Belichick the GM

fnordcircle said:

You don't post winning seasons 14 years in a row without being good at your job. For every Chad Jackson, Tavon Wilson or Jake Bequette there's a Julian Edelman, an Alfonzo Dennard or a Bryan Stork. Actually there's more on the other side of that equation.

I read someone post that Belichick got 'lucky' with the free agents and trades he made this year. At some point sustained success becomes proof that luck has very little to do with it.

I'm not being a homer here, I'm being a fan who endured the 80s and 90s and who is grateful for what we've had the past decade and a half. Especially because I straight up loathed Belichick in 2000 and early 2001.

Click to expand...

I think you forgot to add a certain 6th Round QB as an example of BB's drafting prowess...

Danger Zone said:

http://datascopeanalytics.com/what-we-think/2012/05/01/the-chance-of-a-bust-in-the-nfl-draft
(SNIP)

Click to expand...

These are great links, and highlight once and for all that BB's draft strategy is superior. Amassing picks is an important drafting tool because it's a crapshoot, even at the top of the draft there are tons of busts no matter which way you measure them.

I wanted to hit on the article I left in your quote, because this idea that BB drafts poorly even if he has a solid draft strategy is complete folly. I took the five-year sample from 2008-2012, a solid chunk of time that eliminates the most recent drafts where a 'bust' or 'hit' label may not be fully realized.

The article measures two ways to measure 'bust' vs. 'hit':
1) a player must accumulate 5 or more CarAV, as measured by PFR, to be a 'hit'
2) a player must be a starter for a full season, or have 40+ games played in the NFL to be labeled a 'hit'

Going by those metrics, and tabulating them for the years 2008-2012, the Patriots have the following 'hit' percentages by draft round:
First method:
1st - 100% (5 picks, all hits)
2nd - 81.82% (11 picks, 9 hits)
3rd - 25% (8 picks, 2 hits)
4th - 50% (4 picks, 2 hits)
5th - 60% (5 picks, 3 hits)
6th - 33% (6 picks, 2 hits)
7th - 25% (8 picks, 2 hits)

Second method:
1st - 100% (5 picks, all hits)
2nd - 81.82% (11 picks, 9 hits)
3rd - 25% (8 picks, 2 hits)
4th - 75% (4 picks, 3 hits)
5th - 80% (5 picks, 4 hits)
6th - 33% (6 picks, 2 hits)
7th - 25% (8 picks, 2 hits)

(One note: I labeled Slater and Ebner as 'hits' despite not accumulating starts or CarAV, which I don't think people will object to given their contributions on special teams)

Those numbers aren't just good, they're remarkable--especially considering the Pats average draft position. Looking at the bust rates in the graphs, the average 2nd rounder busts 25% using the first method, 40% using the second. The average 4th rounder busts 50% using the first method, 70% using the second, etc. Belichick has hit, over the past five years, at a much higher rate than the measured sample in every single round of the draft, save the 3rd round. Keeping in mind that BB has traded around to accumulate more picks, he has hit on a remarkable rate of picks using the same metrics used for the study.

And bringing it all together, BB has hit on either 25 (first method) or 27 (second method) of his 47 picks, meaning his average pick, regardless of round, 'hits' at a rate similar to a 3rd rounder (first method) or 2nd rounder (second method). That's incredible!

mgteich said:

because beckham is better than either

Click to expand...

Evans and Watkins both have more catches for more yards and both of them are doing it with no QB. It could be that OBJ emerges as a better receiver later but one amazing catch doesn't make up for the better performances that those guys have had this season.

The disconnect here seems to be that you're basing your assessment of this draft on hope while I'm looking at what I've seen thus far. It's fine that you're doing that, just state it from the outset.

Oswlek said:

Kontra



If you have a need (which was bigger than most - including you - realized since Mallet was a lost cause - and you see a player you love that you rate higher than available options, why wait?

Click to expand...

The team can still select a quarterback next year if Brady is playing at a high level while ridding themselves of Mallett as an FA. There were many, many positions that were more pressing this year than a guy to sit on the bench and hold the clipboard until Brady retires (when Garoppolo becomes a FA anyway).

