2006 Value Groupings

[rookBoston]

Wanted to solicit the board for their value groupings.

To kick things off, I'll post mine. I think I'm already on record with my belief that this is the year of the Linebacker for the Pats, and if we take a Receiver in the first, barring a trade down, I'll absolutely bust a gut.

Keys:
Keep a short board. Only the players that you really want. Remember, you're only going to get ONE of these players, barring a miracle, so make sure every single name that you list is someone you're willing to stake your career on. And remember, you should be perfectly ambivalent over which player you get our of any given group-- they should all value out exactly equal in your mind.


Group 1 - unique
(RB Reggie Bush, DE Mario Williams)

Group 2 - rookie starters for the Pats
(LB AJ Hawk, NT Haloti Ngata, SS Michael Huff, LB Chad Greenway, LB Bobby Carpenter)

Group 3 - elite upside
(LB Manny Lawson, FS Donte Whitner, LB Mathias Kiwanuka, LB Kamerion Wimbley, CB Richard Marshall)

Group 4 - sophmore starters
(RB Deangelo Williams, RB Lawrence Moroney, CB Jimmy Williams, RB Joseph Addai, LB Thomas Howard)

Group 5 - key contributors
(WR Sinorice Moss, DE Tamba Hali, LB Mark Anderson, LB Darryl Tapp, DL Jonathan Lewis, DE John McCargo, LB Roger McIntosh, CB Ashton Youboti)

Note, esp. the players I've left off. I dont want Jackson on the team. I dont want Justice or even D'Brick. I had Vernon Davis in Group 2, but I took him off because I dont like what the scouts have to say about his pass blocking. Jimmy Williams is on the board, but I'm thinking of taking him off. Tye Hill didn't make the cut.

And, yes, I've rated Carpenter ahead of Lawson, and Greenway on par with Hawk, and Marshall ahead of Deangelo... that's just my personal take on value to the team. That's what value groupings are all about.

 

[PonyExpress]

Rook,

I agree with a lot here. The problem I have with Jackson is, without being too insulting, he doesn’t appear to be the sharpest tool in the shed…

As far as Carpenter goes, I’m not so sure. Profootballweekly just tagged him as having “character concernsâ€. These concerns are, according to their head writer Nawrocki, an inability to get along with his teammates and lack of leadership. Combined with the report from NextLevelScouting about Carpenter being prissy and immature at his pro day, I’m not sure this is the guy I want at ILB, the leadership position on the Pats, for the foreseeable future. If PFW and NLS are reporting the same thing, that constitutes a trend. Maybe we should be cautious before putting Carpenter in the “elite†category.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

I wasn't too focused on value groups for my master board, but I could work with the following groupings (though I'd be more inclined to take best value off my shopping list):

Impact DE/OLB: Manny Lawson, Darryl Tapp
Athletic (Swing) OT: Eric Winston, Daryn Colledge, Andrew Whitworth, Guy Whimper
LB to SS conversion: Jon Alston, Brian Iwuh, Keith Ellison, Kevin Schimmelmann
DE/ILB: Chris Gocong, Mike Kudla
Two-down ILB: Oliver Hoyte, Kai Parham, Tim Dobbins, Tim McGarigle
Possession WR: Mike Hass, Brandon Marshall
Second Tier Possession WR: Greg Jennings, Maurice Stoval, Jason Avant

 

[flutie2phelan]

....
Keys:
Keep a short board. Only the players that you really want. Remember, you're only going to get ONE of these players, barring a miracle, so make sure every single name that you list is someone you're willing to stake your career on. And remember, you should be perfectly ambivalent over which player you get our of any given group-- they should all value out exactly equal in your mind.
....

I've been waiting almost two years for this.

First off, your "Keys" sound like the keys to the kingdom.

Cranking in PonyExpress' well-reasoned objection to Carpenter ...
and my remembered impression of the probable flow of picks ahead of us ...
implies that we'll get EITHER Greenway OR Lawson OR Kiwi.

Followed by a good RB.

And another decent LB.

