Lombardi weighs in on team's moves and motives

[MoLewisrocks]

Just pulling names off of the Patriots official site:

2000:

Otis Smith
Bobby Hamilton
Joe Andruzzi


2001:

Antowain Smith
Mike Vrabel
Anthony Pleasant
Roman Pfifer
David Patten
Larry Izzo
Marc Edwards
Mike Compton

Official New England Patriots - History - Free Agents

Is it your position that these players weren't major parts of that 2001 Super Bowl winning team, and that none of them were involved in 2003 or 2004?


2002:

Christian Fauria and a bunch of stiffs, including the unlamented Steve Martin. What happened in 2002? Oh, yes.... the team missed the playoffs.

2003:

Rodney Harrison
Larry Centers
Rosevelt Colvin
Russ Hochstein
Tyrone Poole


2004:

Keith Traylor
Josh Miller

Care to opine as to whether such players were a big part of the 2003-2004 Super Bowl seasons?

Andy, I know you're a homer. I actually appreciate that, because all sides are needed to make the board work. However, you've really lost your mind over the past couple of seasons, and the post of yours to which I'm responding here pretty much confirms it.

So I guess

McGinest
Brown
Bruschi
Johnson
Milloy
Law
Woody
Tebucky
Faulk
BRADY
Pass
Redmond
Light
Seymour
Givens
Branch
Green
Graham
BantaCain
Koppen
Samuel
Wilson

and a handful of other drafted roll players...

players acquired via draft and on the roster from 2001 thru some or all of the championships were just complimentary pieces to all the impact FA signings who won us 3 rings...

Honestly, there were some great veteran role players picked up over the years to fill voids and to help install the system initially. Beyond that, the long term impact FA signings were Vrabel, Rodney, Colvin (although his impact was severely limited out of the gate when he broke his hip...). Short term Patten, OTIS, Poole, Pfifer, Fauria, and Traylor paid some nice dividends. Izzo was a great ST'er.

But the talent and core of the team was always primarily drafted players. The two core exceptions being Vrabel and Harrison. Neither of whom btw was a big splash, first day of FA signing. More like an under the radar or headscratcher signing (as I recall there was much debate about how Rodney and Lawyer would divy a backfield since both were SS...). Little did we know, because we almost never can, that BB was sadly anticipating parting ways with Milloy because he no longer represented value and wasn't making plays or buying all in.

 

[PATRIOTS-80]

I fear dimensia is setting in with you.
In 2001, we signed a ton of low level FAs to fill out the roster.
2003 and 2004 were teams built most heavily through the draft, and in a few cases trades.
Who were all these FAs that we built the team with in 03-04?

Exactly...

Rodney Harrison was dumped by the Chargers who thought he was over the hill, and Vrabel was a diamond in the rough.

The only spendy, flashy FA signed was Colvin.

The team was built by the draft. Brady, Light, Koppen, Watson, Graham, Branch, Given, Seymour, Warren, Samuel, Eugene Wilson, etc.

Troy Brown, McGinest, Bruschi, Ty Law, Milloy were all drafted by the team under the Parcells regime.

Kevin Faulk was another draft pick.

The team was built by the draft. The FA we signed were at low level bargin basement. As opposed to the Dan Snyder method.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Yes that is certainly true. Agreed. Good post.

The "Draft Dreamers" have to look at an 18% rate of Drafting a player that is above average in talent, a future All Pro candidate or just make a substantial impact on the wins and losses of the team....within a three year period of time. It is not a computed statistic for the first year of those said players. Only 18% of the total of eight picks. That is 1.44 players from this Draft. Say even it out as two. The rest will be roster fillers, back ups, cut and go elsewhere or out of the league.

Let's not fall for this "Draft will make a big impact in the Pats from 2009 to 2010". In three years?...better. In 2010? not so much.

2007 was a great year for the Pats look at the FAs.. There showed 63 Players that passed through the 07 Pats roster. 27 were FAs, Trades and Street FAs for a total of 42% of that Teams make up. How important were they in the 18-1 season?

