The Patriots' Record in the 2nd Round

[patchick]

I'm still kind of surprised that Butler didn't pan out. I liked him a whole lot after his rookie season and thought that he'd develop quite well. He nosedived quickly.

I think Chad Jackson is one reason the Patriots have strived so hard to find team captains and intelligent players to add to the mix. He was really the anti-Patriot in different respects, and it burned us. So based on the teams renewed high quality character talent search, you can add him into the successes column for his future draft contributions

For both of those reasons, Wheatley was a puzzling disappointment to me. Tremendous athleticism AND intangibles -- check out this take on him from nfldraftscout:

Hard worker in the training room who also puts in extra hours studying game films...Type of athlete that performs best against top-level competition, as he loves the challenge...Dependable field leader who will spend extra time mentoring the younger players (has a bit of Troy Vincent in him, as he tries to understand the assignments of every position)...Could possibly make a good coaching candidate one day due to his grasp of the playbook

Maybe it just came down to the injuries?

 

[ZoisKing]

For both of those reasons, Wheatley was a puzzling disappointment to me. Tremendous athleticism AND intangibles -- check out this take on him from nfldraftscout:



Maybe it just came down to the injuries?

Injuries are going to happen, but they're such a buzzkill when you think you've got a great prospect on your hands (i.e., Edwards, Katzenmoyer).

Cincinatti grabbed a binky of mine several drafts ago, David Pollack, whose very promising career ended quickly due to a spinal cord injury. I thought he'd be outstanding,and would have enjoyed watching him from an opponent's perspective.

You'd think that the amount of wear and tear on CBs would be less since they're so far away from the line, but I guess arm injuries are fairly common due to their relative slightness of frame and the extension they have to give on their pass defending.

Wheatley has certainly experienced plenty of that, and its his number one reason for not panning out.

 

[The Gr8est]

Injuries are going to happen, but they're such a buzzkill when you think you've got a great prospect on your hands (i.e., Edwards, Katzenmoyer).

Cincinatti grabbed a binky of mine several drafts ago, David Pollack, whose very promising career ended quickly due to a spinal cord injury. I thought he'd be outstanding,and would have enjoyed watching him from an opponent's perspective.

You'd think that the amount of wear and tear on CBs would be less since they're so far away from the line, but I guess arm injuries are fairly common due to their relative slightness of frame and the extension they have to give on their pass defending.

Wheatley has certainly experienced plenty of that, and its his number one reason for not panning out.

Having a titanium rod permanently installed in one of your wrists from injury, while still in college, isn't the best omen either.

 

[mayoclinic]

One other thing to consider in the 2nd round analysis: since the Pats usually have been drafting in the last 10 picks of each round, many their 2nd round picks have been late 2nd round picks. The Pats have shown that they can find great values in the bottom 3rd of the 1st round. But finding great values in the bottom 3rd on the 2nd round seems harder. When the Pats traded out of the bottom third of the second round, the teams they traded with didn't do particularly well (Cincinnati took M at 56 in 2004; Baltimore took Adam Terry at 64 in 2005; Miami took Samson Satele at 60 in 2008; I'm not including Brandon Harris who Houston took at 60 in 2011 because it's too soon to judge).

Looking at the last 10 picks in the 2nd round from 2001-2010, there seems to be a pretty spotty success rate:

2001: Quincy Carter, Michael Stone, Quinton Carver, Tony Dixon, Willie Howard, Travis Henry, Marques Tuiasosopo, Andre Dyson, Shaun Rogers and Gary Baxter. Rogers is the only player of those 10 who became a stud, and he had an up and down career with personal issues.

2002: Ladell Batts, Jon McGraw, Michael Lewis, Sheldon Brown, Anton Pelapoi, Ryan Denney, Antwan Randel El, Antonio Bryant, Travis Fisher and Deion Branch. Branch and Randel El were the 2 best picks, and the Pats got one of them with the last pick in the round. Not too bad. Bryand had talent but huge inconsistency and diva issues.

2003: Bryan Scott, Osi Umenyiora, Anthony Adams, Mike Doss, Alonzo Jackson, Tyrone Calico, LJ Smith, Terrance Kiel, Teyo Johnson, DeWayne White. Umenyiora was the jewel of this group.