After another choice pick ... comes Day2.
All in all, a Christmas to remember!

 

[bosfan]

Whenever I start to plug names into certain rounds I feel it is a futile exercise. We all know we are strategically positioned to have a solid draft and I'm content with that. When the smoke clears we can evaluate our new players and am sure we will have some selected a nice group of reinforcements. Oh yeah, it's fun to speculate who might be where or if we will trade up/down or whatever but in the end if we address LB/DB/WR and RB with our initial picks, I will feel I nailed day one (whatever the names are).

 

[mgteich]

You say that we will get one of these.

1) Is this then your Round 1 Board?

2) I presume some we would have to trade up for; some we would trade down for.

3) I'm somewhat confused by your categories. Are there really no other receivers that could be sophomore starters. I may be nitpicking on label. Group 4 looks like players I would trade down for in the 1st and Group 3 who I would expect to get at 21. I understand we thane would need to move depending on how the draft goes. Are Group 5 expected to there in the top of the second?

Wanted to solicit the board for their value groupings.

To kick things off, I'll post mine. I think I'm already on record with my belief that this is the year of the Linebacker for the Pats, and if we take a Receiver in the first, barring a trade down, I'll absolutely bust a gut.

Keys:
Keep a short board. Only the players that you really want. Remember, you're only going to get ONE of these players, barring a miracle, so make sure every single name that you list is someone you're willing to stake your career on. And remember, you should be perfectly ambivalent over which player you get our of any given group-- they should all value out exactly equal in your mind.


Group 1 - unique
(RB Reggie Bush, DE Mario Williams)

Group 2 - rookie starters for the Pats
(LB AJ Hawk, NT Haloti Ngata, SS Michael Huff, LB Chad Greenway, LB Bobby Carpenter)

Group 3 - elite upside
(LB Manny Lawson, FS Donte Whitner, LB Mathias Kiwanuka, LB Kamerion Wimbley, CB Richard Marshall)

Group 4 - sophmore starters
(RB Deangelo Williams, RB Lawrence Moroney, CB Jimmy Williams, RB Joseph Addai, LB Thomas Howard)

Group 5 - key contributors
(WR Sinorice Moss, DE Tamba Hali, LB Mark Anderson, LB Darryl Tapp, DL Jonathan Lewis, DE John McCargo, LB Roger McIntosh, CB Ashton Youboti)

Note, esp. the players I've left off. I dont want Jackson on the team. I dont want Justice or even D'Brick. I had Vernon Davis in Group 2, but I took him off because I dont like what the scouts have to say about his pass blocking. Jimmy Williams is on the board, but I'm thinking of taking him off. Tye Hill didn't make the cut.

And, yes, I've rated Carpenter ahead of Lawson, and Greenway on par with Hawk, and Marshall ahead of Deangelo... that's just my personal take on value to the team. That's what value groupings are all about.

 

[rookBoston]

You say that we will get one of these.

1) Is this then your Round 1 Board?

Yup. I should have specified. Value Groupings for all seven rounds would take me... well, a long time to pull together.

2) I presume some we would have to trade up for; some we would trade down for.

Undoubtedly. The Value Grouping strategy is based on the fact that you set equally ranked players into a single group. The first player in that group to be drafted sets the "fair value" for that group. The idea is to wait until the group only has one player left, and then trade into that position to cash in on optimal value.

Group 1 is clearly out of reach for us. I put it up there only to set my Top-5 list, in case Houston panics.

Group 2 will start losing players in the Top-10, but a few may drop into the teens. If four out of the five in this group are off the board by #12, then we would need to trade up to #13 to get best value, according to the way I stacked this board.

I've posted my mock draft where we do exactly that-- we trade up to #13 for Carpenter. I think most Pats Fans would probably put Carpenter into Group 3, which would mean Group 2 is pretty much a top-10 bunching: if the Lions take Michael Huff at #9, we'd have to target Greenway as high as #10. Honestly, that would put this Group pretty much out of reach, unless Greenway just kept falling.