Kyle Brady,Wesley Britt,Chad Brown, Rosevelt Colvin, Heath Evans, Jabar Gaffney, Chris Hanson, Rodney Harrison,Russ Hochstein, Larry Izzo, Eddie Jackson,Mel Mitchell, Rashad Moore,Sammy Morris,Randy Moss,Steve Neal,Ryan O'Callaghan, Lonie Paxton,Marcellus Rivers,Junior Seau, Stephen Spach, Antwain Spann, Donte Stallworth, Adalius Thomas,Mike Vrabel, Kelley Washington,Wes Welker

This croaks the theory you can't build a team through FAs or trades.
DW Toys

Tom Brady says :bye2: He and Dan snyder Croak your theory that you can. :nooo: Lovie and Jerry are gonna give that theory one final uncapped test, but only because they have nothing to lose but their jobs, either way...

 

[Ring 6]

Adrian Klemm says "hi"? How nice.

As for my argument, if you'd ever bother with context instead of jumping on anything that you perceive as even remotely less than 100% BB/Patriots ballwashing, you'd never have posted in this thread, because you'd have understood the point I was making.

One of the things that the Patriots became known for was bringing in free agents for 'low' money and getting tremendous use of those players. Also, your question conveniently ignores Vrabel, Poole and other players that I listed. I'm sure that was just an oversight on your part, though.

Lastly, 2001/2003/2004 don't happen without heavy reliance on free agency. Do you really think it's coincidence that years like 2002 and 2005, where FA was a failure, are among the team's worst seasons of the decade? Do you think 2007 happens without Welker (a RFA that became a trade), Stallworth, Washington, Gaffney, Thomas and the Moss trade? Come on, Andy, get past the "Gotta ballwash the Patriots, no matter what!" stuff and get back to being a quality poster.

Please explain to me how this argument could have anything to do with being a homer, other the fact that it is the only answer you have left when you are wrong.
Lets see; I am defending the Patriots by saying that the long list of players that were drafted had more to do with those championships that the bit parts that you listed in 03-04? I guess I should be calling you a homer for ballwashing the fee agent moves.
Only a ballwasher would offer Keith Traylor, Josh Miller, Lary Centers and Russ Hochstein as great moves that resulted in winning SBs.

So is that it. We have converted this board into an exercise in pretending people have an agenda, and inserting it even where its stupid, in place of defending yourself against a poor argument?

You need to "get past the "Gotta create an agenda for anyone who disagrees with me to keep from having to admitI am wrong, no matter what!" stuff and get back to being a quality poster.

How about we do this:
My enjoyment of this board is almost non-existent since you decided that you shall proclaim what is right, have no obligation to defend your point, and accuse anyone who disagrees with you of having no integrity in their post, that they simply have an agenda, because who could honestly disagree with anything the great Dues Irae says.
Your arrogance is ruining this board for me.
I am going to stop responding to any of your posts, and I wold appreciate if you would ignore injecting your immature, arrogant responses that help you convince yourself that you must be the smartest person you know into my post. Then we will be fine. I can continue to offer my opinion and explain it to anyone who disagrees and you can continue to try to resurrect your self image by pretending you are right about everything. Deal?

 

[Deus Irae]

The FA we signed were at low level bargin basement. As opposed to the Dan Snyder method.

This is a different position than you started with. Other than being a bit too general (Colvin and others have gotten some pretty good FA money, for example), it's the valid point in your argument. The Patriots approach to free agency has generally been one of frugality with a spray gun approach, where the team has sought generally older players who are willing to play for less money than the likes of Haynesworth. This approach was overwhelmingly successful in the beginning of the decade, and has been far less so in the latter part of the decade.

That's different than saying that free agency is not a good way to build a team, though.

 

[TealSox]

I fear dimensia is setting in with you.
In 2001, we signed a ton of low level FAs to fill out the roster.
2003 and 2004 were teams built most heavily through the draft, and in a few cases trades.
Who were all these FAs that we built the team with in 03-04?

Agreed.

2001's signings were all low level FAs who provided the locker room with mature talent, that fit the system that BB was trying to bring in and provided depth in otherwise "top heavy" roster. In that group of signings, you didn't see Pioli or Bill go for the most expensive FA. These signings, along with the core of talent on the roster (i.e. Troy Brown, Willie McGinest, Ty Law, Teddy Bruschi), provided the Patriots a path to the Championship.

(see: Larry Izzo, David Patten, Roman Phifer, Anthony Pleasant, Antowain Smith, Mike Vrabel)

In 2002, the Pats tried the same plan in FA, but found a lot of low level duds and never made a difference on the roster, with the exception of Christain Fauria. Donald Hayes was a disappointment.

