CHFF: Belichick umpteen-uples down on DBs in the draft

[Deus Irae]

Actually, it's the author who sets the context by comparing Belichick's drafting to Hitler's actions that resulted in the deaths of 60 million people. I don't think you would look at it very kindly if your actions at your job were compared to Hitler.

For anyone who's read CHFF, it's understood that hyperbole and bluster are part of the shtick. That doesn't make the site illegitimate, nor does it immediately invalidate the article.

 

[bucky]

For anyone who's read CHFF, it's understood that hyperbole and bluster are part of the shtick. That doesn't make the site illegitimate, nor does it immediately invalidate the article.

Right. Well I can see where you get your immense football acumen. To me, it's seems the writer has more knowledge about Hitler than about football. And his theory has more holes in it than Hitler's body after the Russian army was done with it.

 

[Synovia]

It is the everending rhetorical question of who or what is more responsible the DB's, Pass Rushers or BB???...

Strengthening one will make everyone a little bit better, or so they say..

All I know is that there are quite a few teams with good cornerback's whose defenses suck (see Oakland, Tenn, etc). And very few with great pass rushs whose defenses are bad.

 

[Synovia]

For anyone who's read CHFF, it's understood that hyperbole and bluster are part of the shtick. That doesn't make the site illegitimate, nor does it immediately invalidate the article.

No, the content of the article invalidates the article.


CHFF is only slightly LESS illegitimate that CBS Sportsline in the context of intelligent analysis.

 

[kkpat]

2004
Safety Guss Scott (third round) – Started his only two NFL games with the Patriots in 2005; was out of football by 2006.

Safety Dexter Reid (fourth round) – Started two games with the Patriots in 2004 before two uneventful years with the Colts in 2005 and 2006.

Cornerback Christian Morton (seventh round) – Never played in a Patriots uniform; spent four years as a backup with the Falcons, Redskins and Panthers.

2005
Cornerback Ellis Hobbs (third round) – Spent four largely uneventful years (8 INTs) with the Patriots. However, he did start 49 games and was a spectacular kick returner. Best remembered for being toasted by Plaxico Burress for the game-winning score in Super Bowl XLII and was traded to Philly for two fifth-round picks in 2009.

Safety James Sanders (fourth round) – A serviceable safety, who was been a fulltime starter for two years (2007, 2008) with five picks in his five NFL seasons.

2006
Cornerback Willie Andrews (seventh round) – In a very bad draft that went almost exclusively to offense, the Patriots waited until their last pick to grab a player in the defensive backfield; Andrews spent two years as a back-up and special teamer and was busted for marijuana possession with intent to distribute two days after New England's loss in Super Bowl XLII. He was busted six months later on firearms charges. He's now out of football.

2007
Safety Brandon Meriweather (first round) – So far, the promising No. 1 pick has been largely a disappointment, though he did appear to come into his own in 2009, starting all 16 games for the first time, with 5 picks and a TD. But he's yet to live up to the expectations of a No. 1.

Cornerback Mike Richardson (sixth round) – Spent most of his two years with the Patriots on the taxi squad. He was signed by the Chiefs last year, after the Patriots released him. Started one game last year with Kansas City.

2008
Cornerback Terrence Wheatley (second round) – Wheatley saw some playing time as a rookie, but was injured halfway through the season. To say he's had no impact (three tackles in two years) would be an understatement.

Cornerback Jonathan Wilhite (fourth round) – He started the last four games of 2008 and eight games in 2009; with there picks in his limited playing time.

2009
Safety Patrick Chung (second round) – A college teammate of safety Jairus Byrd, who led the NFL last year with nine picks, Chung started one game and recorded a single INT in New England's 59-0 destruction of the Titans.

Cornerback Darius Butler (second round) – Developed fairly well during his rookie season, ending the year with five starts and 3 picks, including a 91-yard TD return in the season finale against Houston. Byrd, a safety, was taken with the very next pick in the draft.