Group 3 will start losing players in the teens, but will probably last into the late-20s/early-30s. As I've stacked this board, I would expect a trade down from #21 to #28-30 range, and we'd probably get either Kiwanuka or Marshall. So, again, by my ratings we'd be getting top-20 talent at (let's say) #30.

Again, critics will say Marshall belongs in Group 4 or Group 5... and honestly, they may be right. Marshall is a bit green to be in this company.

Group 4 may start as early as the teens, and will last into the 2nd round. Given the spread of that grouping, the last player in the group taken will be an absolute bargain. Again, this is because we have him rated equal to a guy who went in the teens, so we're getting fantastic value. Trouble is, it's kinda hard to trade into the #33, #34, #35 spots, where we'd probably want to be for this group. The Baltimore/San Fran trade actually put Balitimore in ideal position for this Group. For the Pats, a big trade up from #52 is not completely out of the question.

Group 5 will have one or two first rounders, but the group should last all the way to #52, or thereabouts. So, really, we could get two of the players on this board.

3) I'm somewhat confused by your categories. Are there really no other receivers that could be sophomore starters. I may be nitpicking on label. Group 4 looks like players I would trade down for in the 1st and Group 3 who I would expect to get at 21. I understand we thane would need to move depending on how the draft goes. Are Group 5 expected to there in the top of the second?

Yup. We can get a Group 3 player at #21, but the value would be in trading down a bit until that Group thins out.

Group 4... you have it right.

Group 5, like I said, will tail off through the second round. Group 5 might be a good group to work with to strategize a trade up from #52, to draft the last guy remaining out of the group.

So, if BB manages to get a player from Group 3 and a player from Group 5 (trade down from #21 and up from #52-- Whitner and McIntosh), I think that is very achievable.

More aggressive would be two players from Group 4 (way down from #21, but way up from #52--> Howard and Addai).

Last option would be to trade up into Group 2 (Greenway, perhaps), but then our appetite to trade up into Group 5 becomes less-- we still want to have some picks in the mid-rounds.

If we sit still and take the BPA, the best we could do is something like Lawson or Wimbley at #21, and probably that's all we'd get off this board.

 

[dryheat44]

Very, very nicely done.

 

[Brady'sButtBoy]

What's the obsession with Carpenter? He's a solid player that surely benefitted from having a ton of talent around him, starting with AJ Hawk. I only saw him play three times but I do remember him making some 'plays' in two of the games so I'm not saying he was purely a product of the OHSU defensive system.

Hawk has the makings of a star, while Carpenter will likely be a starter but not any kind of dominator. The first round is all about getting the super-studs, players with the grades, talent, and attitude that clearly set them apart from the rest of the group. If you look at Carpenter this way, he just doesn't measure up.

The argument could easily be made that there will not be ANY player at 21 who fits my description of what the first round is all about. In fact, that is what I expect and is why I feel trading down 5-8 spots in exchange for a future second rounder would be a very shrewd move since we'd still get a player of a virtually identical grade at the lower spot while positioning ourselves very well for the future - again.

With the Giants, Bears, Panthers at 25, 26, 27, we have three potential trades all out of our conference making a swap easier for both teams. If you buy the hype that the G-Men want a LB (Carpenter?) and the Carolina wants a certain RB and that the Bears want to enhance their offense, well, you can come up with a number of trade scenarios. All this would have been especially true if Lendale "White Castle," hadn't decided to eat half of the state of California for Christmas dinner and maybe fall out of the first round.

 

[mgteich]

Thanks for the clarifications; but I think from your comments that this is really a 2-round board, and perhaps with a bit of addition at the end, we couuld use it through the first pick in the third.

Yup. I should have specified. Value Groupings for all seven rounds would take me... well, a long time to pull together.


Undoubtedly. The Value Grouping strategy is based on the fact that you set equally ranked players into a single group. The first player in that group to be drafted sets the "fair value" for that group. The idea is to wait until the group only has one player left, and then trade into that position to cash in on optimal value.

Group 1 is clearly out of reach for us. I put it up there only to set my Top-5 list, in case Houston panics.