2003 saw the Pats throw money at a FA, in Rosevelt Colvin. Then Rodney Harrison was released and fell right into the Patriots lap. Add those stars, there were more low level veterans such as Russ Hochestein, Brandon Gorin, Don Davis and Tyrone Poole.

Overall, the signings of Colvin (2003), Josh Miller (2004), Keith Traylor (2004), Reche Caldwell (2006), Jabar Gaffney (2006), Adalius Thomas (2007), Leigh Bodden (2009) and Tully Banta-Cain (2009) were all NECESSITY signings... meaning the team had a clear HOLE in those areas, especially when it comes to the starting role... not merely for depth purposes.

As for the draft, I contend that after 2001, picks such as Daniel Graham, Branch, Givens, Jarvis Green, Ty Warren, Ewugene Wilson, Asante Samuel, Dan Koppen, Banta-Cain, Vince Wilfork, Mankins, Ellis Hobbs, Nick Kaczur, James Sanders, and Matt Cassel all kept the team winning.

And now the crew (i.e. Patriots fans) is up in arms, for decent reasons, that the Pats are signing their own and looking at the draft. When you net Mayo and Merriweather over the span of 3 drafts, how much respect can you have building a team through the draft?

Yet, clearly I feel like the Pats are headed in the right direction because there is an extremely evident strategy which was visible after last seasons draft: pick up as many picks, lately second round picks, don't reach for overrated first round talent when you can trade down and get cheaper talent in the next round and draft according to the system (don't fall trap to the upside guys).

 

[Ring 6]

Exactly...

Rodney Harrison was dumped by the Chargers who thought he was over the hill, and Vrabel was a diamond in the rough.

The only spendy, flashy FA signed was Colvin.

The team was built by the draft. Brady, Light, Koppen, Watson, Graham, Branch, Given, Seymour, Warren, Samuel, Eugene Wilson, etc.

Troy Brown, McGinest, Bruschi, Ty Law, Milloy were all drafted by the team under the Parcells regime.

Kevin Faulk was another draft pick.

The team was built by the draft. The FA we signed were at low level bargin basement. As opposed to the Dan Snyder method.

And we won without Colvin.

The real truth is we built with every possible means necessary, the very least of which was a focus on high level UFAs. We have pretty much shunned that means, with a couple of exceptions.
We built a team that was the best 53, when it wasnt nearly the best top 10. We were the antithesis of the teams that 'build through free agency' because those teams chase the biggest names and think the best 5 players on your team determine your fate, while we won because the worst 5 players we got large contribtions from were FAR better than anyone elses.
We built the middle of the roster with cheap pickups, some UFAs that were not sought after, some street FAs.

 

[Deus Irae]

But the talent and core of the team was always primarily drafted players. The two core exceptions being Vrabel and Harrison. Neither of whom btw was a big splash, first day of FA signing. More like an under the radar or headscratcher signing (as I recall there was much debate about how Rodney and Lawyer would divy a backfield since both were SS...). Little did we know, because we almost never can, that BB was sadly anticipating parting ways with Milloy because he no longer represented value and wasn't making plays or buying all in.

I think you take this too far when you point to only two "exceptions", but I don't see where you and I are even in the most minor of disagreements on this general issue in this thread, unless you're going to claim that this team would have won the Lombardis without the free agents they'd brought in. The Patriots drafted players played a tremendous role in the team's dominance, and I don't think you're trying to claim that you've ever heard/read me say otherwise.

 

[PATRIOTS-80]

This is a different position than you started with. Other than being a bit too general (Colvin and others have gotten some pretty good FA money, for example), it's the valid point in your argument. The Patriots approach to free agency has generally been one of frugality with a spray gun approach, where the team has sought generally older players who are willing to play for less money than the likes of Haynesworth. This approach was overwhelmingly successful in the beginning of the decade, and has been far less so in the latter part of the decade.

That's different than saying that free agency is not a good way to build a team, though.

I guess I view "building" the team through FA is how I would describe the Dan Synder method. I think the Dan snyder method is not a good way to build a team.

What the Pats did was building with the draft and filling in the pieces with bargins in FA, not through spendy FAs.

