Patriots Training Camp, Day 12 (@ Philadephia)

[Sicilian]

I honestly think that they had him graded as a second rounder which, based on what we have seen to date, is a pretty big shame.

Oh I agree, I'm not arguing the pick as good to this point. What I'm saying is, if they graded him out as a 2nd rounder, and honestly believed that no one else was going to take him before let's say the 5th, would they have taken him anyway? I think it's more likely they'd heard rumblings that someone had him graded as a 3rd and didn't want to risk him not being there. But some talk like they just took him four or five rounds early because "Meh, **** it."

 

[RobAllan]

Oh I agree, I'm not arguing the pick as good to this point. What I'm saying is, if they graded him out as a 2nd rounder, and honestly believed that no one else was going to take him before let's say the 5th, would they have taken him anyway? I think it's more likely they'd heard rumblings that someone had him graded as a 3rd and didn't want to risk him not being there. But some talk like they just took him four or five rounds early because "Meh, **** it."

I understand what you're getting at here, but I would say this: If they heard rumblings, I would think other people would have heard them too. (This would include not only other teams, but some of the mediots.) But when these picks are made, everyone appears to be shocked. (Fans, mediots, and on occasion other coaches in the media.)

So are they trusting the same bad source year after year, or is it possible something else is going on? Because what I'm looking for when I assess this is a logical reason for the move they're making. And I don't see how they hear "rumblings" that nobody else seems to hear on such a consistent basis.

 

[Deus Irae]

Oh I agree, I'm not arguing the pick as good to this point. What I'm saying is, if they graded him out as a 2nd rounder, and honestly believed that no one else was going to take him before let's say the 5th, would they have taken him anyway? I think it's more likely they'd heard rumblings that someone had him graded as a 3rd and didn't want to risk him not being there. But some talk like they just took him four or five rounds early because "Meh, **** it."

In determining whether a pick is a reach or not, though, it's not about just 1-2 teams. If 30 teams think player "A" is a 4th rounder, and 2 teams have him in round 2, he's still a reach in round 2. The whole notion of "reach/steal" is based upon some level of a general consensus as to where players will/should go.

Also, if the story about the Patriots looking to trade down in the Dowling year is true, then Dowling was a reach that the Patriots didn't want to make, but decided to make since they couldn't get what they felt was fair value for their pick.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Deion Branch was never rated as a 7th round draft pick.

Deion Branch*|*Louisville,*WR*:*2002 NFL Draft Scout Player Profile

Draftcountdown had Branch as the 22nd rated receiver.

NFF Draft Scout had him as the 10th best receiver

I'm looking for more results, need to do more researc, but I distinctly remember a magazine had Branch going in the 7th round.

 

[Sicilian]

In determining whether a pick is a reach or not, though, it's not about just 1-2 teams. If 30 teams think player "A" is a 4th rounder, and 2 teams have him in round 2, he's still a reach in round 2. The whole notion of "reach/steal" is based upon some level of a general consensus as to where players will/should go.

Also, if the story about the Patriots looking to trade down in the Dowling year, then Dowling was a reach that the Patriots didn't want to make, but decided to make since they couldn't get what they felt was fair value for their pick.

Ah, see, I'm working off a different theoretical definition of "reach". Where you're saying a reach is someone who is taken ahead of the consensus, I'm saying a reach is someone taken ahead of where they would need to be taken in order to land the player.

For example, if the Pats wanted Wilson and felt he was worth a 2nd rounder, and had reason to believe he wasn't going to make it to their first 3rd round pick, I don't consider that pick a reach. It may end up being a bad pick, but if they wanted him (in that scenario) the 2nd round was the only place they were going to be able to get him.

 

[belichick010405]

As the great Bill Parcells once said, "Can't make the club from the tub."

 

[Deus Irae]

Ah, see, I'm working off a different theoretical definition of "reach". Where you're saying a reach is someone who is taken ahead of the consensus, I'm saying a reach is someone taken ahead of where they would need to be taken in order to land the player.