Group 2 will start losing players in the Top-10, but a few may drop into the teens. If four out of the five in this group are off the board by #12, then we would need to trade up to #13 to get best value, according to the way I stacked this board.

I've posted my mock draft where we do exactly that-- we trade up to #13 for Carpenter. I think most Pats Fans would probably put Carpenter into Group 3, which would mean Group 2 is pretty much a top-10 bunching: if the Lions take Michael Huff at #9, we'd have to target Greenway as high as #10. Honestly, that would put this Group pretty much out of reach, unless Greenway just kept falling.

Group 3 will start losing players in the teens, but will probably last into the late-20s/early-30s. As I've stacked this board, I would expect a trade down from #21 to #28-30 range, and we'd probably get either Kiwanuka or Marshall. So, again, by my ratings we'd be getting top-20 talent at (let's say) #30.

Again, critics will say Marshall belongs in Group 4 or Group 5... and honestly, they may be right. Marshall is a bit green to be in this company.

Group 4 may start as early as the teens, and will last into the 2nd round. Given the spread of that grouping, the last player in the group taken will be an absolute bargain. Again, this is because we have him rated equal to a guy who went in the teens, so we're getting fantastic value. Trouble is, it's kinda hard to trade into the #33, #34, #35 spots, where we'd probably want to be for this group. The Baltimore/San Fran trade actually put Balitimore in ideal position for this Group. For the Pats, a big trade up from #52 is not completely out of the question.

Group 5 will have one or two first rounders, but the group should last all the way to #52, or thereabouts. So, really, we could get two of the players on this board.



Yup. We can get a Group 3 player at #21, but the value would be in trading down a bit until that Group thins out.

Group 4... you have it right.

Group 5, like I said, will tail off through the second round. Group 5 might be a good group to work with to strategize a trade up from #52, to draft the last guy remaining out of the group.

So, if BB manages to get a player from Group 3 and a player from Group 5 (trade down from #21 and up from #52-- Whitner and McIntosh), I think that is very achievable.

More aggressive would be two players from Group 4 (way down from #21, but way up from #52--> Howard and Addai).

Last option would be to trade up into Group 2 (Greenway, perhaps), but then our appetite to trade up into Group 5 becomes less-- we still want to have some picks in the mid-rounds.

If we sit still and take the BPA, the best we could do is something like Lawson or Wimbley at #21, and probably that's all we'd get off this board.

 

[Rene Vallieres]

Careful Where You Draft Roger MacIntosh

Wanted to solicit the board for their value groupings.

To kick things off, I'll post mine. I think I'm already on record with my belief that this is the year of the Linebacker for the Pats, and if we take a Receiver in the first, barring a trade down, I'll absolutely bust a gut.

Keys:
Keep a short board. Only the players that you really want. Remember, you're only going to get ONE of these players, barring a miracle, so make sure every single name that you list is someone you're willing to stake your career on. And remember, you should be perfectly ambivalent over which player you get our of any given group-- they should all value out exactly equal in your mind.


Group 1 - unique
(RB Reggie Bush, DE Mario Williams)

Group 2 - rookie starters for the Pats
(LB AJ Hawk, NT Haloti Ngata, SS Michael Huff, LB Chad Greenway, LB Bobby Carpenter)

Group 3 - elite upside
(LB Manny Lawson, FS Donte Whitner, LB Mathias Kiwanuka, LB Kamerion Wimbley, CB Richard Marshall)

Group 4 - sophmore starters
(RB Deangelo Williams, RB Lawrence Moroney, CB Jimmy Williams, RB Joseph Addai, LB Thomas Howard)

Group 5 - key contributors
(WR Sinorice Moss, DE Tamba Hali, LB Mark Anderson, LB Darryl Tapp, DL Jonathan Lewis, DE John McCargo, LB Roger McIntosh, CB Ashton Youboti)

Note, esp. the players I've left off. I dont want Jackson on the team. I dont want Justice or even D'Brick. I had Vernon Davis in Group 2, but I took him off because I dont like what the scouts have to say about his pass blocking. Jimmy Williams is on the board, but I'm thinking of taking him off. Tye Hill didn't make the cut.