 

[Ring 6]

I think you take this too far when you point to only two "exceptions", but I don't see where you and I are even in the most minor of disagreements on this general issue in this thread, unless you're going to claim that this team would have won the Lombardis without the free agents they'd brought in. The Patriots drafted players played a tremendous role in the team's dominance, and I don't think you're trying to claim that you've ever heard/read me say otherwise.

Backtracking
"FA is how the team won in 2001, 2003 and 2004. If that's not a good way to build the team, perhaps using more of the bad way is in order?aside," = sayng otherwise:bricks:

 

[primetime]

There is no 100% surefire way to build a competitive team. There are 31 other teams in the league; they draft players and sign free agents as well. You can only draft a player who is available, and you can only sign a free agent who wants to come. You can't sign everybody, you can't draft everybody, and you can't trade for everybody. You can find duds as easily in the draft as in free agency. There's a large degree of luck inherent in the process, and a very fine line that separates a mediocre team from a dominant one. Both in building the team, then in the actual game on the field itself.

 

[Deus Irae]

Backtracking
"FA is how the team won in 2001, 2003 and 2004. If that's not a good way to build the team, perhaps using more of the bad way is in order?aside," = sayng otherwise:bricks:

There's no backtracking at all. As I've noted, if you weren't so gung ho to see everything as anti-Patriot, you'd be better off. You'll notice that, in the post above you, the person I'd originally responded to clarified his position, and explained that he was referring to Daniel Snyder style. Once we get that clarification, I'm in agreement with that poster:

guess I view "building" the team through FA is how I would describe the Dan Synder method. I think the Dan snyder method is not a good way to build a team.

What the Pats did was building with the draft and filling in the pieces with bargins in FA, not through spendy FAs.

Now, unless you going to claim that the Patriots would have 3 Lombardis in the 2000s if the team hadn't brought in all those free agents, you've really got no point.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

A gold star for the academic installment; for extra credit would you like to do a field practical (fan version) for the New England Patriots applying the literature to the challenge they face in the 2010 offseason? You may "Kraft" your answer beginning with their situation as it is known to fans as of March 7, 2010.

All three have their pitfalls and, before starting, it's best to be clear what the disadvantages are of each. In all three cases, the team looking to improve faces disadvantages because of imperfect information.

This is clearest, of course, in the case of "Trade", where the team faces a classic form of information asymmetry (see Stiglitz, J.). In a trade the "selling" team has a much, much better idea of the strengths and weaknesses of the player than the "buying" one. Even (by common consent) the worst-managed franchise in the NFL has managed to get the better of two recent trades with the Patriots (Gabriel, Burgess) -- although obviously being bested in a third.

In Free Agency, there is a similar effect (the club that has allowed the player to get to the open market is in a vastly superior epistemic position -- if the player has reached free agency, the first question to ask must always be: why?). Add to that, the effects of imperfect information are not uniform, so someone will always be at the optimistic end of the spectrum. The result is that, in free agency, someone will (almost) always overpay and so the cost of free agent signings is in almost all cases excessive.

Finally, the draft is, notoriously, extremely uncertain -- inevitably, given the gulf between the College version of the game and the NFL. In this case, the uncertainty is not unevenly distributed, so the drafting team is not intrinsically at a disadvantage vis-a-vis a competitor in the way that the acquiring team in a trade or free agency is. But -- and it's a big "but" -- it is rare for teams to get major benefit from new draft picks in Year One. This varies with the complexity and distinctiveness of the playbook and schemes used. Clearly, Miami was able to use its rookie corners very effectively, as were the Colts their wide receivers. New England, it seems, for whatever reason, cannot slot in even successful draft picks so easily.

So:

All three methods of trying to improve a team have fundamental disadvantages. The best position to be in is not to be having to do so and the way to do that is to concentrate your resources on signing those players you think are of a "good enough" standard as early as possible for as long as possible, rather than deluding yourself that it will be easy to substitute or upgrade via free agency, trade or the draft. Otherwise, you risk ending up letting decent players go and replacing them with ones who are less satisfactory (thus: do not keep Kelley Washington or Jabar Gaffney, bring in Joey Galloway, Greg Lewis, end up with Isaiah Stamback; bring in Alex Smith, Michael Mathews, Chris Baker, release Dave Thomas, end up with ... nobody)

Respectfully submitted,

Mike

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Teacher, teacher..me, me i know....The Draft :bricks:

It does unfortunately appear to be the case, is there a silver lining to this gloomy Free Agency outlook, and does the draft in anyway impact the potential for trade? A gold star for being a good sport!