Are late second success rates so high that we assume a player picked at any other position would be a surefire starter?

Click to expand...

Jarvis Landry and Donte Moncrief both would have been better options at a position of bigger need. Again, this year's draft was extremely deep. Taking a QB in the 2nd was a waste and I would be surprised if Garoppolo is still here by the time Brady hangs them up.

What if you think Gops was a better fit and a better prospect than anyone you'll have a reasonable chance of getting in the next couple years?

Click to expand...

It's doubtful Belichick has even looked at this year's draft yet... let alone the next couple of years.

Given the year Tom is having, why isn't it just as much of a waste next year?

Click to expand...

Because Mallett would have been gone as a FA and the need factor would have gone up.

Why is cap space saved only valuable if you are up against the limit or it is utilized that year?

Click to expand...

What else are we doing with the $3M this year because logging it for book keeping purposes? It would have been off the books after Mallett departed next year regardless. Why not use the draft capital in a more helpful manner?

The situation is far more complex than you either realize or admit.

Click to expand...

No, it's actually very simple. You're trying to make it harder so that you can excuse the pick. The pick can't be excused. It was a miss. I will say, though, that Garoppolo holds the clipboard better than Mallett ever did.

With that inaccurate assessment, I can see why you aren't.

Click to expand...

You're free to point out what about my assessment is inaccurate. I'm still waiting for the name of that other "solid starter" outside of Stork thus far.

And even with a more reasonable approach, it still isn't "overwhelming", it's just a good, solid draft.

Click to expand...

If Easley and/or Moore develop and Stork remains injury-free, sure. This is why your assessment is based on hope. Right now? Not close.

You would do well to approach discussions with an open mind and a willingness to learn, Kontra. Enjoy the last word.

Click to expand...

I approach all of them with an open mind, including this one. It would do you some good to look at this draft based on what you've SEEN thus far and not hope and/or assumptions that some select players will step it up. Again, based on what we've seen thus far, it's a suspect draft. However, I'm holding out hope that Easley gets fully healthy and Moore continues to develop along with Fleming.

hambone1818 said:

These are great links, and highlight once and for all that BB's draft strategy is superior. Amassing picks is an important drafting tool because it's a crapshoot, even at the top of the draft there are tons of busts no matter which way you measure them.

I wanted to hit on the article I left in your quote, because this idea that BB drafts poorly even if he has a solid draft strategy is complete folly. I took the five-year sample from 2008-2012, a solid chunk of time that eliminates the most recent drafts where a 'bust' or 'hit' label may not be fully realized.

The article measures two ways to measure 'bust' vs. 'hit':
1) a player must accumulate 5 or more CarAV, as measured by PFR, to be a 'hit'
2) a player must be a starter for a full season, or have 40+ games played in the NFL to be labeled a 'hit'

Going by those metrics, and tabulating them for the years 2008-2012, the Patriots have the following 'hit' percentages by draft round:
First method:
1st - 100% (5 picks, all hits)
2nd - 81.82% (11 picks, 9 hits)
3rd - 25% (8 picks, 2 hits)
4th - 50% (4 picks, 2 hits)
5th - 60% (5 picks, 3 hits)
6th - 33% (6 picks, 2 hits)
7th - 25% (8 picks, 2 hits)

Second method:
1st - 100% (5 picks, all hits)
2nd - 81.82% (11 picks, 9 hits)
3rd - 25% (8 picks, 2 hits)
4th - 75% (4 picks, 3 hits)
5th - 80% (5 picks, 4 hits)
6th - 33% (6 picks, 2 hits)
7th - 25% (8 picks, 2 hits)

(One note: I labeled Slater and Ebner as 'hits' despite not accumulating starts or CarAV, which I don't think people will object to given their contributions on special teams)

Those numbers aren't just good, they're remarkable--especially considering the Pats average draft position. Looking at the bust rates in the graphs, the average 2nd rounder busts 25% using the first method, 40% using the second. The average 4th rounder busts 50% using the first method, 70% using the second, etc. Belichick has hit, over the past five years, at a much higher rate than the measured sample in every single round of the draft, save the 3rd round. Keeping in mind that BB has traded around to accumulate more picks, he has hit on a remarkable rate of picks using the same metrics used for the study.

