value vs need revisited

[ayjackson]

Most years, with free agency preceding the draft by almost two months, teams address their roster needs in FA and then draft best talent available (generally).

If there is no FA before the draft, how much does this dynamic change? I think this year, especially for teams with a lot of roster spots to fill, you`ll see a lot of drafting for need and maybe some odd runs up the draft board for some prospects.

 

[cstjohn17]

Most years, with free agency preceding the draft by almost two months, teams address their roster needs in FA and then draft best talent available (generally).

If there is no FA before the draft, how much does this dynamic change? I think this year, especially for teams with a lot of roster spots to fill, you`ll see a lot of drafting for need and maybe some odd runs up the draft board for some prospects.

Good point, usually by the time the draft rolls around the Patriots have adequate athough oftem uninspiring options for every unit. The draft turns poor into average and average into good. This year they either fill open roster spots via the draft and then try to cherry pick a FA or two or take a chance that free agency will still go ahead as planned and try to pick BPA.

With the current holes I expect 2 of the top 5 picks to be offensive lineman.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

Good point, usually by the time the draft rolls around the Patriots have adequate athough oftem uninspiring options for every unit. The draft turns poor into average and average into good. This year they either fill open roster spots via the draft and then try to cherry pick a FA or two or take a chance that free agency will still go ahead as planned and try to pick BPA.

With the current holes I expect 2 of the top 5 picks to be offensive lineman.

I would not be upset if we took 2 O linemen early,if we used the other 3 on DE and OLB players.

 

[sg14]

This thought is not free agent driven, but speaking of value vs need, maybe BB will act more like a fan and say "I am sick of tired of no pass rush, so lets do whatever it takes to get the premier pass rusher". Then maybe not,,,

Am expecting that the defense will get most of the attention, but we do need a starting caliber Right guard, and am expecting another OT,
so 17, 28 go OLB, DE, then the two second rounders are OL,
with a later round C

 

[Ochmed Jones]

"I am sick of tired of no pass rush, so lets do whatever it takes to get the premier pass rusher".

I have been saying this for the past 5 years in a row.

 

[MaineMan]

This may affect some of our "need" calculations. Reiss posted this today:

Ian Rapoport of the Boston Herald reported today, citing an unidientified source, that the Patriots have asked Kaczur to cut his $3.4 million. Kaczur does not plan to do so........

 

[patchick]

Since the many possible definitions of "value" are a reliable argument starter, can we just say for the purposes of this thread that we're talking about balancing roster needs with the relative quality of players at different positions available at a given point in the draft?

Anyway...yes, this is setting up to be a very tricky draft if free agents aren't squared away. Can you afford to leave a gaping hole in your lineup, counting on securing a top FA? If everybody decides "no" and drafts more for need, will that come back to bite the veteran FAs when signings finally begin? Etc.

 

[mgteich]

The patriots have relatively few needs and 6 early picks.

I do not think that the patriot should, or will, leave an gaping holes, hoping to fill that need in free agency.

There will two offsetting effects on free agents. Some wteams will pay more, some will pay less, all depending on who they were able to get in the draft. Some teams will be quite desparate.

HOW THIS AFFECTS THE PATRIOTS
1) OT is a gaping hole, since apparently Kaczur is NOT viewed as a starter.
2) OG is a gaping hole. We have Connolly at one guard spot and Neal/Wendell at the other. We may certainly look to the OT's to find our OG. We could also look to the couple of top C/G's, but the pickings are slim among guards and centers.
3) RB is a gaping hole. We need help for Green-Ellis and Woodhead.
4) DE is a gaping hole. G. Warren is not re-signed. And we cannot count on both Ty Warren and Wright being back to 100% in 2011.
5) OLB is a want, just like every year. We have youngsters Cunningham, Spikes, Fletcher and Moore. We could see an Acho or a Beal, or not.

BOTTOM LINE
I see Belichick putting a premium on the values for DE's, OG's, OT's and RB's.

To put it another way, I would be quite satisfied in we ended the 2nd round having filled these four positions. I would be even more fine if we traded 74 and 92 to move up to 55 to draft an OLB.

Since the many possible definitions of "value" are a reliable argument starter, can we just say for the purposes of this thread that we're talking about balancing roster needs with the relative quality of players at different positions available at a given point in the draft?

Anyway...yes, this is setting up to be a very tricky draft if free agents aren't squared away. Can you afford to leave a gaping hole in your lineup, counting on securing a top FA? If everybody decides "no" and drafts more for need, will that come back to bite the veteran FAs when signings finally begin? Etc.

 

[Water Boy]

I have been saying this for the past 5 years in a row.

How would you address this need in this year's draft Ochmed?

 

[ctpatsfan77]

The patriots have relatively few needs and 6 early picks.

I do not think that the patriot should, or will, leave an gaping holes, hoping to fill that need in free agency.

There will two offsetting effects on free agents. Some wteams will pay more, some will pay less, all depending on who they were able to get in the draft. Some teams will be quite desparate.

HOW THIS AFFECTS THE PATRIOTS
1) OT is a gaping hole, since apparently Kaczur is NOT viewed as a starter.
2) OG is a gaping hole. We have Connolly at one guard spot and Neal/Wendell at the other. We may certainly look to the OT's to find our OG. We could also look to the couple of top C/G's, but the pickings are slim among guards and centers.
3) RB is a gaping hole. We need help for Green-Ellis and Woodhead.
4) DE is a gaping hole. G. Warren is not re-signed. And we cannot count on both Ty Warren and Wright being back to 100% in 2011.
5) OLB is a want, just like every year. We have youngsters Cunningham, Spikes, Fletcher and Moore. We could see an Acho or a Beal, or not.