2004: Greg Jones, Madieu Williams, Antwan Odom, Shawntae Spencer, Sean Jones, Courtney Watson, Kris Wilson, Keary Colbert, Marquis Hill. Not an impact player among them. Sean Jones was decent. Darnell Dockett went in the 1st pick of the 3rd round.

2005: Roscoe Parrish, Darrent Williams, Justin Miller, Terence Murphy, Jonathan Babineaux, Kelvin Hayden, Vincent Jackson, Bryant McFadden, Matt McCoy, Adam Terry. Vincent Jackson is the stud here, with Kelvin Hayden and Bryant McFadden having solid careers.

2006: Andrew Whitworth, Chris Chester, Devin Hester, Richard Marshall, Jeremy Trueblood, Maurice Jones-Drew, Tony Scheffler, Tim Jennings, Daryl Tapp, Tavaris Jackson. Probably the best group so far, with Maurice Jones-Drew a stud, Devin Hester one of the great return men of all time, and Richard Marshall a solid CB.

2007: Josh Wilson, Tim Crowder, Victor Abiamiri, Ikaika Alama-Francis, Ryan Kalil, Samson Statele, Gerald Alexander, Dan Bazuin, Brandon Jackson, Sabby Piscatelli. 1 stud (Ryan Kalil) and mostly duds.

2008: Jason Jones, Ray Rice, Brian Brohm, Chad Henne, Dexter Jackson, Mike Pollack, Patrick Lee, Martellus Bennett, Terrance Wheatley, Terrell Thomas. 1 stud (Rice), 2 solid players (Thomas and Jones) and otherwise nothing better than backup material.

2009: William Moore, Fili Moala, Paul Kruger, Sebastian Vollmer, Sherrod Martin, William Beatty, Sean Smith, Sen'Derrick Marks, Cody Brown, Richard Quinn. Vollmer has been the stud of this group. William Moore and Sean Smith have been ok. Not a lot of clear starters out of this group.

2010: Sean Lee, Mike Neal, Terrance Cody, Ben Tate, Montario Hardesty, Golden Tate, Vladimir Ducasse, Brandon Spikes, Pat Angerer, Charles Brown. The 2010 draft was considered unusually deep, and this is the strongest group of the bunch. Sean Lee has been a stud, Brandon Spikes and Pat Angerer have shown flashes of brilliance, Ben Tate has shown flashes despite missing a year with injury, and Terrance Cody has been at least a solid run stuffer. But Golden Tate, Montario Hardesty and Vlad Ducasse have been pretty disappointing.

So my take home messages from this analysis include the following:

1. EVERYONE is pretty crappy at finding great players in the last 10 picks of the 2nd round.

2. The bottom 10 picks seem much more hit-or-miss than having a top-50 pick. Teams miss in the top 50 but overall it's a bit less uncertain. Perhaps that argues in favor of trading up, though the Chad Jackson and Ron Brace picks underscore that that is not a sure thing. Trading back or out may make more sense. The Pats traded away picks 56 in 2004 for Corey Dillon and 60 in 2007 for Wes Welker. They traded back from pick 64 in 2005, 60 in 2011 and 62 in 2012. So BB may be well aware of how much of a crapshoot picking at that point in the draft can be.

A pick in the 55-64 range is much less certain than a pick in the 33-42 range. No big surprise there. Are the Pats worse at drafting in the second round, or have they just been drafting more frequently in the bottom part where there are fewer gems left to find?

 

[ZoisKing]

I think this thread has done a good job exposing the inconsistencies in the draft process.

A lot of it is luck. Issues a player has that don't expose themselves come to the surface when they take that next step. Others are derailed due to injuries. Sometimes the best scouting processes yield nothing.

I feel that if you get 3 genuine players out of a draft you've done very well. Any more than that and you've overachieved to a great extent. I think we've achieved that this year, and when I look back on the two previous to 2012, then I think we've really done well; basically reshaping our team into a major Superbowl contender for several years to come.

 

[patchick]

Just did this exercise for the Ravens too, after noticing this remark in the Pats/Ravens thread:

Without reviewing the picks it seems as if the Ravens usually do a better job with the picks they have but BB does a much better job than anyone of moving around in the draft to get extra picks.

It turns out that the Ravens also grade out at exactly 50% of players selected in the 2nd round being "successes." (The did have a couple of borderline guys who just missed the cut, though.)

I guess the takeaway message is that the most stable, successful NFL personnel operations can expect half of their 2nd-round picks to become starting-caliber players for them.