And bringing it all together, BB has hit on either 25 (first method) or 27 (second method) of his 47 picks, meaning his average pick, regardless of round, 'hits' at a rate similar to a 3rd rounder (first method) or 2nd rounder (second method). That's incredible!

Click to expand...

There is a study that looked at exactly the same time period (5 years) but one year removed, 2009-2013

http://q.usatoday.com/2014/05/07/nf...-49ers-tennessee-titans-new-england-patriots/

The Patriots are heads and shoulders above everyone else.

Oswlek said:

I know I said I was bowing out but I can't help myself...



Well, if we are going all condescending, know-it-all mode, then...

The disconnect is really that one of us has a realistic expectation for rookie season production and one of us doesn't.

And if you think Bill isn't fully aware of how well the next season's rookie pool stacks up to the current, you are fooling yourself.

OK,seriously, that's it. I'm out. Have a nice Thanksgiving!

Click to expand...

Wasn't trying to be condescending, so my apologies if that was the way it came off as that wasn't my intent. The only way that we can judge the draft is by what we've seen thus far into the season (understanding that this could change any given week).

The first round pick does not look healthy yet. I'm a Gator fan. I watch every game of theirs. I can name you starters at each position going back to '95 and feel confident that I can hit on the starters' names with close to 90% accuracy. Easley is not himself. Whether that's a learning curve, whether it's the way he's been used, or if he's still technically rehabbing on the fly, I'm not sure. But, to me, he looks a step slower in his initial explosion off the ball which tells me he's not fully mended yet.

Garoppolo was a total waste of a pick. You can feel free to disagree but we basically tossed a 2nd rounder in the trash for a guy that is going to hold a clipboard until he leaves as a FA. You're more than welcome to look at that as a good use of a 2nd rounder. I do not.

Stork has been nothing less than a godsend to the center position. He's held up against some big and explosive (women usually use these two terms when talking about me) DT's. Excellent pick.

White looks like maybe he needs some time in both the film and the weight room. He also looks like he needs to develop proper field vision and patience to allow his blocks to set up. So far, he doesn't look good. But I do still have high hopes for him so hopefully (there's that word again), that will change.

Fleming still needs some development time but he is useful as a 6th OL in some jumbo packages. Hopefully he can continue to hone his craft against the pass but, as a run blocker, he is useful.

Halapio is no longer in the NFL. Moore is useful as a DT in subpackages and it will be interesting to see if his snaps increase as the season goes on. Neither Thomas nor Gallon is currently in the NFL.

So the draft as a whole has one solid starter (Stork), two minor contributors (Moore and Fleming, I'm being kind on one of them), two guys that can hopefully develop (one being a first round pick), and the rest that are out of the league already. In a draft this deep, with that many picks in the first four rounds, it's a suspect draft. That said, it could change at any time. All it takes is one or more of these other guys developing.

Oswlek said:

We agree on the overall gist.

I use the term "success rate" a lot, but when you get so specific I think you need to be more detailed in how you are defining it. Is it a starter? A solid role player? Someone still in the league on a second contract? Are you grading on a scale that takes draft position into consideration?

I ask because your, IMO, your numbers are high. I've reviewed many drafts and I don't think there is a 76% success rate in the first 5 picks, let alone the entire first round. To get that high a number, "success" must be defined as, "anyone who can play a lick." Mark Sanchez is showing some spunk with Philly, is he a success? How about Jerry Hughes? Or does it need to be a complete bust like Vernon Gholston to be considered a failure?

But, again, I agree with your overall point, I'm just interested in where your numbers come from.

Click to expand...

I just recalled the study on these pages, done by ??, over the period of the 21st century. That is their figures, but i sort of recall that their success measure was a certain number of starts over several years. IOW was the drafted player a regular "starter" ?

hambone1818 said:

These are great links, and highlight once and for all that BB's draft strategy is superior. Amassing picks is an important drafting tool because it's a crapshoot, even at the top of the draft there are tons of busts no matter which way you measure them.