And that doesn't even get into the DB disasters in free agency, at least since the Rodney Harrison signing – back in that same 2003 offseason that produced Asante Samuel.

Does any one disagree with what he says about these draft picks?

 

[Deus Irae]

Right. Well I can see where you get your immense football acumen. To me, it's seems the writer has more knowledge about Hitler than about football. And his theory has more holes in it than Hitler's body after the Russian army was done with it.

1.) Your inability to get past an analogy that upsets your sensibilities doesn't make the article invalid.

2.) Your inability to grasp the clear point of the article doesn't somehow make the article wrong.

3.) I've noted on this very board that I believe CHFF has not been as good recently as it used to be. That doesn't mean one should just search for excuses to dismiss the article.

4.) I didn't comment on the value of the article in my posts and, while I think it takes too simplistic an approach to the question, the basic point of the article is that the team's failed to draft well for the secondary in recent years. That anyone can dispute that given what position the Patriots chose in the first round just a few days ago is something that just goes to show how people like to avoid dealing with reality.

5.) Deriding someone's football acumen because you're not emotionally capable of handling a Hitler reference certainly explains a lot more about you than it does about anyone else, or about the article.

 

[miDeuce]

Can't argue with it, but I find it kinda shocking that our 2006 DPR was the third best of the decade considering we had no Rodney, and Hobbs/Samuel, with Troy playing nickel. Worth mentioning that 2008's horrid DPR was against such a cake schedule too. I kinda think that tends to show we wouldn't have won the SB even if TB had been upright.

 

[Sicilian]

The point the author was making wasn't just the Pats have drafted X number of DBs. It was that they have to keep investing picks on DBs because they haven't done a good job of picking productive players at CB/S.

I'm not disputing that we've taken a number of DBs that haven't panned out, but by that breakdown we've taken a very appropriately proportional number of DBs, compared to how many we need to field on any one play. So I disagree with the author's assessment that our draft mistakes have "forced" us to draft more DBs than we wanted to. Seems to me we would have drafted that many anyway, especially considered DBs are usually contributors on special teams.

 

[bucky]

1.) Your inability to get past an analogy that upsets your sensibilities doesn't make the article invalid.

No. It just makes the article offensive and insulting. And makes it sound like the writer is more interested in spewing out witty analogies than thinking about football. Maybe if someone compared your actions to those of Hitler, you would be more sensitive to it.

2.) Your inability to grasp the clear point of the article doesn't somehow make the article wrong.

No, but since you asked, here is a list of things that does make the article wrong:

1) Comparing the drafting of McCourty to Hitler's invasion of Russia.
2) Lack of any football context - such as comparing the Pats' drafting of DBs to other teams' drafting of DBs or comparing it to the Pats' drafting of other positions.
3) Underlying assumption that pass defense is dependent entirely on defensive backs.
4) Misuse of statistics to back up one's point.
5) Misrepresentation of statistics.
6) Highly subjective evaluation of draft picks without establishing any baseline for the evaluation

As I said - more holes that Hitler's body after the Russian army was through with it.

3.) I've noted on this very board that I believe CHFF has not been as good recently as it used to be. That doesn't mean one should just search for excuses to dismiss the article.

I don't need to search for excuses. That article in itself gives me plenty of reasons to dismiss it. As a matter of fact, articles like this are sometimes reason enough to dismiss other, possibly more legitimate content on sites like this.

4.) I didn't comment on the value of the article in my posts and, while I think it takes too simplistic an approach to the question, the basic point of the article is that the team's failed to draft well for the secondary in recent years. That anyone can dispute that given what position the Patriots chose in the first round just a few days ago is something that just goes to show how people like to avoid dealing with reality.

By that same token, you can say that the basic point of the Bible is that god created the earth and man. And leave everything else out. Unfortunately, this article makes many more claims and doesn't validly support any of them. I see the basic point of this article as something written by a writer whose main objective is to sound smart and witty.

5.) Deriding someone's football acumen because you're not emotionally capable of handling a Hitler reference certainly explains a lot more about you than it does about anyone else, or about the article.