Note, of course, that it's harder to crack the starting lineup for such teams! A quick peek at some of the LEAST stable, successful opertions suggests that a different measure of draft success is required for them. Their picks are much more likely to show a pattern of starting their first or second season -- out of necessity, presumably -- then never again.

 

[thodoks]

sometimes i really wonder whether some of my patsfans bros ever leave the house

 

[ZoisKing]

Switching to the 1st round and the crapshoot that it is, I was looking back at previous posts members were making concerning our 7th pick in the 2008 draft.

A good top three from the majority for that slot would have been:

1) Gholston
2) Harvey
3) Groves

A lot of people on this board wanted any of those 3 guys and were disappointed in not acquiring them. Now fast forward 4 years later and how many of them have made an impact? None. Zero.

That's shocking to some degree thinking that most of us just don't get it when it comes to scouting players via media picks or random youtube videos. The majority of the board had no idea. Yet, year after year, many continue to have very strong opinions on players they really haven't seen enough of to warrant such an opinion.

All that means is that we have to take the picks in stride and give each player the benefit of the doubt and hope for the best. We're all armchair scouts.

Anyway, the guy we did select with that first pick after trading down 3 spots was Jerod Mayo, who I'll admit I knew very little about. I was sad that the 49ers managed to win a few games near the end of the season to make us miss out on some top guys I really liked, but in the end, the Pats knew best and grabbed a tremendous football player.

 

[Ron Sellers]

Steelers: 8 total picks, 4 successful, 50% hit rate.

Patriots: 14 total picks, 7 successful, 50% hit rate.

So that's dead even at 50%...

Two comments.

As far as building the team goes the percentage is irrelevant (more on that in a moment); what is important is the total number of players that the team adds that contribute at whatever level (elite, solid starters, good sub package/backup, good special teamer). The guys that didn't make it are gone, they don't matter; the players that make it do matter. In this example it's as simple as 7 being greater then 4.

Fans and the media get hung up on the percentages for whatever reason - but why? Let's say there are two teams and one trades up, ending up with fewer picks, and another trades down, resulting in more picks. Team A ends up with 3 out of 4 good picks; Team B ends up with 5 out of 10 good picks. People can point to how Team A hit on 75% of their picks while Team B hit on only 50% all they want, but I'll go with Team B every day of the week. Why? Simple, they netted 5 good players and the other guys only ended up with 3.

Maybe it's because so many statistics in sports are based on percentages, but it's as if we collectively have been brainwashed into thinking that this draft pick percentage (that nobody seems to be able to agree on what is good, bad or average), when in fact the total number is what is most important.


5>3 matters; 75%>50% does not.

 

[patchick]

As far as building the team goes the percentage is irrelevant (more on that in a moment); what is important is the total number of players that the team adds that contribute at whatever level (elite, solid starters, good sub package/backup, good special teamer). The guys that didn't make it are gone, they don't matter; the players that make it do matter. In this example it's as simple as 7 being greater then 4.

This came up earlier in the thread -- the point of looking at percentages rather than totals was to tease apart draft strategy vs. talent identification. (The Pats had stood accused of lousy talent identification in round 2.)

But beyond that, wouldn't the total number of players successfully drafted IN A GIVEN ROUND, in isolation, be a messed up measure of draft success? E.g. if a team regularly traded up or down from round 2, they'd end up as losers on that measure, regardless of the ultimate talent acquired. Plus one way a team ends up with extra picks is by trading away veterans, which should be factored in somehow if you're just totaling up.

Anyway, since I was addressing concerns about the team's choices in a particular round, percentages seemed the way to go -- while also including the absolute numbers for perspective. :confused2:

 

[jsull87]

One thing to note is that for the 5 years between 2003 (Eugene Wilson) and 2009 (Pat Chung, Sebastian Vollmer) the Pats didn't have a successful 2nd round pick, not including trades:

2004: Pick 64 used on Marquise Hill, who never developed before his tragic death. Pick 56 was traded for Corey Dillon, which was a successful trade.

2005: Pats traded back from #64 with Baltimore for 3rd round picks in 2005 and 2006. Ellis Hobbs, taken with Baltimore's 3rd at 84 was reasonably succesful. Adam Terry, who the Ravens took at #64, hasn't done too much.

2006: Chad Jackson was the worst 2nd round pick of the BB era, and cost a third for a trade up, to boot.