I wanted to hit on the article I left in your quote, because this idea that BB drafts poorly even if he has a solid draft strategy is complete folly. I took the five-year sample from 2008-2012, a solid chunk of time that eliminates the most recent drafts where a 'bust' or 'hit' label may not be fully realized.

The article measures two ways to measure 'bust' vs. 'hit':
1) a player must accumulate 5 or more CarAV, as measured by PFR, to be a 'hit'
2) a player must be a starter for a full season, or have 40+ games played in the NFL to be labeled a 'hit'

Going by those metrics, and tabulating them for the years 2008-2012, the Patriots have the following 'hit' percentages by draft round:
First method:
1st - 100% (5 picks, all hits)
2nd - 81.82% (11 picks, 9 hits)
3rd - 25% (8 picks, 2 hits)
4th - 50% (4 picks, 2 hits)
5th - 60% (5 picks, 3 hits)
6th - 33% (6 picks, 2 hits)
7th - 25% (8 picks, 2 hits)

Second method:
1st - 100% (5 picks, all hits)
2nd - 81.82% (11 picks, 9 hits)
3rd - 25% (8 picks, 2 hits)
4th - 75% (4 picks, 3 hits)
5th - 80% (5 picks, 4 hits)
6th - 33% (6 picks, 2 hits)
7th - 25% (8 picks, 2 hits)

(One note: I labeled Slater and Ebner as 'hits' despite not accumulating starts or CarAV, which I don't think people will object to given their contributions on special teams)

Those numbers aren't just good, they're remarkable--especially considering the Pats average draft position. Looking at the bust rates in the graphs, the average 2nd rounder busts 25% using the first method, 40% using the second. The average 4th rounder busts 50% using the first method, 70% using the second, etc. Belichick has hit, over the past five years, at a much higher rate than the measured sample in every single round of the draft, save the 3rd round. Keeping in mind that BB has traded around to accumulate more picks, he has hit on a remarkable rate of picks using the same metrics used for the study.

And bringing it all together, BB has hit on either 25 (first method) or 27 (second method) of his 47 picks, meaning his average pick, regardless of round, 'hits' at a rate similar to a 3rd rounder (first method) or 2nd rounder (second method). That's incredible!

Click to expand...

Thank You for resurrecting the study and its results in detail.

I also recall a conversation elsewhere, where Belichick said he had to find a way to overcome the disadvantage of steadily winning; and never having Top Ten picks to produce impact players.

He said he recognized the problem, and dealt with it, not specifying how. But that should be obvious, when he next said, you absolutely can't gamble with First picks. It sets your program back too far, if you miss on a First pick.

The unannounced implication is that he amasses more picks then others as one offset method. The other implication is that he gambles on potential greatness with Second and Third round picks, but not Firsts.

From the results as applied specifically to the Patriots, It seems he gambles some in the Second; and gambles a lot in the Third, where he strikes out more often.

We know how he masses extra picks by trading down. Fewer recognize that he also is shedding established vets for draft picks, "One year too soon, rather then one year too late."


Edit PS: I should have credited Danger Zone for finding the Study. Sorry DZ. And Thanks again.

KontradictioN said:

Garoppolo was a total waste of a pick. You can feel free to disagree but we basically tossed a 2nd rounder in the trash for a guy that is going to hold a clipboard until he leaves as a FA. You're more than welcome to look at that as a good use of a 2nd rounder. I do not.

Click to expand...

Let me ask, then: why do you think they were so eager to draft Garoppolo that they almost literally turned in the card the second they were on the clock?

meatface said:

Evans and Watkins both have more catches for more yards and both of them are doing it with no QB. It could be that OBJ emerges as a better receiver later but one amazing catch doesn't make up for the better performances that those guys have had this season.

Click to expand...

Sorry ! All they do is demonstrate that great as opposed to merely good, WRs contribute little to Team victories.

meatface said:

Evans and Watkins both have more catches for more yards and both of them are doing it with no QB. It could be that OBJ emerges as a better receiver later but one amazing catch doesn't make up for the better performances that those guys have had this season.

Click to expand...

Beckham missed four games. Watkins and Evans kind of have the "sexy" height that a true #1 require. Beckham is just crazy good at running routes, has good hands and is quite strong. Very different receivers.

