Trading Picks for Vets: The Patriots' Track Record

[patchick]

I recently read two posts, one suggesting that it's essential to extend key player Aqib Talib, the other lamenting that the Pats "pissed away" so many draft picks on malcontent vets.

It made me wonder about the team's overall track record in trading away picks for veterans. On balance, is it worth it? Here's the roundup of the BB era:

Players received:
Albert Haynesworth
Alex Smith
Andre Davis
Aqib Talib
Chad Ochocinco
Corey Dillon
Derrick Burgess
Doug Gabriel
Duane Starks
Greg Lewis
Quinn Ojinaka
Randy Moss
Ted Washington
Tracy White
Wes Welker

Net Picks Sent:
2nd
3rd
3rd
4th
5th
5th
5th
5th
5th
6th
7th

Summary: The total picks sent over a 13-year period amount to a little less than one full draft's worth. And the players received include 4 multiyear high level starters (Talib, Dillon, Moss, Welker), plus a few contributors at other levels (E.g. Washington, White.)

That is a spectacular yield. SPECTACULAR.

I suspect there's a memory bias -- a failed trade leaves you with only the lost pick to focus on, while a successful trade leaves you focused on the player, rather than how he got here.

 

[Snake Eyes]

I recently read two posts, one suggesting that it's essential to extend key player Aqib Talib, the other lamenting that the Pats "pissed away" so many draft picks on malcontent vets.

It made me wonder about the team's overall track record in trading away picks for veterans. On balance, is it worth it? Here's the roundup of the BB era:

Players received:
Albert Haynesworth
Alex Smith
Andre Davis
Aqib Talib
Chad Ochocinco
Corey Dillon
Derrick Burgess
Doug Gabriel
Duane Starks
Greg Lewis
Quinn Ojinaka
Randy Moss
Ted Washington
Tracy White
Wes Welker

Net Picks Sent:
2nd
3rd
3rd
4th
5th
5th
5th
5th
5th
6th
7th

Summary: The total picks sent over a 13-year period amount to a little less than one full draft's worth. And the players received include 4 multiyear high level starters (Talib, Dillon, Moss, Welker), plus a few contributors at other levels (E.g. Washington, White.)

That is a spectacular yield. SPECTACULAR.

I suspect there's a memory bias -- a failed trade leaves you with only the lost pick to focus on, while a successful trade leaves you focused on the player, rather than how he got here.

Good post. I think people get a bit tribal when it comes to trading picks for players as opposed to the draft or free agency, they're all methods of player selection and I don't think any is inherently better than the other, it all depends on the particular deal.

Also, we got Moss for a 4th but then sold him for a 3rd, should we then remove a 3rd from your list?

 

[patchick]

Also, we got Moss for a 4th but then sold him for a 3rd, should we then remove a 3rd from your list?

Good question -- I don't think so, because that's a trade of a vet for picks, which would be a different thread. (Off the top of my head, Moss for a 3rd, Seymour and Bledsoe for 1sts, and a bunch of 7th rounders?)

 

[MrNathanDrake]

Some of those were hugely successful.

Talib changed our defense.

Moss changed our offense.

Welker was incredible.

Corey Dillon and Washington were key pieces to SB victories.

 

[JMC00]

Good question -- I don't think so, because that's a trade of a vet for picks, which would be a different thread. (Off the top of my head, Moss for a 3rd, Seymour and Bledsoe for 1sts, and a bunch of 7th rounders?)

They traded Branch to Seattle for a 1st round pick and got him back for basically Laurence Maroney (the 4th round pick the Pats got from Denver for Maroney went to Seattle)

 

[patchick]

They traded Branch to Seattle for a 1st round pick and got him back for basically Laurence Maroney (the 4th round pick the Pats got from Denver for Maroney went to Seattle)

Ah, right, big omission! Clearly the Pats have given up good players as well as received them, but it's notable that they've always received full value in return. Compare:

Welker + Moss + Dillon + Talib = 2nd + 2nd + 4th + 4th + 7th + 7th

Seymour + Bledsoe + Branch = 1st + 1st + 1st

The total "chart value" of the picks sent for 4 major players was about 740 pts. The value received for 3 major players was 2,715 pts.

 

[Danger Zone]

But but but Belichick has WINDOWS of a few years in one or two positions where he hasnt drafted well at those one or two positions and.. and not EVERY trade or draft pick has been a huge success.

Belichick is just an average GM and he badly needs oversight.

You are just homers and ignorant (pink hat wearing) sheep if you cant see this.

And now I should net another 50 posts going back and forth with the people who found me unecessarily insulting!

Woot! 40,000 posts here I come!

....


But seriously, thank you for making this list. Its great to see all the names together along with their costs. And yes, the net value in return HAS been an overwhelming success imo.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Ah, right, big omission! Clearly the Pats have given up good players as well as received them, but it's notable that they've always received full value in return. Compare:

Welker + Moss + Dillon + Talib = 2nd + 2nd + 4th + 4th + 7th + 7th

Seymour + Bledsoe + Branch = 1st + 1st + 1st

The total "chart value" of the picks sent for 4 major players was about 740 pts. The value received for 3 major players was 2,715 pts.

My favorite is still trading Moss for a higher pick than they got him for. Thank you Al Davis.

 

[jsull87]

Thanks for this write up. I agree that sometimes the fan base an be over critical due to the failures without fully appreciating the successes.

To use a current example, if Blout didn't make this team everyone would be saying it was a waste by BB. But he has become a solid contributor and provided great depth and some important plays for this team to date.

"Welker + Moss + Dillon + Talib = 2nd + 2nd + 4th + 4th + 7th + 7th

Seymour + Bledsoe + Branch = 1st + 1st + 1st

The total "chart value" of the picks sent for 4 major players was about 740 pts. The value received for 3 major players was 2,715 pts."

Is what I think also people don't fully appreciate. BB likes to sell high (even if some don't agree with the sale) and buy low. You could even argue throwing in the Moss Trade when we sold on the Selling Players side there. Especially after him performing so well for the years he was here.

 

[AQPE]

But but but Belichick has WINDOWS of a few years in one or two positions where he hasnt drafted well at those one or two positions and.. and not EVERY trade or draft pick has been a huge success.

Belichick is just an average GM and he badly needs oversight.

You are just homers and ignorant (pink hat wearing) sheep if you cant see this.

And now I should net another 50 posts going back and forth with the people who found me unecessarily insulting!

Woot! 40,000 posts here I come!

....


But seriously, thank you for making this list. Its great to see all the names together along with their costs. And yes, the net value in return HAS been an overwhelming success imo.

I see what you did there ... I approve

 

[Lamanai]

Another factor to consider: Many fans tend to overestimate the value of draft picks, particularly picks in the 3rd-5th round.

(That is my opinion, but if you look at the rate at which mid-round picks make the team there is some basis to holding this opinion)