Apparently not all "gaping holes" are created the same.

Seriously, though: they need a RB, but they don't need a RB to come in and be "the man," they need one to come in and make the two-headed monster they have right now into a three-headed monster.

 

[cstjohn17]

The patriots have relatively few needs and 6 early picks.

I do not think that the patriot should, or will, leave an gaping holes, hoping to fill that need in free agency.

There will two offsetting effects on free agents. Some wteams will pay more, some will pay less, all depending on who they were able to get in the draft. Some teams will be quite desparate.

HOW THIS AFFECTS THE PATRIOTS
1) OT is a gaping hole, since apparently Kaczur is NOT viewed as a starter.
2) OG is a gaping hole. We have Connolly at one guard spot and Neal/Wendell at the other. We may certainly look to the OT's to find our OG. We could also look to the couple of top C/G's, but the pickings are slim among guards and centers.
3) RB is a gaping hole. We need help for Green-Ellis and Woodhead.
4) DE is a gaping hole. G. Warren is not re-signed. And we cannot count on both Ty Warren and Wright being back to 100% in 2011.
5) OLB is a want, just like every year. We have youngsters Cunningham, Spikes, Fletcher and Moore. We could see an Acho or a Beal, or not.

BOTTOM LINE
I see Belichick putting a premium on the values for DE's, OG's, OT's and RB's.

To put it another way, I would be quite satisfied in we ended the 2nd round having filled these four positions. I would be even more fine if we traded 74 and 92 to move up to 55 to draft an OLB.

I agree with 1 and 2, would switch 3 and 4 and then have RB, WR, Safety next in line. Which based on my track record of predictions means we should expect QB, TE, P, K with the first 4 picks.

Offensive line is a mess, potential starters under contract are (Koppen, Connolly, Vollmer which could leave two rookies protecting the franchise... shudder.

Kaczur move could affect draft approach - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

 

[mgteich]

Agreed........

Apparently not all "gaping holes" are created the same.

Seriously, though: they need a RB, but they don't need a RB to come in and be "the man," they need one to come in and make the two-headed monster they have right now into a three-headed monster.

 

[bucky]

Since the many possible definitions of "value" are a reliable argument starter, can we just say for the purposes of this thread that we're talking about balancing roster needs with the relative quality of players at different positions available at a given point in the draft?

I think BB has clearly defined this to be his definition of value on numerous occasions. In particular, value is defined as a player's ability to contribute to the team's existing roster both in the short and long term. In other words, if we had Chris Johnson as the RB here (on a rookie contract), you would not see BB picking a RB in the 1st round even if he were clearly the highest rated player (unless of course he was better than Johnson).

 

[meggett]

kaczur from what i hear is gone. Not as down on the O-line as others here, BB usually finds a way to make it work. I think Light will be back for at least one more season ( I have no info on this, just gut talking) not that Light gives me any relief against a speed rusher, but its not the end of the world.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I think BB has clearly defined this to be his definition of value on numerous occasions. In particular, value is defined as a player's ability to contribute to the team's existing roster both in the short and long term. In other words, if we had Chris Johnson as the RB here (on a rookie contract), you would not see BB picking a RB in the 1st round even if he were clearly the highest rated player (unless of course he was better than Johnson).

FWIW, I would argue that the best name for this sort of value is an economic one: marginal utility.

In other words, there are two parts to the equation, at least with regard to picks in the first four rounds.

COSTS:
(1) The draft pick used to select the draftee
(2) The money paid to that player
(3) The talents of the player cut to add the draftee

BENEFITS:
(1) The talents of that player
(2) The costs saved, if any, from cutting the existing player

The marginal utility = BENEFITS - COSTS.

For example, this is why I have a hard time seeing an ILB drafted this year: adding an ILB would require getting rid of either Guyton or Fletcher, and doing so would increase the salary cap hit without adding a huge net amount of talent.

OTOH, last year, at TE, the cupboard was so bare that GRONK was beyond outstanding value, and having Hernandez available in the fourth was far too much value to pass up. [Think about that: not only did the Pats get the best DB in the draft, they then got the TWO best players in the entire draft at TE.]

 

[patchick]

FWIW, I would argue that the best name for this sort of value is an economic one: marginal utility.

Totally agree. One other factor I'd toss in to your value equation is opportunity/scarcity, as represented by the distribution of talent available at that position. That includes both intra-draft tactical calculations and leaguewide "planet theory" calculations.

(Ironically, the goal of my earlier post was to avoid defining "value"! But you did such an excellent job, it makes me think that a little board glossary might be a good thing.)

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Totally agree. One other factor I'd toss in to your value equation is opportunity/scarcity, as represented by the distribution of talent available at that position. That includes both intra-draft tactical calculations and leaguewide "planet theory" calculations.

(Ironically, the goal of my earlier post was to avoid defining "value"! But you did such an excellent job, it makes me think that a little board glossary might be a good thing.)

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooo! I don't want to take algebra again!

 

[patchick]

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooo! I don't want to take algebra again!

Sorry, I'm always verbose and technical first thing in the morning. One more cup of coffee and I might be able to restate it in the form of a knock-knock joke.

 

[patchick]

Knock Knock.

BB: Who's there?

OLB, 6'4" 256 4.59 21 40.5" 10'08" 4.18 6.87

BB: Go away.

 

[Peachhead]

knock knock.

Bb: Who's there?

Olb, 6'4" 256 4.59 21 40.5" 10'08" 4.18 6.87

bb: Go away.

omg...lolrotfl!