Position groups BB has under-/over-invested in?

People commonly claim that BB has under-invested in some position group or other, typically WR or pass rusher.

If your claim is that this happened because he got low on resources because he past personnel selections that didn't offer much benefit, fine. But if you go beyond that to suggest he had the wrong priorities on position group investment, then ...

... which position groups do you think he has OVER-invested in?

• QB? A couple of weeks ago, people were seriously wondering whether Brady's window was finally closing.
• ST gunner? How much would be saved by reducing the talent to mediocrity.
• Kicker? Really??
• CB? Every CB on the roster except maybe Butler has already been seriously needed.
• WR? You might wish the picks and money at WR had been spent more successfully, but unless you think cutting Thompkins or inactivating Dobson is a big waste of talent, BB didn't over-invest in WR.
• S? See WR.

I don't even see any candidates beyond those groups. So I don't see how the "BB is dumb for not having invested more in Position X" arguments hold water.

What about offensive line and defensive line? You are building a straw man here. Investing in a poor player is over investing. Amendola was an over investment because he was not worth anything close to what he was paid. Tavon Wilson was an over investment because he was not worth anything close to a second round pick. An investment being good or bad is determined based on the return not just the act of it.

tavon wilson and duron harmon…. both 2nd day picks and neither gets much playing time

Brady6 said:

What about offensive line and defensive line? You are building a straw man here. Investing in a poor player is over investing. Amendola was an over investment because he was not worth anything close to what he was paid. Tavon Wilson was an over investment because he was not worth anything close to a second round pick. An investment being good or bad is determined based on the return not just the act of it.

Click to expand...

Not a straw man at all, as you should know, since you read the forum just as I do.

under-invested at DE. (Easley is better at DT)

we needed better DE's for many years and he didn't draft one in the 1st rd until 2012.

was relying on an UDFA and 6th rd pick as depth. now its gonna bite him in the ass with Chandler being injured

MrNathanDrake said:

tavon wilson and duron harmon…. both 2nd day picks and neither gets much playing time

Click to expand...

Unless you think they deserve to play and are being crowded out by some other investment -- presumably in Chung -- that's not over-investment in the position; it's just unfortunate player selection.

MrNathanDrake said:

under-invested at DE. (Easley is better at DT)

we needed better DE's for many years and he didn't draft one in the 1st rd until 2012.

was relying on an UDFA and 6th rd pick as depth. now its gonna bite him in the ass with Chandler being injured

Click to expand...

What positions do you think he should have fed less so as to have more resources for DE?

Fencer said:

What positions do you think he should have fed less so as to have more resources for DE?

Click to expand...

The short answer is that investing $3M or more a year ($2M 2014 cap room) on a backup LB and DE could have been accomplished within the current cap. So my answer is that we could have spent less on carry forwards to the 2016 cap. The 2o15 cap will have new contracts with relatively low first year cap hits for Revis, McCourty, Gostkowsi and Vereen. With the current cap hit for 2015 including $25M for Revis, accommodating these four is nowhere near the issues that some suggest. The 2016 cap needs help, some of which will come from increased revenue (and increased cap).

Fencer said:

People commonly claim that BB has under-invested in some position group or other, typically WR or pass rusher.

If your claim is that this happened because he got low on resources because he past personnel selections that didn't offer much benefit, fine. But if you go beyond that to suggest he had the wrong priorities on position group investment, then ...

... which position groups do you think he has OVER-invested in?

Click to expand...

Your argument is sound. Presuming that the pats are using their cap, then the issue is one of allocation.
==================
Let us take a trip back in time to the beginning of camp when we were estimating how much cap money we would need to start the season, after the Practice Squad was signed. The number included all effects on the 2014 cap. These numbers include a reserve for in-season injuries and a small cushion for incentive reached within the season which would affect next year. I never remember a number higher than $6M before the season started.

Apparently, Belichick planned to cut Mankins and push all the money into 2015. The alternative was to use SOME money on needed backups at DE and LB.

We had these discussions all off-season. Most of us understand the tradeoffs. Belichick knowingly went into the season again counting on Jones and Ninkovich to not be injured and play 100% of the reps. After all, the only backups were Buchanan and Moore. Belichick knowingly went into the season with no backups except new UDFA's at LB. At the same time, as the final cuts were made in the two weeks before and after the season started, hundreds of players were available. Belichick could find no better a plan than to have one of the highest unspent caps in the NFL. It is what it is. Belichick used to spend down to the limit (since we couldn't pass the money forward. Now, he does NOT spend the money, instead carrying it forward a couple of years.

This is a definite change of strategy. Saving lots of cap money for the future, with relatively few contracts with later cap hits is a new idea for Belichick. Belichick is NOT spending now. He is saving for the future.
I am NOT talking about an all-in, sign the top free agent approach. I am taking about the balanced approach the team has used for years of planning to spend this year's cap in THIS year, signing extensions if there was "excess" money because of few injuries. If there were lots of incentives or great needs next year, then various strategies would be use next year. In addition, we have rightly signed lots of players "early" to better balance year-toyear cap hits.

