ethic and intangibles.

It's as simple as this:


"Is he a good kid?"

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Good example how "off the field" can easily become "on the field." It doesn't have to be drama queen stuff a la TO... it can be work ethic that leads to never understanding roles or the playbook for example. It can be that mental toughness of thinking "behind by 21 - how do we win it?" as opposed to "Game over man."

Very few athletes are so physically gifted that they'll succeed even if they lapse mentally. To the extent that he "dogs it" on some plays - still not that convinced of that - I guess you could say Moss is one.

slightly off topic - The Onion did a great timeline once of the ups and downs of Terrell Owens' career. For 2005 it said "Won his part of the Super Bowl." I LULled on the metro.

 

[thodoks]

PatsFanInVa: FANTASTIC post. Thank you for taking the time to actually think about the draft in the context of larger issues, and identifying the criteria that highlights that the way the Pats do business simply isn't matched anywhere in the league.

You're a breath of fresh air in this forum.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Next years draft looks to be thin, while the FA market will be deep. That is why the Pats are concentrating their picks at the top of that draft to get what quality exists, while its still there. Next year they have a great chance to come out of those first 2 rounds with an impact RB, Pass rusher, and WR. Which will be all they need to add to vast talent of "good" players they are accumulating.

Good post, even where we see different emphases. Would add: RB is something that if it does not become a "just can't get the job done" situation - I don't believe it's there - is more of a wannahave than gottahave. My reasoning is that RBs can always be found. A Maroney (in the Pats' O) is what you expect. A Corey Dillon is what you may luck into, but can't pick with reliability (notice we got him from elsewhere... not that that equates to certainty, but he did come with a track record, in various senses of the phrase.)

So at RB I take it Maroney's rookie deal is up (?) which would mean you get him back cheap if you're okay w/his development, or you replace him relatively cheaply via the draft. I wouldn't be surprised if we package a lot of the first four picks' value into FA acquisitions or future hauls of draft picks. The pleasures of being a Pats fan.

 

[Captain Cliche]

BB referred to the draft as "freebies". There is a lot of wisdom in what seems like an off hand remark.

If you do the math...in an ideal world all 7 picks would make your team times the average player lifespan of 5 years this would add up to 35 players out of the draft to populate your team. Where do the other 18 players come from? Plus your practice squad.

The point is, if you draft strictly for need, you still have to flesh out your roster from elsewhere. So you draft for the players that are difficult or expensive to find elsewhere...left tackles, tight ends, DE's, 300# athletic freaks, shut down corners (hopefully)etc.

This places lesser value on receivers, running backs and outside linebackers where you may be able to get by without high draft pick/expensive free agents because you can not fill every position with elite level talent...it would be too expensive and cost you depth-wise. I think this is where some fans here get frustrated when we pass over big name running back, receiver, and outside linebacker picks/free agents.

Of course this doesn't happen in a vacuum...the presence of Matt Light and Sea Bass allowed BB to draft in other areas. Having TFB allows the team to take a flyer on late rounds QB prospects because we are set at that position.

I hope I am making a little sense here. I am having a little trouble articulating this idea.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Yep, it does make sense - but there's also scheme. RBs are especially immune to differences in schemes (IMO,) the most purely non-skill position. (NOTE - I say that with ironic awareness that the spots we call "skill positions" are misnamed. They are in many ways the "natural talent" positions, with the clearest exception being QB. However even receivers can't necessarily translate natural talent; see Galloway, Joey.)

I also say this with awareness that everybody will immediately clamor that Maroney must be used "in space." Look, we don't play in space. We play in Foxboro. We get him into "space" sometimes, but it's not rocket science (see what I did there?) You need a bruiser sometimes, and you need crazy legs sometimes, and if you're thinking "every down back," you're thinking in the past. We might be looking for a semi-fata$$ back next time we go to that well.

The "freebies" comment dovetails nicely here. It's all about context and tone, and I wouldn't read TOO much into it. But I do think it supports the thinking at Patriots Place, that you can think highly of any prospect, but you can't count on any of them (even first rounders.) They're all rocks that might have gold in them. Of course, first rounders are from streams in California in the 1840s, and seventh-rounders are from bags of topsoil down at the Home Depot... but it happens.

 

[patsox23]

GREAT stuff PfVA!

