Grading the Draft

[mayoclinic]

With no evidence other than my own reasoning, I propose this hypothesis: There just wasn't anyone enthusiastically looking to trade up to that spot, I guess.

It's been pointed out elsewhere that the Pats trade back apparently occurred immediately after Tampa Bay traded up to 58 to nab Lavonte David. It's possible that BB was locked in on David at that point in the draft, and when he was taken BB was left without a player that he valued worth the #62 pick.

Two things to consider:

1. Time considerations. I believe that only 7 minutes was allowed between picks, so if the Pats decided to trade down starting around #58 they had less than 30 minutes to work out a trade before selecting someone at 62.

2. Player considerations. There just weren't that many exciting players left on the board after Lavonte David. I had only 4 guys who I had rated worth the #62 pick left on my board at that point: DBs Trumaine Johnson (and we had already taken Tavon Wilson over Johnson) and Alfonzo Dennard (who had been dropped down due to his arrest); and DTs Alameda Ta'amu and Brandon Thompson. Obviously BB didn't rate those guys as highly, or anyone else. I think that there's more involved than just taking a player at a particular spot - BB doesn't want to overpay a guy as a 2nd round pick who he doesn't believe is worth it. But apparently no one else was excited enough about the prospects left on the board to offer very much, either.

While BB got terrible point value for his trade backs, he got excellent player value. Dennard was a late 2nd round talent by himself, Bequette is a solid addition, Ebert was a nice late round pick, and Ebner is one of the most intriguing wild cards in the draft. I'm not happy with "what" we got for the pick, but I'm ok with "who" we got.

 

[BelichickFan]

While BB got terrible point value for his trade backs, he got excellent player value.

Agree with this, I hated Day Two with a passion but the players we got on Day Three made it alright. I still can't wrap my arms around the Wilson pick other than to assume Bill wanted him (obviously), expected to trade 2b and didn't think he'd get Wilson where he traded 2b down to. That's not to say I like the pick but it;s the best explanation I can come up with and Wilson's measurables are actually competitive with the other safeties including Barron.

I like Bequette, too much production in the SEC not to be taken seriously. I love the Dennard pick. Ebert will almost certainly be cut but hopefully will show enough to get to the practice squad. Ebner is, of course, interesting, I wonder if they'll give him a look as a kickoff returner, our guys are awful and Ebner has some running ability.

 

[ZoisKing]

It's been pointed out elsewhere that the Pats trade back apparently occurred immediately after Tampa Bay traded up to 58 to nab Lavonte David. It's possible that BB was locked in on David at that point in the draft, and when he was taken BB was left without a player that he valued worth the #62 pick. That's an interesting theory, and makes sense.

Two things to consider:

1. Time considerations. I believe that only 7 minutes was allowed between picks, so if the Pats decided to trade down starting around #58 they had less than 30 minutes to work out a trade before selecting someone at 62.

2. Player considerations. There just weren't that many exciting players left on the board after Lavonte David. I had only 4 guys who I had rated worth the #62 pick left on my board at that point: DBs Trumaine Johnson (and we had already taken Tavon Wilson over Johnson) and Alfonzo Dennard (who had been dropped down due to his arrest); and DTs Alameda Ta'amu and Brandon Thompson. Obviously BB didn't rate those guys as highly, or anyone else. I think that there's more involved than just taking a player at a particular spot - BB doesn't want to overpay a guy as a 2nd round pick who he doesn't believe is worth it. But apparently no one else was excited enough about the prospects left on the board to offer very much, either. I would have taken Brandon Thompson at that pick, and thought BB might have done the same. It was definitely a curious draft. Some of the maneuvering surprised me. If it were me, I'd have taken Worthy or Thompson in the 2nd with another edge rusher. Bequette was on my list for our 4th rounder. As you say, the value of players available wasn't what Bill wanted for that pick.

While BB got terrible point value for his trade backs, he got excellent player value. Dennard was a late 2nd round talent by himself, Bequette is a solid addition, Ebert was a nice late round pick, and Ebner is one of the most intriguing wild cards in the draft. I'm not happy with "what" we got for the pick, but I'm ok with "who" we got.

Truthfully, I didn't care what we did after the first round. If I had to judge the draft without the selections in the 1st, then I'd lament it more.

However, I'm very happy with Bequette and Dennard.

 

[rfournier103]

Haven't posted in a while... but I LOVED this year's crop. I've been waiting since 2008 for the Pats to significantly beef up their D. I predict a wildly successful season!