Those would be the same, except in outlier scenarios. The Raiders gave us good demonstrations of this for several years in a row.

For example, if the Pats wanted Wilson and felt he was worth a 2nd rounder, and had reason to believe he wasn't going to make it to their first 3rd round pick, I don't consider that pick a reach. It may end up being a bad pick, but if they wanted him (in that scenario) the 2nd round was the only place they were going to be able to get him.

But it is a reach. At that point, the question becomes whether or not the team thinks the reach is worth it. What you, and others, seem to hang your hat on is basically this:

As long as one other team is also willing to draft a pick well above where most people think that player's value is, it's not a reach.

All that really does is allow one team to 'justify' a reach by pointing to another team that might have been willing to do that same thing. It doesn't change a reach to a non-reach.

 

[ATippett56]

Draftcountdown had Branch as the 22nd rated receiver.

Never been a fan of Scott Wright's Draft Countdown.

NFL Draft Scout had him as the 10th best receiver.

3rd Round Grade.

I'm looking for more results, need to do more researc, but I distinctly remember a magazine had Branch going in the 7th round.

No offense, I could care less about "some" magazine.

 

[belichick010405]

I think Ebner has enough value on special teams to be safe. - Mike Reiss

 

[Sicilian]

Those would be the same, except in outlier scenarios. The Raiders gave us good demonstrations of this for several years in a row.

I disagree with this part. I think they are quite different philosophically, which makes arguing against your next section kind of moot. In my mind, you and I are working off of different definitions of the word "reach". Your definition may be technically correct from a results based standpoint, but IMO my definition fits the spirit of the argument better. If the Patriots want Tavon Wilson, they have to select him before another team does.

It doesn't matter if only one other team would have, it's possible that if they didn't take him at 48, he would have been gone by their next pick. I find it more likely that they had reason to believe that, than they simply decided to take a player drastically before was needed out of arrogance or desperation.

 

[Sicilian]

I think Ebner has enough value on special teams to be safe. - Mike Reiss

Has he even practiced yet?

 

[ATippett56]

I honestly think that they had him graded as a second rounder which, based on what we have seen to date, is a pretty big shame.

After Mark Barron and Harrison Smith, the 2012 NFL Draft was a crap draft class for safeties.

 

[patchick]

I think Ebner has enough value on special teams to be safe. - Mike Reiss

I'd like to think so too, but I'm having surprising trouble making room for him.

 

[Deus Irae]

I disagree with this part. I think they are quite different philosophically, which makes arguing against your next section kind of moot.

They are exactly the same, with the exception of the outliers. Even there, the only difference is whether one's willing to reach or not.

In my mind, you and I are working off of different definitions of the word "reach". Your definition may be technically correct from a results based standpoint, but IMO my definition fits the spirit of the argument better. If the Patriots want Tavon Wilson, they have to select him before another team does.

Then they have to be willing to reach for the player.

It doesn't matter if only one other team would have, it's possible that if they didn't take him at 48, he would have been gone by their next pick.

Of course it matters. BB has, himself, made this abundantly clear in discussing his draft policies. Take a look at what he says when it comes to having a group of similarly rated players. He's noted that he'd be willing to trade down as long as it wouldn't be too far to get one of the players in that similar grade group.

I find it more likely that they had reason to believe that, than they simply decided to take a player drastically before was needed out of arrogance or desperation.

They reached. What you're really trying to do is justify the reach by changing the definintion instead of just acknowledging the reach but justifying it based upon need, etc....

 

[Sicilian]

They are exactly the same, with the exception of the outliers. Even there, the only difference is whether one's willing to reach or not.

And again, I simply disagree that they are the same. If you'd like to detail why they are the same you're welcome to, but I don't think it matters. Our disagreement is entirely predicated on this distinction (or from your perspective, lack thereof).

Of course it matters. BB has, himself, made this abundantly clear in discussing his draft policies. Take a look at what he says when it comes to having a group of similarly rated players. He's noted that he'd be willing to trade down as long as it wouldn't be too far to get one of the players in that similar grade group.