No. I'm deriding your football acumen because you are defending this useless, offensive, piece of crap article.

 

[eom]

Does any one disagree with what he says about these draft picks?

I count 12 guys there, 2 of which are too recent to judge, but if anything I'd be positive on them.

of the remaining 10:
2 higher than 3rd round --- probably a split between success and failure
5 in middle rounds --- I'd give that about a C.
3 in the bottom 2 rounds --- not sure what you'd expect there

like the other guy said, the expectation is that you draft a lot of db's by nature of the position, and the success rate past the first round is probably something like 20% averaged over the 2nd - 4th round, if it's even that high.
belichick has probably done worse than some teams in the league in this particular regard, but I'm sure he's done better than many, too.
overall, we don't have much to complain about.

 

[eom]

now that I think about it, why start the analysis in '04?
I think we should start in '05 --- it skews the results much more favorably.

 

[patfanken]

But his management of the draft from 2004 to 2009 reminds us of Adolf Hitler's management of the German military from 1941 to 1945: one disastrous decision after another.

Here's a cold hard football fact that belies what this quote from the author. The Pats have won 10+ games for the last 7 consecutive years. That would be hard to do if your HC has been making "one disastrous decision after another."

And I repeat what I said at the start of this thread. EVERYBODY's secondary has looked like crap because of the rules interpretation changes the last 5 years.

 

[Deus Irae]

No. It just makes the article offensive and insulting. And makes it sound like the writer is more interested in spewing out witty analogies than thinking about football. Maybe if someone compared your actions to those of Hitler, you would be more sensitive to it.

The article is only offensive to those who are so politically correct that their getting offended about pretty much everything is to be expected.

No, but since you asked, here is a list of things that does make the article wrong:

1) Comparing the drafting of McCourty to Hitler's invasion of Russia.
2) Lack of any football context - such as comparing the Pats' drafting of DBs to other teams' drafting of DBs or comparing it to the Pats' drafting of other positions.
3) Underlying assumption that pass defense is dependent entirely on defensive backs.
4) Misuse of statistics to back up one's point.
5) Misrepresentation of statistics.
6) Highly subjective evaluation of draft picks without establishing any baseline for the evaluation

As I said - more holes that Hitler's body after the Russian army was through with it.

Finally, you post something about the article that's relevant to a sports board. Furthermore, I agree that the article is far too simplistic in its approach. Had you taken the article from that angle from the beginning, instead of whining about the analogy, you'd have had an actual point.

I don't need to search for excuses. That article in itself gives me plenty of reasons to dismiss it. As a matter of fact, articles like this are sometimes reason enough to dismiss other, possibly more legitimate content on sites like this.

Seems a silly method of evaluation, but to each his own.

By that same token, you can say that the basic point of the Bible is that god created the earth and man. And leave everything else out. Unfortunately, this article makes many more claims and doesn't validly support any of them. I see the basic point of this article as something written by a writer whose main objective is to sound smart and witty.

Given that the Bible is a bit longer than one internet page, I'd say your analogy falls short. Now, should I pretend to be offended?

No. I'm deriding your football acumen because you are defending this useless, offensive, piece of crap article.

Ok, so you're deriding my football acumen because your reading comprehension sucks and your tender sensibilities can't handle a politically incorrect reference from a website. Got it.

 

[Synovia]

The article is only offensive to those who are so politically correct that their getting offended about pretty much everything is to be expected.

Sensitive? Politically correct?


No, Deus, the comparison to Hitler is wrong because its completely asinine. It doesn't make sense at all. Its a terrible article, and thats as far as it goes.

 

[Triumph]

IMO, everything is riding on McCourty.

If he winds up being a questionable pick (I think BB got this one right) its going to be another season of watching the NE secondary getting picked apart like the thanksgiving turkey.

Butler and Chung need to contribute in a big way too.