Make no mistake, it a new day when the patriots have $8.7M of cap money available on October 25th, even after a normal set of injuries (some would say abnormally large, but I think not).
===============
So, my BOTTOM line is that unless we spend some money by November 1st, my conclusion is that we have under-invested in this year's team, specifically at DL and LB. I'm sure that someone can recall a lineman or two that they would have wanted to still be on the team or to have been added, but that isn't my point.

Yeah, I left the intertemporal part of the analysis for somebody else to work through.

So it's your contention that BB has generally underinvested in this year's team, to the benefit of future years. OK. Would you still think that if the Mankins trade hadn't happened?

mgteich said:

Belichick used to spend down to the limit (since we couldn't pass the money forward. Now, he does NOT spend the money, instead carrying it forward a couple of years.

Click to expand...

This isn't true at all.

http://www.boston.com/sports/articles/2008/01/08/patriots_business_as_usual/?camp=pm

The short version: they tweaked Eckel's contract to include a NLTBE incentive that effectively carried the excess room over to the next season.

What the 2011 CBA did was remove the need to create a "bogus" contract to do this; now they can just do it by informing the league.

Roughly speaking (this isn't exactly true, but the spirit of it is), the Patriots saved about $5M around a decade or so ago, and have been carrying that same $5M year-to-year ever since. They've spent essentially 100% of the salary cap money they've been given to spend each year.

Bill seems to like investing high on the inactive/injured reserved.

Bb has invested a ton of draft picks in defensive backs and by my count, batting less than .500.

Bb has really ignored pass rushers in the draft for he most part.

Bb should draft more d lineman, especially early because he is quite good at either identifying d line talent or developing it.

Ochmed Jones said:

Bb should draft more d lineman, especially early because he is quite good at either identifying d line talent or developing it.

Click to expand...

BB's three actual first-round picks over the past three drafts are:

• A pass-rushing DE
• A DL who among other things is the backup for that pass-rushing DE
• An LB who folks around here think is at his best when he's pass-rushing.

In that same period he also used a 3rd-rounder on Bequette.

It appears that another thread has morphed into BB does not know how to draft... but as usual will ask what team knows how to draft effectively year after year? In the absence of a long term database and ability to quantify draft picks for all the NFL teams this is an inane argument..

We can pick out less successful picks, but in reality every team has their fair share...

Amendola was beat out by Edelman and is redundant, not sure we realized how good Edelman could be if given the opportunity to play full time..

Interesting take on Amendola from Mike Reiss... I agree.

5. While on the subject of receivers, the contract that receiver Danny Amendola signed with the Patriots in 2013 is for five years and $28 million, but the way it’s structured, it would also be accurate to call it a two-year, $10 million pact. That obviously hasn’t worked out like the Patriots planned, and it would be an upset if Amendola is with the Patriots in 2015 under the terms of the contract that calls for a $4 million base salary and a $5.5 million salary cap charge.

Click to expand...

He under invests in guards...

Fencer said:

BB's three actual first-round picks over the past three drafts are:

• A pass-rushing DE
• A DL who among other things is the backup for that pass-rushing DE
• An LB who folks around here think is at his best when he's pass-rushing.

In that same period he also used a 3rd-rounder on Bequette.

Click to expand...

Yes, and the reasonable counter to the "he should draft more because he's good at it" is "if he's good at it, he probably saw reasons not to draft the other guys." Once you start requiring selections at certain positions, the hit rate is going to drop, much for the same reason why mutual fund performance tends to lag when a fund gets too big or has too many deposits/redemptions.

The cap space argument is off base. NE was planning for bonuses that would be earned this year but applied in 2015. Once those are factored in, they have the same amount of room that they've always had.

Fencer said:

Not a straw man at all, as you should know, since you read the forum just as I do.

Click to expand...

The team has next to no depth at DE, DT, LB, and RB. Letting Woodhead, Blount, Fletcher, Spikes, and Kelly all leave over the past few years for minimal money is an indication of lack of investing. Now we have practice squad players playing significant snaps.

Necroing this thread:

• DE/rush OLB depth became a problem. Fortunately, Ayers was a great scrap-heap find.
• DT depth was a problem. Fortunately, Walker was enough to muddle through.
• LB depth was a problem. Fortunately, Casillas was on the scrap-heap.
• RB depth was a bit of a problem, even with Gray on the PS. Fortunately, Blount made his way to the scrap-heap.

I'd like to see BB pay up for Ayers, up to point. Edge rushers are expensive, but he certainly seems to be worth more than, say, Cannon.

DT is feeling fine right now, even if Easley doesn't produce this year.

LB will be an issue for the off-season. If both Mayo and Casillas stay, that's a good start.

Power RB depth depends on whether Gray can be quickly rehabilitated. (And if Blount is hurt, it should be quick indeed.) Vereen/White is hard to forecast; Vereen seems a bit glassy, but that might also lower his price.

The Tommy Kelly move is still a head-scratcher.