2007: Pats traded out from #60 and got Wes Welker. Great trade.

2008: Pick 62 used on Terrance Wheatley, who never developed, in part due to injuries.

That's a pretty bleak stretch, and would be much worse if not for the Dillon and Welker trades.

These have been some interesting stats comparing the teams at the top and thanks for putting them together. I do agree when saying how many picks the pats had you do have to take into account the Welker trade although it shouldnt come into account when looking at draft hit vs miss.

I do take exception to the Merriweather as a miss. I think the reality is he was a starter who was an above average safety. he then decided he would try and be Ed Reed and go free lancing and we all know how that turned out but i personally can't call that a draft miss as on paper we picked a pro bowl safety in the 20's of the draft which is all you can ask from our draft scouts... it's just unfortunate the guy started to believe his own hype.

 

[mayoclinic]

These have been some interesting stats comparing the teams at the top and thanks for putting them together. I do agree when saying how many picks the pats had you do have to take into account the Welker trade although it shouldnt come into account when looking at draft hit vs miss.

I do take exception to the Merriweather as a miss. I think the reality is he was a starter who was an above average safety. he then decided he would try and be Ed Reed and go free lancing and we all know how that turned out but i personally can't call that a draft miss as on paper we picked a pro bowl safety in the 20's of the draft which is all you can ask from our draft scouts... it's just unfortunate the guy started to believe his own hype.

I believe I graded Meriweather as a "meh" in my list - not a bust, but he didn't live up to expectations.

Expectations are everything. One person considers Bethel Johnson a good 2nd round pick because of his ST ability, while another considers him a bust. Certainly he didn't establish himself as a consistent long term starter, which would be my metric for "success" in a 2nd round pick. Not everyone is going to be a grand slam like Gronk, but I think a player who establishes himself as a solid multi-year starter (or equivalent in terms of playing time) is a pick well spent. Since BB took over the team I would include Matt Light, Deion Branch, Eugene Wilson, Pat Chung, Sebastian Vollmer, Rob Gronkowski and Brandon Spikes in that category. The jury is still out on Jermaine Cunningham, Ras-I Dowling, Shane Vereen and obviously Tavon Wilson. And the trades for Corey Dillon and Wes Welker add value from the 2nd round picks. So all things considered the Pats have added 9 solid or better long term contributors using their second round picks (including trades), with another 4 guys still up in the air. There have been 6 2nd round picks who have turned out poorly, or 7 depending on how you view Bethel Johnson.

 

[jsull87]

I believe I graded Meriweather as a "meh" in my list - not a bust, but he didn't live up to expectations.

Expectations are everything. One person considers Bethel Johnson a good 2nd round pick because of his ST ability, while another considers him a bust. Certainly he didn't establish himself as a consistent long term starter, which would be my metric for "success" in a 2nd round pick. Not everyone is going to be a grand slam like Gronk, but I think a player who establishes himself as a solid multi-year starter (or equivalent in terms of playing time) is a pick well spent. Since BB took over the team I would include Matt Light, Deion Branch, Eugene Wilson, Pat Chung, Sebastian Vollmer, Rob Gronkowski and Brandon Spikes in that category. The jury is still out on Jermaine Cunningham, Ras-I Dowling, Shane Vereen and obviously Tavon Wilson. And the trades for Corey Dillon and Wes Welker add value from the 2nd round picks. So all things considered the Pats have added 9 solid or better long term contributors using their second round picks (including trades), with another 4 guys still up in the air. There have been 6 2nd round picks who have turned out poorly, or 7 depending on how you view Bethel Johnson.

Sorry if i wasn't clear i didn't mean you said he was a miss. Just the general consensus that some people around here say that he was a miss. On paper he played out his rookie deal, started for us since his rookie season, made 3 pro-bowls... even tho we as a fan base knew he wasn't an all pro.

I just think thats a good pick by evaluators that here is the guy with the talent to do the things listed above, unfortunately in year 3-4 he decided to try free lance and was cut loose.

But i do agree with your assessments of our second round picks as i to feel the jury is out on Cunningham for instance as he started his rookie year basically every game but last year was a wash and Vereen and Ras-I are basically rookies this year.

 

[captain stone]

For both of those reasons, Wheatley was a puzzling disappointment to me. Tremendous athleticism AND intangibles -- check out this take on him from nfldraftscout:



Maybe it just came down to the injuries?