 

[Off The Grid]

1 ~ I have no problem with the Trade Down from a Points perspective. The Chart is only a Book Value mechanism. The Market at a given moment is what determines the Market. I think it stands to reason that Mad Bill considered the Draft Class extremely unpalatable at #62 ~ so unpalatable, in fact, that #90 and #163 seemed like an improvement. I couldn't've agreed less, as I liked several guys who went in between #62 and #90...However, having established his own judgement of the Prospects likely to go in that range, and having found them wanting, I applaud the principle of his Trade Down, and if that's the best that the Market provided, then that's what the Pick ~ #62 ~ was worth, Value Charts be damned.

2 ~ However, the Browns + Broncos trade clearly illustrated that the Market could've done much better.

3 ~ It is inexplicable. Does anyone know of any precedent for such a spectacular disconnect??

With no evidence other than my own reasoning, I propose this hypothesis:

There just wasn't anyone enthusiastically looking to trade up to that spot, I guess.

It's been pointed out elsewhere that the Pats trade back apparently occurred immediately after Tampa Bay traded up to 58 to nab Lavonte David. It's possible that BB was locked in on David at that point in the draft, and when he was taken BB was left without a player that he valued worth the #62 pick.

Two things to consider:

1. Time considerations. I believe that only 7 minutes was allowed between picks, so if the Pats decided to trade down starting around #58 they had less than 30 minutes to work out a trade before selecting someone at 62.

2. Player considerations. There just weren't that many exciting players left on the board after Lavonte David. I had only 4 guys who I had rated worth the #62 pick left on my board at that point: DBs Trumaine Johnson (and we had already taken Tavon Wilson over Johnson) and Alfonzo Dennard (who had been dropped down due to his arrest); and DTs Alameda Ta'amu and Brandon Thompson. Obviously BB didn't rate those guys as highly, or anyone else. I think that there's more involved than just taking a player at a particular spot - BB doesn't want to overpay a guy as a 2nd round pick who he doesn't believe is worth it. But apparently no one else was excited enough about the prospects left on the board to offer very much, either.

While BB got terrible point value for his trade backs, he got excellent player value. Dennard was a late 2nd round talent by himself, Bequette is a solid addition, Ebert was a nice late round pick, and Ebner is one of the most intriguing wild cards in the draft. I'm not happy with "what" we got for the pick, but I'm ok with "who" we got.

Thanks for having the Balls to speculate on a bewildering subject, Gents!!

1 ~ I don't believe it was a Time Constraint issue. These guys make so many preliminary calls BEFORE the Draft ~ and during the Draft, or so I gather ~ that such a disconnect is EXTREMELY rare. And who in this league is more thorough than Coach Bill Belichick, Madman and Genius??

2 ~ What's truly inexplicable is that this doesn't make Mad Bill look bad quite as much as John Elway: I think we can assume that Mad Bill isn't THAT Mad: Ergo, he took the best offer he could find. The Failure, therefore, wasn't HIS, so much as John Elway's: Had Elway offered the #87 and the #120 for #62 ~ which is what he ended up trading for #67 ~ it stands to reason that Mad Bill would have GLADLY taken it ~ rather'n the #90 and #163 we ended up taking from the Packers!!

So Elway would've been up 5 BIG SPOTS at a critical stage of the Draft.

And Belichick would've been up BIG.

The more I think'f it, the more I think that this must have been Elway's screw up.

 

[mayoclinic]

The thing that hurts the most is that if the Pats had gotten 87 and 120 they could have traded back from 120, gotten Senio Kelemete, and still picked up Dennard and Ebner. And had their pick of Bequette or Akiem Hicks at 87.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

The thing that hurts the most is that if the Pats had gotten 87 and 120 they could have traded back from 120, gotten Senio Kelemete, and still picked up Dennard and Ebner. And had their pick of Bequette or Akiem Hicks at 87.

Very true, but in my mind, if David is there at #62,BB takes him and calls it a draft, thinking Dennard, Ebner and Ebert all become UDFA signings.

 

[mayoclinic]

Very true, but in my mind, if David is there at #62,BB takes him and calls it a draft, thinking Dennard, Ebner and Ebert all become UDFA signings.

Absolutely. If David is there at 62 then I'm doing cartweels. I do wonder whether the Pats would have tried to make a trade to pick up a later round pick somehow (player trade; trading out of 2013 would have been difficult given that the Pats had no 5th or 6th round pick), especially for Dennard. If they could somehow have snagged Dennard and then gotten Ebner in FA they might have had:

21. Chandler Jones
25. Dont'a Hightower
48. Tavon Wilson
62. Lavonte David
7th round. Alfonzo Dennard
UDFA. Nate Ebner, maybe Jeremy Ebert

That would have been an amazing draft.

The trade with GB appeared to happen right after Tampa Bay traded up to #58 for David, so I have to think that BB was targeting David at 62 and that once David was off the board BB didn't see anyone worth taking and took the best deal he could get.