And, yes, I've rated Carpenter ahead of Lawson, and Greenway on par with Hawk, and Marshall ahead of Deangelo... that's just my personal take on value to the team. That's what value groupings are all about.

Basically, a very good list. However, I continue to caution about Roger MacIntosh. I think he rates mid-late 4th round by a team who is looking for a spot back-up and great special teams player. Roger was hurt a good deal of his career at the U. He's had shoulder surgery, and couldn't beat out Jon Beason or Leon Williams the last half of the 2005 season. But, he did play a lot. (Beason plays mostly inside, but can also play outside.) They tried Roger inside a couple of games, but he had trouble getting in on tackles and is not the best cover guy. He's a great kid and I think he has a future in the NFL, but other than special teams, he is a project. He is listed on some mock draft boards as a late 2nd-3rd rd pick, which I don't understand. Being an ACC guy, I've seen and like Oliver Hoyte as a better value pick by the Pats, despite his slow 40 time. Roger is about .15 seconds faster. He (Hoyte) should be available well after the 3rd round and may even fall into the 6th.

 

[mgteich]

If the first round is for super-studs, then you shouldn't want us drafting in the first round. We have almost no chance to get any of the 8-12 superstuds in this draft (rook's Group one and two).

I just don't understand your position. I would expect to get a super-stud if I were drafting in the top 10. If I draft later, why should I give up on the first round. 10-25 yields players that we should want.

What's the obsession with Carpenter? He's a solid player that surely benefitted from having a ton of talent around him, starting with AJ Hawk. I only saw him play three times but I do remember him making some 'plays' in two of the games so I'm not saying he was purely a product of the OHSU defensive system.

Hawk has the makings of a star, while Carpenter will likely be a starter but not any kind of dominator. The first round is all about getting the super-studs, players with the grades, talent, and attitude that clearly set them apart from the rest of the group. If you look at Carpenter this way, he just doesn't measure up.

The argument could easily be made that there will not be ANY player at 21 who fits my description of what the first round is all about. In fact, that is what I expect and is why I feel trading down 5-8 spots in exchange for a future second rounder would be a very shrewd move since we'd still get a player of a virtually identical grade at the lower spot while positioning ourselves very well for the future - again.

With the Giants, Bears, Panthers at 25, 26, 27, we have three potential trades all out of our conference making a swap easier for both teams. If you buy the hype that the G-Men want a LB (Carpenter?) and the Carolina wants a certain RB and that the Bears want to enhance their offense, well, you can come up with a number of trade scenarios. All this would have been especially true if Lendale "White Castle," hadn't decided to eat half of the state of California for Christmas dinner and maybe fall out of the first round.

 

[patchick]

Thanks Rook! I might quibble with the players but I love the structure--great food for thought. It's an intriguing exercise to try to group by value rather than position, especially in round 1-2.

As the draft goes on, can I presume that position starts to carry more weight? E.g., if you take Kam Wimbley in the 1st, Mark Anderson may fall out of the next tier value group. Or if your first two picks are Richard Marshall and Joseph Addai, you might shift to an all-LB group to make sure you cash in there while there's still top talent at the position.

 

[bakes781]

1st Round

1. DeAngelo Williams, RB
2. Manny Lawson, LB
3. Tye Hill, CB

2nd Round

1. Richard Marshall, CB
2. Maurice Stovall, WR
3. D'Qwell Jackson, LB

3rd Round

1. Mike Hass, WR
2. Cedric Griffin, CB
3. Ryan O'Callaghan, OT

4th Round

1. Chris Gocong, DE
2. PJ Daniels, RB
3. Skyler Green, WR

Option 1: DeAngelo Williams, Richard Marshall, Mike Hass & Chris Gocong
Option 2: Manny Lawson, Maurice Stovall, Cedric Griffin & PJ Daniels
Option 3: Tye Hill, D'Qwell Jackson, Ryan O'Callaghan & Skyler Green

 

[Boston Tim]

I just don't understand your position. I would expect to get a super-stud if I were drafting in the top 10. If I draft later, why should I give up on the first round. 10-25 yields players that we should want.

