For Those Advocating The Selection of Darren McFadden

[dryheat44]

As I've been saying for as long as we've had the draft forum, the Patriots draft the player who is at the intersection of need and value. They may need a kicker. They won't draft one in the first round. They might be drafting late in the first and there's an astounding QB value to be had. They won't be doing that either. And there are many more realistic scenarios between the two extremes.

Let's not try to shoehorn Belichick's drafting strategy onto a foot of predetermined size. He just doesn't operate that way, and there's no foolproof manta, except maybe that he will draft the player whom he believes to be of most help to the team relative to the other players available.

 

[patchick]

As I've been saying for as long as we've had the draft forum, the Patriots draft the player who is at the intersection of need and value.

Can't argue with that. But on the rare occasions that the Pats make an aggressive move up in the draft, I think it's generally been driven by the need side. Moving up for Ty Warren was a perfect example. Blessedly, we've seen very few of those obvious needs in the past 5 years!

 

[dryheat44]

Can't argue with that. But on the rare occasions that the Pats make an aggressive move up in the draft, I think it's generally been driven by the need side. Moving up for Ty Warren was a perfect example. Blessedly, we've seen very few of those obvious needs in the past 5 years!

See, I would call that a value move. Warren didn't really fill a need then, he backed up Ted Washington, and projected to a eventual DE starter. So I wouldn't call it a need. You could say the same about Chad Jackson last year. If he was a need, Belichick probably would have drafted him in the first round. I think he traded up to get him because of his value provided in that draft slot relative to the players likely to be available at the Patriots pick, 20 or so picks later.

It fits with BBs philosophy that there are only so many athletes of that size available, so it's a first round value. BB has hinted, if not said outright, in the past, that the reason he's drafted so many D-lineman and Tight Ends in the first round over his career is that there is a finite number of players that have the necessary size and athleticism in a given year. Last year, for example, the number of Tight Ends was 0. It almost gets into a supply/demand equation.

 

[sebman2112]

It's a combo of need and Value, but need is involved in their picks. I've been saying for awhile now that NE drafts for need one year in advance. I said this was the reason they would draft Maroney and Meriweather, and it seemed to prove true.

Chad Jackson seemed like he could have been drafted out of immediate need though.

 

[DaBruinz]

Hold on a second. You entered a thread that had already been going on for a week and supplied your own definition of a term that others in the thread had been clearly using very differently.

Sorry, Patchick, but it was YOU who supplied your own definition on drafting for NEED and it contradicted the generally accepted definition. It doesn't matter how long the thread was going on. The definition, as you provided, was not accurate.

Then using your newly supplied definition, you went back and said the people who posted before you made false statements. Not kosher, DaBruinz. You may not like my definition, but don't pretend I was following yours! Take a look at an example of my usage of "need" posted in this thread a week before you joined in:

"After the FA signings, including A. Thomas, the Pats had no real need at ANY position for 2007. They did have a glaring need at safety for 2008."

Except that isn't drafting for need. Just because attempted to establish a different definition on what Drafting for need is doesn't make it fact. And I didn't take you to task for it. I just pointed out where your definition was incorrect. But if you feel slighted because you got corrected on what "Drafting for NEED" is defined as, then I suggest you look in the mirror for the problem. Not at me.

Yet you took me to task based on the following definition--which is completely antithetical to my actual statements:

"Drafting for NEED means that you pick the player at a position where they are going to be starting immediately. Drafting for NEED is not drafting a player that you will slowly work into the starting line-up in a year or two."


Come on, no need (err..."reason" ) to put words in my mouth. Nobody thinks the Pats have a knee-jerk, short-term draft philosophy. Here's what I'm actually trying to say.

I didn't put words in your mouth. I quoted you directly. Just because your explanation didn't support your initial statement doesn't mean that your initial statement was correct.

It's often suggested on the board that the Pats draft the best player available regardless of need, which I strongly disagree with. I think that BB/SP's history suggests that:

- They try hard to configure their roster with FA signings to avoid any glaring holes in the lineup heading into the draft. This helps them avoid getting backed into a corner, and gives them the flexibility to scoop up a sliding player at a "luxury" position or to trade away picks when good offers come along. But...

- On the rare occasions that a starting position does remain unfilled, they tend to draft aggressively toward it (e.g. Logan Mankins, Stephen Gostkowski), and...

- A Patriots 1st-round pick should be looking at a starting opportunity by year 2, virtually no exceptions. A 2nd-round pick should be the same, unless you're talking about a rare physical specimen who you wouldn't normally expect to find at that point in the draft (e.g. Marquise Hill). By the middle rounds you have a lot more leeway.


Nothing radical, I think.

Actually, most people who participate in the draft forums KNOW that the Patriots do NOT draft BPA or by NEED. Most knowledgable posters know that the Patriots draft by value and that need is a part of that value equation.

There are 3 ways of drafting.

1) Best Player Available - Team takes the top ranked player on their board, regardless of whether or not the team needs him.
2) Need - Teams takes a player at a position where they lack depth, regardless of how talented the player is
3) Value - Combination of BPA and Need. For the Patriots, they consider the Tangibles, Intangibles, and Team Depth. A lot of people confuse this with BPA.

 

[ayjackson]

Ughhhhh!


Value is made up of many things - need is one of them. If we perceive a need pick, it is a value pick because the need is so great, the player returns the most value.

Ty Warren was a value pick because he could start and contribute and provide HIGH RETURNS almost immediately. That is VALUE - returns less investment. He filled a need, and that made him valuable (ie need was a significant component of value - need created value)

 

[DaBruinz]

Ughhhhh!


Value is made up of many things - need is one of them. If we perceive a need pick, it is a value pick because the need is so great, the player returns the most value.

Its already been established that NEED is part of the Value equation. However, the value is also defined by the tangibles and intangibles of a player. If you've read any of the articles on how BB sets up his draft board, you'd know that need, while a factor, is not the DRIVING factor.

I've given a general outline of what BB has said their draft style is. You can sit there and pretend like its not, but its right from the horses mouth.

Ty Warren was a value pick because he could start and contribute and provide HIGH RETURNS almost immediately. That is VALUE - returns less investment. He filled a need, and that made him valuable (ie need was a significant component of value - need created value)

Warren was a VALUE pick for many reasons, but not for what you stated. Warren was NOT expected to start immediately nor was he expected to provide HIGH RETURNS immediately. Warren was drafted while Bobby Hamilton was still a starter on this team. Many fans and pundits thought Warren was drafted to be a NT. However, this proved to be false when BB went out and got Ted Washington prior to the start of the season, but after the draft.

Warren was a VALUE because he'd have time to learn the position and would not have the pressure or expectations by the team of being an immediate impact. Warren was a VALUE pick because the Pats did not have a need at DE because they already had Seymour and Hamilton.

Warren definitely wasn't a NEED pick because the Pats were returning Hamilton and Seymour. Warren certainly wasn't the BPA at the time.

Warren was certainly the best value because he had the tangibles and intangibles that the Pats were looking for and would have the ability to grow into the position.

Darelle Revis was a NEED pick for the Jets.
Ben Watson was a VALUE pick for the Patriots.

Another way to define a NEED player is someone who has to come in and perform immediately because the team doesn't have anyone better.

A VALUE pick is a pick that the team takes to allow them to develop with the expectations that they will move into the starting line-up given a year or two as an understudy.

 

[ayjackson]

Well arguing on the internet is fruitless. I agree with substantially all of your retort DaBruinz. You did not contradict anything I said, though you may think you did.