Lil' Terry was an IR-body waiting to happen before he was even over-drafted in the first place.
He should never have been considered until at least the end of the 4th round, at the spot where
slow dwarf Johnny Wilhite was over-drafted, again by at least 2 rounds.

Wheatley's disappointment should not have been puzzling in the slightest.

 

[mayoclinic]

Lil' Terry was an IR-body waiting to happen before he was even over-drafted in the first place.
He should never have been considered until at least the end of the 4th round, at the spot where
slow dwarf Johnny Wilhite was over-drafted, again by at least 2 rounds.

Wheatley's disappointment should not have been puzzling in the slightest.

And BB should never have taken Deion Branch in the end of the 2nd round in 2002 - he was considered a 4th round pick by many. And he never should have taken Sebastian Vollmer at the end of the 2nd round in 2009. Vollmer too was considered a 4th round pick by many. And taking a kicker in the 4th round in 2006? Mel Kiper himself said that he didn't have a draftable grade on any kickers in that draft, so it has to be a reach.

You really need to work on some new lines. The old ones are getting really tired and worn.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

And BB should never have taken Deion Branch in the end of the 2nd round in 2002 - he was considered a 4th round pick by many. And he never should have taken Sebastian Vollmer at the end of the 2nd round in 2009. Vollmer too was considered a 4th round pick by many. And taking a kicker in the 4th round in 2006? Mel Kiper himself said that he didn't have a draftable grade on any kickers in that draft, so it has to be a reach.

You really need to work on some new lines. The old ones are getting really tired and worn.

You forgot drafting a punter.

 

[patchick]

And BB should never have taken Deion Branch in the end of the 2nd round in 2002 - he was considered a 4th round pick by many. And he never should have taken Sebastian Vollmer at the end of the 2nd round in 2009. Vollmer too was considered a 4th round pick by many. And taking a kicker in the 4th round in 2006? Mel Kiper himself said that he didn't have a draftable grade on any kickers in that draft, so it has to be a reach.

You really need to work on some new lines. The old ones are getting really tired and worn.

Amen. The Pats just don't go by the same criteria as other draft observers. As a result, they end up with a lot more perceived "reaches" than other teams. Some have turned out fabulously for them (Vollmer, Mankins, Branch, Mayo, etc.), others have been duds. Same goes for their picks who were considered "steals": for every Wilfork there's a Butler.

Unless you can show a relationship between Pats picks being perceived as a "reach" on draft day and the picks not panning out, then slamming a past failed pick on the grounds that it was a "reach" to begin with is utterly illogical.

 

[State]

I don't think you understand what a risk it was to take Ras-I Dowling so early in the second round in 2011. So far the conventional wisdom has proven correct--he's an injury waiting to happen, not a good value where he was taken. Glass IR Dowling is in the house.

And, according to Greg Bedard's analysis in the Globe of Dowling in the OTAs, he's struggling from where he was last year.

And it was a gamble that didn't need to be taken. It was Belichick saying, screw you, conventional wisdom, I know better. But the gamble so far hasn't paid off.

We could have had that deep burner that would have made the Giants defense much more suspect in the SB if we had taken Torrey out of Maryland. The Ravens took him later in the same round.

And if Dowling goes down again...

Then Belichick will look as though he were imprudent.

 

[State]

And BB should never have taken Deion Branch in the end of the 2nd round in 2002 - he was considered a 4th round pick by many.

Are you talking about the MVP of the Senior Bowl.

Maybe some considered him a slight reach. With an emphasis on slight.

Your analogy stinks, Mayo. But you ride that hobby horse to the setting sun.

 

[patchick]

I don't think you understand what a risk it was to take Ras-I Dowling so early in the second round in 2011. So far the conventional wisdom has proven correct--he's an injury waiting to happen, not a good value where he was taken.

Wow, you read this whole thread and come away with THIS?

The whole point of this thread is that you can't look at the success of a single pick in isolation; in the wildly imperfect science of drafting you have to look more broadly at the success of the team's strategy and evaluation processes. So what's your takeaway message?

I guess you're saying that the Patriots are fundamentally misguided in their willingness to take a chance on players who have fallen due to serious health concerns. Draft picks like Dowling, Gronkowski and Cannon should never have been made and represent foolhardy arrogance on the Patriots' part. I can't agree; I think it it can make sense to take a change on a highly talented prospect with an injury history vs. a healthy JAG.