 

[PatsFanStnfrd]

Good stimulating posts on this thread.

This draft (and entire off season) has been marked by a re-calibration of the kind of player who should be a Patriot. To us on the outside, what happens in the locker room remains opaque, but there has been non-stop chatter about lack of team chemistry and leadership issues. Only one player has been publicly identified as a "rebel": AD. Surely there were others. Have they been already let go? Yet, reading from the Management's actions this off season, they are acting as if they really are determined to send a message. So:
-- the focus on signing Wilfork, Bodden and other home grown free agents, thus eliminating the grumbling of even the "good citizens" who were simply dissatisfied (or uncertain) about their pay and future. Indeed, by doing what they did they empowered these players to play leadership roles in the future in the lockerroom and on the field.
-- next, the passivity towards FA and RFAs -- partly justified through lack of quality
-- similarly, the unwillingness to trade for premier talents like Boldin or Marshall. The cost in draft picks for Boldin in particular was reasonable but the Patriots were unwilling to give him an extensionuntil he has played out his contract in NE. Here again, management seemed to be sensitive to creating an inequity in pay by say paying a Boldin $ 8 mill/year relative to say $ 3 mill/yr for Welker.

And in the draft, they execrcised considerable self-restraint and discipline. They passed on Dez Bryant who football writers such as Gosselin have picked to be "Rookie of the Year". Kyle Wilson is a physical player some rated above McCourty but had some noise on character issues. Bert Breer of the Globe who covered the Cowboys in his prior gig, was openly critical of BB for not going for "home runs" or not taking a flyer on "gifted" athlethes such as Kindle or selecting Cunningham over his teammate Dunlap. Breer was only echoing the thoughts of many fans who prefer sizzle with their steaks. And it is far from a coincidence that many of the Pats draft picks were team captains on their respective teams.

So to sum up, there is an over arching message underlying all the Patriots moves. We want a certain type of player to be a Patriot. Still it would be a shame if this marked more than a re-calibration. It would be a shame to see a great coach who reached for greatness by his willing to dare, eliminated considering "difficult" talents like Dillon or Moss because of locker room problems last year. You do not do yourself any favors by eschewing free agents and by relying on the draft. Ultimately, no pick is safe. There is always risk. Talent risk. Maturity risk. It is always a risk-return tradeoff.

Now we get a chance to wait, watch and judge.

 

[Captain Cliche]

It all stems from the salary cap.

No one can load up on elite talent at every position ala the Yankees. Therefore you need and have to have your fair allotment of JAG's. You need to decide where you can afford to get by and where you must either use a high draft pick or expensive free agent.

If you select a receiver with your high first round pick, where else are you hurting the team by not selecting a left tackle...for instance. Now you have to acquire one through free agency (expensive) or get your QB killed...pick your poison. Ask Matt Millan and the Loins how that worked out for them. These GM's and owners that fall in love with these "name" players are killing their teams.

The other side of the coin is finding a gem in the late rounds. How much trouble and picks have the Pats saved by finding TFB in the 6th round? Right off the bat you can count the 1st for Bledsoe. It may have been luck to stumble upon him, but it was good management to recognise his value.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

True dat, but all teams are under the same cap, and take various roads under the same constraints. A while back - maybe 04 or 05 - I put together scatter graphs representing a different curve between Pats' compensation and compensation on some other teams - i.e., with the same total outlay pot, you can look at who gets what and get a rough idea of who the "outliers" were. We started with TFB, added Seymour, and had I been tracking later years, there would have been others. Back when I was into the cap stuff, I saw the Seymour chopping block situation coming a couple years out, but plenty of other people did too, as well as some other guys who were likely '09 and '10 cap casualties. The Pats still maintain a pretty contained elite group (though in all honesty I haven't checked out Miguel's page for a while - you should, if you're into caponomics.) Of course all those rules might be about to get blown up, though I still don't believe it until I see it. We'll see how revenue recovers in '10; that'll be a big input into how chafed labor and management are at each other.

There are enough holes that teams don't seem to go to cap jail as regularly, but that's mainly because they've all learned where the warning track is (by the way, capologists, if I'm wrong about that, just let me know.)

 

[ausbacker]

The last time BB decided to go with his modified brainchild version of Urban Meyer's we ended up 18-1. Let's hope a similar type (minus the 1) of success comes with the latest connection.