And if Wilson was among the last players in that particular grade group, my point still stands.

They reached. What you're really trying to do is justify the reach by changing the definintion instead of just acknowledging the reach but justifying it based upon need, etc....

I'm not trying to justify anything. I'm the type of person who likes to try to understand why things happen rather than just assume I'm smarter than the person making this decision. To me, my scenario is more likely than the others I've heard. But regardless, don't mistake my lack of criticism of the STRATEGY with a lack of criticism for the PICK. If Tavon doesn't end up improving and become a solid contributor, it doesn't matter if they reached or not, they were wrong to grade him in the 2nd round.

But that, IMO, is where the criticism should be. Not did they take him too early, but should they have taken him at all.

 

[Kontradiction]

After Mark Barron and Harrison Smith, the 2012 NFL Draft was a crap draft class for safeties.

Very much agreed. There were several different directions the team could have gone with. If memory serves me correctly, LaMichael James (KR) and T.Y. Hilton (WR) were also available and went pretty quickly after. Both could have made immediate impacts at positions of need. If the team liked Wilson that much, they could have probably got him on the last day of the draft. If not, from what we've seen thus far, it doesn't appear as if it would have been a back-breaking loss.

 

[Mack Herron]

I'd like to think so too, but I'm having surprising trouble making room for him.

I first list starters/key contributors on offense, defense and special teams before adding depth. I have Ebner as a key contributor on STs whereas T. Willson, for example, is not looking like a key contributor anywhere.

 

[RobAllan]

But that, IMO, is where the criticism should be. Not did they take him too early, but should they have taken him at all.

If he becomes a good backup or good in some situational packages and they took him in the 5th, for example, that would have been good value for his level of contribution. If he's taken in the second and doesn't contribute more significantly, then it wasn't good value for the pick.

So the question of taking him too early actually does apply. Maybe if we'd gotten someone different at that position AND him much later in the draft, we'd be looking at him differently as a good pick and not a questionable one.

Given that as a possible outcome, especially if he makes the team, I think the key question is placement of the pick not of the pick itself.

I don't think we can even agree on that point, then, sorry to say.

 

[BTTA]

Had a chance to ask an NFL GM about the issue of outside evaluations for the draft. It was at a party and he was pretty relaxed. He said that after the first dozen or so players, there are two, maybe three outside evaluators who get somewhat close to the NFL teams' evaluations, and they are generally not highly visible guys. The mass market evaluators are considered entertainers, not talent people.

He also said that there is a lot of difference in evaluations between teams, much more than the average fan would assume, and a lot more than there is between the media evaluators.

The overall message was that when evaluating a team's picks, one should pay very little attention to what the media evaluators say, and that defining a "reach" based on "consensus" is like coming to believe that jumping off a cliff is a good idea because you are watching a group of lemmings.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I'd like to think so too, but I'm having surprising trouble making room for him.

Here's a way I could see it happening (note these are not all in rank order):

QB (3) Brady, Mallett, Tebow
RB (4) Ridley, Vereen, Washington, Blount
WR (6) Amendola, Dobson, Edelman, Thompkins, Slater, Boyce
TE (4) Gronkowski, Hoomanawanui, Fells, Sudfeld
C (1) Wendell
G (3) Mankins, Connolly, Cannon
T (4) Vollmer, Solder, Svitek, Zusevics
DE (5) Ninkovich, Francis, Bequette, Benard, Jones
DT (3) Wilfork, Forston, Kelly
ILB(3) Spikes, Fletcher, Beauharnais
OLB(3) Mayo, Hightower, Collins
CB (5) Talib, Arrington, Dennard, Dowling, Ryan
SS (3) Wilson, Ebner, Wilson
FS (3) McCourty, Gregory, Harmon
ST (3) Gostkowski, Mesko, Allen

NFI (1) Armstead

Total players: 53
Created with Pats Picker: Pats Picker 2013

I could see Beauharnais being a PS player, and adding a fourth DT. I could also see Gregory getting cut, or even Ebner being placed on IR.