 

[DaBruinz]

Decent article. Hard to deny the fact Patriots have not had two GOOD defensive backs for many years now. And that they have drafted an inordinate number of DB's over the years. And disastrous free agent signings like Duane Starks. Does any one remember the last minute signing of Deltha O'Neal in 2008 (when expectation was to repeat the mind blowing 2007 season) Brady going down took care of that expectation. As an aside, does anyone remember the dismemberment of Deltha O'Neal by Brady in a game against Denver (maybe, 2006 or 2005)?

Ofcourse, lack of a credible pass rush exposes a mediocre secondary.

But, I think positive changes are afoot. They now have a solid nucleus to build on. Bodden is solid. Butler, Springs, and this year's pick should lay the foundation for future. I am not so sure on Wilhite and Wheatley.

Let's not forget that BB is taking over the coaching duties for the defense.

Just a point of information, the Pats traded for Starks.. They didn't sign him as a FA..

Also, Springs was cut..

No, BB isn't taking over the "coaching duties" for the defense. BB will be more involved, but he's always been involved with them..

 

[Patjew]

Another point of information is that the Russians did not shoot Hitler.

 

[RayClay]

Since our last super Bowl was in 2004-5 and included key contributions from Randall Gay and Hank Poteat, do the authors propose hiring cheap scrubs to go along with unproven fourth round draft picks?

I think I need to look at that data.

 

[DaBruinz]

The point - that the Pats have spent a lot of draft picks on DBs without much to show for it - is hard to dispute. It was just a very poorly written article.

Actually, it's very easy to dispute. First of all, since BB took over, the Pats have used 20 picks on DBs. Over 11 years. Out of 101 draft picks. For 4 different positions. Of those 20 picks, 9 were safeties and 11 were CBs.

The picks were:
2000 - Antwan Harris - Safety - 6th round pick (4 years with Pats)
2001 - Brock Williams - CB - 3rd round pick -
Hakim Akbar - Safety - 5th round pick
Leonard Myers - CB - 6th round pick
2003 - Eugene Wilson - CB - 2nd round pick (4 years with Pats as a Safety)
Asante Samuel - CB - 4th round pick (5 years with Pats - 3 as a starter)
2004 - Guss Scott - Safety - 3rd round pick - injured both years.
Dexter Reid - Safety - 4th round pick - only lasted 1 year
Christian Morton - CB - 7th round pick - Cut during TC.
2005 - Ellis Hobbs - CB - 3rd round pick (4 years with Pats - 3 as a starter)
James Sanders - Safety - 5th round pick (6 years with Pats)
2006 Willie Andrews - Safety - 7th round pick (2 years with Pats) - Special Teams Ace
2007 Brandon Meriweather - Safety - 1st round pick (4 years with Pats)
Mike Richardson - CB- 6th round pick (2 years with Pats)
2008 Terence Wheatley - CB- 2nd round pick (2 years with Pats - Both ended on IR)
Johnathan Wilhite - CB- 4th round pick (2 years with Pats)
Matthew Slater - Safety - 5th round pick (2 years with Pats) Special Teams Ace
2009 Patrick Chung - Safety - 2nd round pick (1 years with Pats) - jury still out
Darius Butler - CB- 2nd round pick (1 year with Pats) jury still out
2010 - Devin McCourty - CB - 1st round pick - Has yet to take a snap.

Samuel, Hobbs, Sanders, Wilson, Mariweather - all became starters
Slater, Harris, Myers, Andrews - all either did or do provide excellent special teams play.

Wilhite looks like a JAG but has shown some flashes. Wheatley was playing well before his injury. Those two, along with Chung, Butler and McCourty, the jury is still out on..

So, out of the 15 players that the jury isn't out on, you had 5 starters and 4 more who had impacts.. So, is it really that bad?? 9 of 15 have contributed? What's it compare to the rest of the league?

 

[DaBruinz]

Its an interesting and fair article stat-wise. The Hitler references are unnecessary.

The author's assessments of the players is BS.. Hardly a fair article. Being a CB or a Safety isn't just about the number of INTS you get. Yet that is what the author bases his assessments almost entirely on.