He isn't saying to give up on the first round. He is saying that if you can't get into the Top 10 (to draft a "super stud,") then you might as well trade down into the Bottom 10ish. I think he is saying to trade down to position 25-32 because you can pick up an additional day one pick in 2007 as well as a player that is equally as good as what you could have gotten at #21. At least, that is what I think he is saying.

 

[mgteich]

If you believe that you would get an equal quality at 31 as 21 (and no other team knows this secret), then indeed you should trade down. Seriously, if we have several that we have equal on our board, then we will trade down, if we can find a partner, presumably someone who has a different view, and really wants one of the players available.

However, this is a playoff team, not a rebuilding team. We need a few good picks.

He isn't saying to give up on the first round. He is saying that if you can't get into the Top 10 (to draft a "super stud,") then you might as well trade down into the Bottom 10ish. I think he is saying to trade down to position 25-32 because you can pick up an additional day one pick in 2007 as well as a player that is equally as good as what you could have gotten at #21. At least, that is what I think he is saying.

 

[mgteich]

I believe that your board would make the first round very easy indeed.
1) See how far Greenway ad Carpenter slip, and choose to move up or not.
2) If not, take a Whitner or Marshall at 21; at least one WILL be there

Wanted to solicit the board for their value groupings.

To kick things off, I'll post mine. I think I'm already on record with my belief that this is the year of the Linebacker for the Pats, and if we take a Receiver in the first, barring a trade down, I'll absolutely bust a gut.

Keys:
Keep a short board. Only the players that you really want. Remember, you're only going to get ONE of these players, barring a miracle, so make sure every single name that you list is someone you're willing to stake your career on. And remember, you should be perfectly ambivalent over which player you get our of any given group-- they should all value out exactly equal in your mind.


Group 1 - unique
(RB Reggie Bush, DE Mario Williams)

Group 2 - rookie starters for the Pats
(LB AJ Hawk, NT Haloti Ngata, SS Michael Huff, LB Chad Greenway, LB Bobby Carpenter)

Group 3 - elite upside
(LB Manny Lawson, FS Donte Whitner, LB Mathias Kiwanuka, LB Kamerion Wimbley, CB Richard Marshall)

Group 4 - sophmore starters
(RB Deangelo Williams, RB Lawrence Moroney, CB Jimmy Williams, RB Joseph Addai, LB Thomas Howard)

Group 5 - key contributors
(WR Sinorice Moss, DE Tamba Hali, LB Mark Anderson, LB Darryl Tapp, DL Jonathan Lewis, DE John McCargo, LB Roger McIntosh, CB Ashton Youboti)

Note, esp. the players I've left off. I dont want Jackson on the team. I dont want Justice or even D'Brick. I had Vernon Davis in Group 2, but I took him off because I dont like what the scouts have to say about his pass blocking. Jimmy Williams is on the board, but I'm thinking of taking him off. Tye Hill didn't make the cut.

And, yes, I've rated Carpenter ahead of Lawson, and Greenway on par with Hawk, and Marshall ahead of Deangelo... that's just my personal take on value to the team. That's what value groupings are all about.

 

[Mark Morse]

Wanted to solicit the board for their value groupings.

To kick things off, I'll post mine. I think I'm already on record with my belief that this is the year of the Linebacker for the Pats, and if we take a Receiver in the first, barring a trade down, I'll absolutely bust a gut.

Keys:
Keep a short board. Only the players that you really want. Remember, you're only going to get ONE of these players, barring a miracle, so make sure every single name that you list is someone you're willing to stake your career on. And remember, you should be perfectly ambivalent over which player you get our of any given group-- they should all value out exactly equal in your mind.