I tend to look at this year and next and allow the 3rd year to wait. But, I'll play.

2015
You list Revis. If Revis isn't given a new contract, we'll SAVE $20M against the cap. If he signs a contract of $14M-16M AAV, the cap SAVINGS will be only $13M. So, when considering Revis, we should note that we will at least a $13M savings off the current cap numbers.

DEFENSE
$13M in first year cap space pays for a lots of players, almost surely ALL of McCourty, Ayers, Chung, Branch and Casillas. After all, McCourty's cap hit is likely to be less than $7M, unless he is franchised. Revis with a Mayo's contract is likely to be restructured, freeing up money needed later in the offseason.

OFFENSE
Here we basically have over $8M available from cutting Amendola and making $6M of Brady's salary into a bonus). I have no idea why you think that Brady's 2015 cap hit will increase.

$8M of cap room should be enough to re-sign the Ghost, Vereen, Connolly with a bit to spare or their replacements).

BOTTOM LINE
There is lots to do, as always; but IMHO we are not tight against the cap in 2015.
===========================
2016
This looks like the normal list to me. There will be issues as contract increases from 2015 come into play. There may be more than the normal amount of work to do. However, there is certainly no crisis. Hopefully, an increase in the cap will help.

Wright will be on the patriots for 2016 (he will be either an ERFA or an RFA for 2106). Allen and Ryan don't use up real money. We are left with Jones, Hightower, Solder and Arrington. This seems like a normal list to me. I suspect that Solder will be gone if he doesn't sign a new contract this offseason. In any case, lots of changes can happen in the rest of 2014 and 2015 to affect the cap. For example, I don't know whether Wilfork and Mayo will be drawing the big salaries in 2016 that are on current cap pages.
If you think that Ryan will be commanding a significant salary, then we might be forced to choose between Arrington and Ryan (some would have us do this for the 2015 season and cut Arrington).

JarOfMayo51 said:

If you look at the cap situation in a bubble as it exists right now, no tthey aren't tight against it.. but if you look less than 1 year into the future you have the following guys you need to sign or extend..

Revis
Mccourty
Ghostkowski
Ayers
Branch
Ridley
Vereen
Casillas
Chung

That doesn't include the bump they'll most likely give to Brady..

And if you look another year out, you need to worry about guys like

Chandler Jones
Hightower
Solder
Logan Ryan
Arrington
Wright
Ryan Allen

So that $3 million will be desperately needed in the next two offseasons...

That's how you stay competitiv, with forward thinking and cap management . Wilfork will be off the books in 2 to 3 years and replaced with another top contract, but they still need A LOT of cap room to keep this team together and to lock up all of their young, drafted talent

Click to expand...

Except the money isn't available as Amendola hasn't been cut (and probably won't be) and Brady's salary hasn't been converted into a bonus (but may be)

Sfpat said:

Except the money isn't available as Amendola hasn't been cut (and probably won't be) and Brady's salary hasn't been converted into a bonus (but may be)

Click to expand...

???

We are discussing the 2015 and 2106 off-season. Of course, one of the choices available to the patriots is to pay Amendola $4.4M. Another is to not bother moving $6M of Brady's salary to bonus. These moneys are available if and when the team want to use them.

I suspect that many of the important decisions will be made before the new season starts, including decisions about Revis, Browner and probably McCourty and Gostkowski.

VrabelJr said:

Beckham missed four games. Watkins and Evans kind of have the "sexy" height that a true #1 require. Beckham is just crazy good at running routes, has good hands and is quite strong. Very different receivers.

Click to expand...

Okay, but Mike Evans has still played better than Odell Beckham and with no QB

The Patriots, as of right now week 13 in 2014, have a more balanced team than they have had in years. As of right now are probably odds on favorite to win the SB. They also have their most difficult opponent/game left on the schedule coming up against arguably the best team in the NFC (a possible pre-SB match up). A game if they win, arguably, makes the AFC #1 seed a markedly more downhill drive.

Given that, an argument over the rate of past personnel mistakes seems like misdirected energy. I mean have at it, no doubt, but the cup runneth over for good Patriot post subjects. Having a lot of good stuff to chat about never lasts long term - so take advantage of it while it lasts