 

[reflexblue]

That would be an "F" Mr. Blue.
DW Toys

I just try to conserve my words mr toys. After carefully contemplating all three for a whole two minutes I deduced that the draft held the most value with the least amount of risk that doesn't mean that the other two don't have there place in building a team :singing:

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Are you going to even be alive in 2015 when this great draft haul that BB no doubt is going to reel in is going to rejuvinate the franchise?

Seriously, if we stand pat in FA, BB has to hit one out of the park in the draft or we're not going to sniff another Lombardi while Brady and BB are still here.

For the first part, I shall ask the nurse for extra celery and fresh green leafy items to gum while sunning. Your prayers are welcomed.

For the latter, I do not propose NE stand, er "pat," certainly the visit of Josh Reed is welcome evidence of no such folly from the front office. Instead, I ask my fellow fanatics, as astute observers of the NFL and NE Patriots, where can this team, as of March 7, 2010, go to add to their talent base, increase competition, and hopefully improve themselves beyond the morbid prognostication of Deus Irae?

I do ask for some modicum of the ever popular realism in this exercise, though if our European and Canadian and China-infiltrating brethren know of an untapped field of elite football talent, I'll happily drop a note to Nick Caserio. Bending Al Davis over the couch is only an acceptable answer if you have his nurse's signature on the offer sheet.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

I just try to conserve my words mr toys. After carefully contemplating all three for a whole two minutes I deduced that the draft held the most value :singing:

A gold star for the courage of your conviction (you do expect to appeal that don't you?), and hold out your hand for a ruler slap for quoting the enlightening toy-fan.

 

[Ring 6]

There's no backtracking at all. As I've noted, if you weren't so gung ho to see everything as anti-Patriot, you'd be better off. You'll notice that, in the post above you, the person I'd originally responded to clarified his position, and explained that he was referring to Daniel Snyder style. Once we get that clarification, I'm in agreement with that poster:



Now, unless you going to claim that the Patriots would have 3 Lombardis in the 2000s if the team hadn't brought in all those free agents, you've really got no point.

Wow.
Do you have any conscience?
Mr Anyone who disgrees with me is a homer is now accuse me of interpreting everything as jaded by an agenda. Oh brother.

You did not say that Free Agent acquisitions contributed to the success of the team, you said "FA is how the team won"

To compare I could say Earthwind Moreland is how the team won in 2004.
Any sane person would interpret that to mean I give him credit for being the primary reason. And when I responded "we wouldnt have won with 10 players on the field" they would say I was a moron.
That is an exact replica of your argument here.

 

[Deus Irae]

Wow.
Do you have any conscience?
Mr Anyone who disgrees with me is a homer is now accuse me of interpreting everything as jaded by an agenda. Oh brother.

You did not say that Free Agent acquisitions contributed to the success of the team, you said "FA is how the team won"

To compare I could say Earthwind Moreland is how the team won in 2004.
Any sane person would interpret that to mean I give him credit for being the primary reason. And when I responded "we wouldnt have won with 10 players on the field" they would say I was a moron.
That is an exact replica of your argument here.

Ummmm..... free agency IS how the team won. Again, I haven't backtracked a bit.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Recriminations be damned sir, battles of the past are an academic exercise for historians and not men of inaction such as we! Damn the interweb charges, full speed ahead! Let us develop a strategy to outflank the Jesters, hook the Dolfish, and roast the Bills! Now I'm off to church, play nice.

You use a mix of all available tools. Trades, free agents and the draft should all be on the table.

As for the 2010 season, the elephant in the room has been the limited number of truly quality free agents due to the CBA situation. The Patriots passed on the best players in that very shallow pool, and they'll now have to rely on cut players and the draft. That doesn't automatically doom them but, given the large number of holes to be filled, it does make things a lot more difficult.

The failure of the Thomas signing, and the inability to adequately replace Bruschi and Vrabel to date, coupled with the trading away of Seymour and some other questionable moves, has really put the defense in a hole, to say nothing of the Welker/WR situation and the need for TEs. It's going to take a combination of spectacular acumen and fortune in the draft, great second year 'leaps' from last year's rookies, and brilliant manipulation of the future cut players for this team to get back to the top of the mountain this year or next.