 

[captain stone]

With no evidence other than my own reasoning, I propose this hypothesis:



There just wasn't anyone enthusiastically looking to trade up to that spot, I guess.

Except that Denver, with whom Bill had already done business the day before, trades up to 51 w/ Philly in exchange for 59 & 120.

Looks to me that Bill was so focused on drafting Tavon Fecking Wilson at 48, that he never bothered to give Denver - or anyone else - a call, when he should've known that Wilson would've been available at 59, 159 or 259.

 

[fester]

Looks to me that Bill was so focused on drafting Tavon Fecking Wilson at 48, that he never bothered to give Denver - or anyone else - a call, when he should've known that Wilson would've been available at 59, 159 or 259.

Yee old omniscient one, please tell me what tomorrow's Pennsylvania State lottery numbers are as I would like to buy another Pittsburgh Zoo and Aquarium pass as my three year old daughter loves spending her weekends there, and free money makes that a whole lot easier on me.

 

[mayoclinic]

Except that Denver, with whom Bill had already done business the day before, trades up to 51 w/ Philly in exchange for 59 & 120.

Not to let facts interrupt your argument, but it was Green Bay who traded 59 and 123 to Philly for 51, to select Jerel Worthy.

BB's phone is always open for trade offers. The Packers traded up again to 62 with the Pats. So though we don't know whether it actually happened, it wouldn't be at all surprising if the Packers had indeed called BB and offered 59+123 to trade up to 48. IF they did, then obviously BB turned them down.

Let's assume for just a moment that that hypothetical situation had actually occurred. Then why turn the offer down? The obvious answer is that BB valued the player he took at 48 more than the trade that was offered. And the corollary to that is that he thought that trading back to 59 would cause him to lose out on the player he wanted. San Diego at 49 and Atlanta at 55 were two teams with whom Wilson had visited.

Suppose that the trade had occurred. The Pats would have held picks #59, 62 and 123. Then assume the following:

1. Pack takes Jerel Worthy at 48, as actually occured
2. Either San Diego at 49 or Atlanta at 55 takes Wilson 0 not improbable
3. Tampa Bay trades up to 58 for Lavonte David, as actually occurred

I mention #3 on the list because the Pats decision to trade out of 62 apparently occurred right after TB traded up for David, so I'm guessing - yes, guessing - that the Pats were interested in David at 62. In that scenario, the Pats would be sitting at 59 and 62 with Wilson and David both off the board. Who is left? Trumaine Johnson? The media loved him and it was rumored that the Pats did too, but they obviously preferred Wilson. Johnson had character issues, questions of selfishness, and came from a divison II school.

As it was, the Pats traded out of 62 because they didn't feel anyone left was worth the pick. I'm guessing they would have felt similarly about 59, as the two picks were so close. So what's the advantage of trading back and having 2 picks where you don't feel there are any prospects worth taking? Doesn't make much sense to me.

I wouldn't say that BB was "hell bent" on taking Wilson with the #48 pick. But he obviously valued Wilson as being worth taking at 48. And he valued Wilson more than whatever alternatives were available. Rightly or wrongly. Just like he valued Vollmer at 58 in 2009 and Cunningham at 53 in 2010. Whether the player ends up being a good pick is one thing. How BB valued the player is another. What's so hard to understand about that?

 

[captain stone]

It was indeed GB who traded up to 51, not Denver. Bill has dealt with both of them so often recently
that I confused one for the other.

And everything else may also be true, which is not hard at all for me to understand.
Bill simply screwed up...big time....again.

 

[MP-Logick]

It was indeed GB who traded up to 51, not Denver. Bill has dealt with them so often recently
that I confused one for the other.

And everything else may also be true, which is not hard at all for me to understand.
Bill simply screwed up...big time....again.

You are a comic genius. I haven't laughed this hard in a while.

 

[mayoclinic]

Bill simply screwed up...big time....again.

Maybe we'll get lucky and Kraft will be able to lure Matt Millen away from broadcasting to remedy these failures.

 

[fester]

Maybe we'll get lucky and Kraft will be able to lure Matt Millen away from broadcasting to remedy these failures.

Or we could be even luckier and have the Krafts hire the noted Internet draft board expert Captain Stone to sink the franchise in three seasons or less. As come on, any idiot with a DSL connection can do better than a guy whose tenure has a 25% Super Bowl win rate and a 44% Super Bowl appearance rate. That is a ridiculously low standard to beat.

 

[mayoclinic]

Or we could be even luckier and have the Krafts hire the noted Internet draft board expert Captain Stone to sink the franchise in three seasons or less. As come on, any idiot with a DSL connection can do better than a guy whose tenure has a 25% Super Bowl win rate and a 44% Super Bowl appearance rate. That is a ridiculously low standard to beat.

And he had to cheat to get that far.