Did Piolichick pull a genius move? The case for it.

[RayClay]

First off, I wasn't happy with the trades as i didn't see good value.

I also wasn't happy they didn't package all the tradeable low picks for some mid rounders.

Let's say, for the sense of argument, they looked at the draft and said "not a lot of difference between a low 1st and a third in this draft"

and

Not a lot of difference between a low third and a 5th or 6th.

If that is their belief, they have 9 picks now plus probably high 1st and 3rds next year.

If they get two decent players out of 9, aren't they getting similar value?

Of course higher picks should be better but 2 stiffs and one asante samule still = 1 Asante Samuel.

Can't decide between the fast guy with no big time experience and the slow guy with good character and competitiveness or the guy who's got it all but is a little short or light?

Draft them all and let them fight it out.

If we lost two decent players, but gain two by this method, we got 2 picks next year for nothing and got full value out of our low picks.

Thoughts?

 

[RayClay]

Wow! All bowing before the genius. Impressive.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Wow! All bowing before the genius. Impressive.

I was tying my shoe laces you egomaniac!

 

[RayClay]

I was tying my shoe laces you egomaniac!

I ain't nearly no genius Box, you knows that.

I's talking about the two-headed Piolichick monster.

 

[Patters]

I think that is the method the Pats use. They constantly bring in peple and constantly find pepole to fill holes. Another aspect of this that I wonder about: the Pats probably look at who other teams drafted and then figure out who might be released. Perhaps they expect some of their needs to be filled in this indirect way by the draft.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

I ain't nearly no genius Box, you knows that.

I's talking about the two-headed Piolichick monster.

Youse just go figgures out how to birth them babies and leave them monsters alone!

For what it's worth rofl I was relieved with both trades, there just wasn't anybody there I really wanted to draft. Staley was my default at #28 for BPA, and Philly scarfed both of my BPA guys at #87 & #90. My Day Two draft board looks pretty healthy, I would really love another 4th rounder or high 5th.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

I was relieved with trading pick #28. I think a proven guy of Welker's quality is worth a 2, so not unhappy there. When the 91 went, I was boo hoooing like everybody else, but just because Santa's skipping my house at Christmas, and hell, I'm used to that.

I dunno about a "genius" move. They're going with their best info, under their own value scheme. Maybe there are considerations that aren't public (like something to do w/the Moss "trade",) but I'll believe that when I see it.

I don't think you can ever say who drafted well or badly until after a couple of years, and sometimes you don't even know then. I was impressed by SF's front office this draft, but everybody is.

Long story short, a team that only has depth to address (for the most part,) will have a harder time looking like geniuses, but it is also the case that the Pats don't look like geniuses.

History says they'll look like geniuses later, of course, but right now they just look like they did what made sense to them.

PFnV

 

[sebman2112]

Really, I think some of the players still on the board are better than those who have already been taken:
1. RB Mchael Bush (First round talent who fell because of the injury, at this point in the draft I'd take the chance.)
2. RB Antonio Pittman (I thought he was late second round talent so his still being available is a surprise to me.)
3. RB Dwayne Wright (I really like his game, and we're getting into the rounds were taking him should be a serious option.)

1. WR Aundrae Allison (I think he's late second/early third talent so his still being available is a surprise to me.)
2. WR Chris Davis (I thinkh fits NE's offense better than any WR available, and some already taken. Elusive, reliable hands, crisp route runner, and good at finding the hole in zone defense. He's Deion Branch like.)
3. WR Courtney Taylor (Good possession WR.)

1. S John Wendling (Best Safety available. Has great size to play SS, his coverage range is good, and he has better recovery ability than some think. I think he's the next John Lynch.)
2. S Josh Gattis (Good Safety with size who could play either FS or SS, and I think he's better than some of the Safeties already taken.)
3. S Michael Johnson (has the size to play either FS or SS, and his game is a little simular to Michael Griffins. With some time to develop he could be a very good Safety.

1. CB DeAndre Jackson (Without the injury he's gone in the first two rounds. He is physical in man-to-man, can play zone defense, supports the run, hits, ball skills, and is a good returner. He's a bigger version of Hobbs.)
2. CB Kenny Scott (Good CB with height, who just needs to add weight. Good in man coverage, supports th run, good tackler, experienced, and a return man.)
3. CB Michael Coe (Good size, physical, ball skills, good instincts, intelligent with good intangibles.)

1. ILB Desmond Bishop (Decent size, very good tackler, good instincts and awareness, strong against the run, motor never stops, has a nasty attitude, team leader, loves the game, and is a very hard worker.)
2. ILB Brandon Siler (Intelligent, instinctive, has all the intangibles, hits with power, solid tackler, good against the run, good blitzer/pass rusher, takes on blockers well, nasty, and experienced.)
3. ILB Prescott Burgess (Good size, good in coverage, plays faster than he times, very good ball skills, very good pursuit, high motor, hard worker, hits with force, and can play with an attitude. Has loads of upside.)
4. ILB Antwan Barnes (Very good speed and explosion, 22.5 tackles for loss in '06, very good pass rusher/blitzer who could be a fantastic small school sleeper.)

1. OLB Zak DeOssie (I'm putting him at OLB because that's the position he said he want's to play. Very good size, speed is good fr his size, high motor, good pursuit, good range, and is very good in coverage.)
2. OLB Brian Robison (Good size, has speed, good pass rusher, plays physica and is tough, very good pusuit, high motor, has all the intangibles, hard worker, experienced, very good on special teams where he was a PK blocking freak.)
3. OLB Jay Moore (Great size, tough and reliable, intelligent, always behind the LOS, very high motor, all the intangibles, hard worker, great bull rush, and versatile. Underrated becaus he played on the other side of Carriker.)

1. TE Ben Patrick (Has all-around skills, and frankly I'm surprised he's still on the board. BB had him in for a private workout and I think his value should be pretty high at this point in the draft.)

1. P Daniel Sepulveda (What's there to say, best punter available.)

1. NT Paul Soliai (Best NT available, and his value will start becoming to much to ignore.)
2. NT Walter Thomas (All potential, but worth taking a chance on in the later rounds (6-7).)
1. DT Antonio Johnson (I thought he would last this long, but I really like his game. If he's still on the board for NE's fifth round pick they'll have to seriously think about it.)

 

[RayClay]

I was relieved with trading pick #28. I think a proven guy of Welker's quality is worth a 2, so not unhappy there. When the 91 went, I was boo hoooing like everybody else, but just because Santa's skipping my house at Christmas, and hell, I'm used to that.

I dunno about a "genius" move. They're going with their best info, under their own value scheme. Maybe there are considerations that aren't public (like something to do w/the Moss "trade",) but I'll believe that when I see it.

I don't think you can ever say who drafted well or badly until after a couple of years, and sometimes you don't even know then. I was impressed by SF's front office this draft, but everybody is.

Long story short, a team that only has depth to address (for the most part,) will have a harder time looking like geniuses, but it is also the case that the Pats don't look like geniuses.

History says they'll look like geniuses later, of course, but right now they just look like they did what made sense to them.

PFnV

Of course, I'm developing this theory based on what happened, which is a lot easier than predicting things.

To my credit, though, I made a number of post about their low round glut and how it was unlike them to waste value like that. I wanted them to package, but what they did was take two of the three guys we had to give serious camp time to out of the picture.

Voila! Now our second day picks are worth something and if we hit on a couple, next years picks are grav!

Getting value out of the second day picks is the genius.