Ron Sellers
2nd Team Getting Their First Start
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2010
- Messages
- 1,896
- Reaction score
- 0
I brought up tight ends to show how silly the concept of 'we should never ever ever again draft a (fill in the position) between the rounds of (fill in the rounds that are cherry picked to fit said argument) because (fill in the name of the players that did not live up to your expectations)'. Prior to 2010 the same identical argument could be made for drafting tight ends based on the logic you presented, in my opinion. In fact, others on this site said exactly that.ok lets draft more DBs and WRs our GM/HC/OC/DC has a great track record of selecting players at these positions. i never said we drafted tight ends poorly, you did.
Sounds to me like you're picking specific rounds to fit an argument. And as mentioned before your definition of a bust seems to vary from position to position to fit your argument.read your post. i said we did a decent job of drafting tight ends, certainly not poorly enough to stop drafting them. You listed players, and the only busts were those picked in rounds 4 through 7. I chose players drafted in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, premium picks.
Adding veterans rather than rookies, whether it be by free agency or a trade, is not some magic elixir either. Do I really need to list all the veteran wide receivers and defensive backs added over the last decade that didn't live up to expectations either?going forward i would not be too thrilled if we selected DBs and WRs in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. do i think we could potentially do well there? of course. But id rather sign current nfl veterans at these positions and draft where we have drafted well. therefore, we have a greater liklihood of improving the team.
Talent evaluation is not really all that different for college personnel or veteran NFL players. The reality is that you're going to miss as often as not with either one. Think of it like baseball, where even the best hitters are making an out two out of three at bats, and less like hockey where even a below-average goalie is making a save on nine out of ten shots he faces.
I just personally think it would be highly counter-productive to be looking at a draft board, it's the Patriots turn to draft, everybody agrees that the team should take a certain player, and then someone says 'wait, we can't take him because the last couple of times we drafted a player at that position it didn't work out' ... and then go on to the next highest rated player on the board and go through the same exact scenario.
I'm not trying to pick on you specifically; what am I attempting to counter is the argument. It is an argument that many here adhere to, and in my opinion it does not really make a lot of sense to me. In my opinion it is an overreaction to a very small sample size, combined with unrealistic expectations on the overall performance and productivity of players selected in the draft.
When you only have a very limited number of bullets in your holster, why purposely throw some of them away?