Group 1 - unique
(RB Reggie Bush, DE Mario Williams)

Group 2 - rookie starters for the Pats
(LB AJ Hawk, NT Haloti Ngata, SS Michael Huff, LB Chad Greenway, LB Bobby Carpenter)

Group 3 - elite upside
(LB Manny Lawson, FS Donte Whitner, LB Mathias Kiwanuka, LB Kamerion Wimbley, CB Richard Marshall)

Group 4 - sophmore starters
(RB Deangelo Williams, RB Lawrence Moroney, CB Jimmy Williams, RB Joseph Addai, LB Thomas Howard)

Group 5 - key contributors
(WR Sinorice Moss, DE Tamba Hali, LB Mark Anderson, LB Darryl Tapp, DL Jonathan Lewis, DE John McCargo, LB Roger McIntosh, CB Ashton Youboti)

Note, esp. the players I've left off. I dont want Jackson on the team. I dont want Justice or even D'Brick. I had Vernon Davis in Group 2, but I took him off because I dont like what the scouts have to say about his pass blocking. Jimmy Williams is on the board, but I'm thinking of taking him off. Tye Hill didn't make the cut.

And, yes, I've rated Carpenter ahead of Lawson, and Greenway on par with Hawk, and Marshall ahead of Deangelo... that's just my personal take on value to the team. That's what value groupings are all about.

I agree with your principle of value grouping. However my groupings are a little different this year. I have taken 140 players I think are on the Patriots draft board and allocated them to rounds of the darft. I have also split each round in thirds. I am still refining it and will post it next week before the draft.

I don't have Kiwinuka, Hali, Moss, Addai, Lewis or McIntosh on my Draft Board. Iam assuming that you have taken Jason Allen and Antonio Cromartie are off because of injury issues.

According to Michael Holley in the book Patriot Reign the Pats use 8 categories to rank players 1. Starter, 2. Circumstantial Starter - 1st year NFL starter who has some type of circumstance (agent, family conflict etc) 3. Make It - a player that won't start his 1st year but will contribute and develop into a strter, 4. Dirty Starter - could start but something about the pklayer is restrictive (speed, athletic ability) 5. Make It - a backup that won't win or lose a game for you. 6. Free Agent, 7. Pats Reject and 8. Reject

 

[spacecrime]

If you believe that you would get an equal quality at 31 as 21 (and no other team knows this secret), then indeed you should trade down.

That isn't what Rook is saying at all. I don't think you understand what he means by value groupings.

Or maybe I don't.

As I understand it, value groupings contain players of roughly equal value to the patriots. The key will be to draft the last guy left in this group, not the first. That will give maximum value per pick/$$$spent.

As far as your comment about no other team knowing the secret (assuming you were serious and not just being sarcastic), no two teams should have the same value placed on the player. According to Jimmy Johnson, one of the keys to a successful draft is to put a value on the players, your value, and don't worry where anyone else has set the value for the player. So should all 32 teams use a value grouping system, the various groups for different teams would comprise different players.

How'd I do, Rook? Do I understand your first post? Or am I missing something?

 

[mgteich]

space,

Yes, you missed something. I wasn't writing in response to rook, but to BBB.

If you read from the beginning, you will see that I agree with rook's approach, asked for some clarification, and received it is an excellent second post by rook. Actually, as many others, I've been waiting to see rook's list and analysis.

I would like to expand his last category a bit, and perhaps add another, so that we can use the list (as we each individually modify it) through the third round. As it is, it is useful through the second.

That isn't what Rook is saying at all. I don't think you understand what he means by value groupings.

Or maybe I don't.

As I understand it, value groupings contain players of roughly equal value to the patriots. The key will be to draft the last guy left in this group, not the first. That will give maximum value per pick/$$$spent.

As far as your comment about no other team knowing the secret (assuming you were serious and not just being sarcastic), no two teams should have the same value placed on the player. According to Jimmy Johnson, one of the keys to a successful draft is to put a value on the players, your value, and don't worry where anyone else has set the value for the player. So should all 32 teams use a value grouping system, the various groups for different teams would comprise different players.

How'd I do, Rook? Do I understand your first post? Or am I missing something?