Ohrnberger: A Tale of Draft Perspective

[Armchair Quarterback]

I kinda find it funny that you have Maneri and Yeatman on that list when they haven't accomplished jack in the NFL.

Hocstein was a 5th round pick by the Bucs. Connolly was a UDFA for the Jaguars and got cut a few times before the Pats claimed him off waivers.. And then he was cut by the Pats as well.

In other words, Just because the guy was cut once by the Pats doesn't make him a failure. And it took them a few years (Neal included) to make an impact.

Neal didn't earn a starting position in his 2nd year. He got the start because of other people being banged up. And it was the 5th game of the season. You're acting like he was starting out of TC, which wasn't the case at all.

You wanna know what else Neal, Hochstein, Connolly and Maneri all have in common? They were all cut by the Pats at least once...

It's even funnier because I was responding to another poster, you see I didn't bring them up, someone else did. Funny stuff huh?

Guess what else, King of Irrelevant Information? Those players were mentioned in relation to what the Patriots had invested in them so listing what round TB drafted Hochstein or that Connolly was an UDFA by the Jags brings nothing to the table for this discussion.

As far as Neal goes, he got the start, therefore he earned it, something Ohrnberger hasn't been able to do. I never acted or implied that he was given the starting job out of TC. That's you making stuff up. What I said is factually correct. I said he earned a starting position in his second year, which he did, to refute another poster's claim that he didn't start until his fourth year.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

It's amazing how you read only what you want to read and ignore other stuff.

First, where they rank players doesn't mean anything to the Pats and you are being ignorant to think it does. The Pats, under Belichick, have not used ANY of the outside scouting bureaus. So to say that player xyz wat rated 326th doesn't mean a damn thing.

Secondly, that same page shows the HIGH and LOWs of where the player was ranked. Something you ignored.

Third, you fail to understand because you don't want to. You have your mind set that Ohrnberger is a bust and that's that. You have shown that you aren't willing to rationally look at other information.

Lastly, hindsight is 20/20. I can sit here and say, now, that the OL quality wasn't that good, but clearly that isn't something that was known then. I understand that. YOU clearly don't. It's an irrational supposition on your part.

We get it. You don't like Ohrnberger. So don't participate in the conversation if all you are going to do is b!tch, whine, and be irrational while ignoring some pertinent information.

I GOT THE RANKING FROM YOU! YOU LINKED TO IT!!!
And then you have the balls to call someone else ignorant???

Hindsight being 20/20 now that's original, bet you've never used that one before. What a ridiculous statement.

 

[Metaphors]

He was cut last year and when he was re signed he was only active for two games as a reserve. How is that not the case?

When Ohrnberger was cut, the Pats had Koppen, Neal, Connolly and Wendell on the roster. Mankins could report at any time and Kaczur was still an option for OG (taking up a roster spot) at that point as well.

It could also be relatively easy to argue that Quinn Ojinnaka was an unexpected and insufficient alternative,

It would be more difficult to argue that the Pats considered Ojinnaka an OG or in competition with Ohrnberger in any way. Just because the Falcons played him there doesn't mean the Pats put him in the mix (outside of emergencies) in the interior. There were games when the only backup linemen were Wendell and Ojinnaka.

one that cost the Patriots another pick.

A future 7th round pick that turned into pick #230 in 2011? While your statement is technically accurate (didn't want to hurt your feelings by insinuating otherwise), even mentioning it reveals a lot about the basis for your argument.

So rest assured I have considered and I do understand your scenerio,

Considered? Maybe. Understand? Not so much. The Pats drafted Ohrnberger with the hope that he take meaningful snaps on the interior OL when needed. Connolly and Wendell have played well enough to keep Ohrnberger inactive or in situational snaps while keeping the Pats offense humming right along.

however I have last year to fall back on and you have a future unknown hypothetical.

You have a year when the Pats offense ranked #1 and was historically efficient, yet are critical that a 24 yo, 2nd year 4th round guard couldn't break into the lineup. I have an assertion that the Pats interior OL was fine in 2010, should be fine in 2011 and Ohrnberger has a reasonable shot at being a part of the equation in the future.

Also do you really believe that they spent a 4th rounder on someone they didn't intend to give any meaningful snaps to?

In his rookie year. That is why my statement included the words "290 lbs" and "rookie" when describing Ohrnberger. He was neither a rookie nor 290 lbs last year so my statement wouldn't be applicable in that context.

What kind of rational is that?

You could ask Belichick. If he isn't available, you could ask Taylor Price directly. Apologies that my example wasn't a 4th round pick since you seem to have some emotional attachment to that round.

And he wasn't a rookie last year.

Yes.

 

[Metaphors]

That's you making stuff up. What I said is factually correct. I said he earned a starting position in his second year, which he did, to refute another poster's claim that he didn't start until his fourth year.

Unfortunately, you are not factually correct about me claiming he didn't start until his fourth year. Glass houses, throwing stones and all that.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

Unfortunately, you are not factually correct about me claiming he didn't start until his fourth year. Glass houses, throwing stones and all that.

I would call a start "meaningful snaps." To say he didn't get meaningful snaps untill his fourth year implies he was on the bench for four years. He earned a start, whether by injury or not in 2002, got injured himself, missed the rest of 2002 and also missed all of 2003 with the same injury. He was signed as an UDFA on July 23,2001 without the benefit of playing college football and was in the starting lineup a little more than a year later October 13, 2002.

 

[Metaphors]

I would call a start "meaningful snaps." To say he didn't get meaningful snaps untill his fourth year implies he was on the bench for four years. He earned a start, whether by injury or not in 2002, got injured himself, missed the rest of 2002 and also missed all of 2003 with the same injury. He was signed as an UDFA on July 23,2001 without the benefit of playing college football and was in the starting lineup a little more than a year later October 13, 2002.

You said I claimed Neal didn't start until his 4th year. I clearly didn't.

I don't recall when in the game he got hurt, but getting less than a full game's worth of snaps over 3 years is hardly meaningful...in quantity if not quality. If all it takes is getting one start to make the grade, Wheatley had a helluva rookie year.

Neal went into 2004 with significant uncertainty. He hadn't show anything on the field up to that point to indicate he could be a starter or even the top interior reserve. He had no more experience on the field than Ohrnberger does now. I think Belichick knew what he had in Neal and invested the time, effort and roster spot to realize that potential. I don't know if the same can be said about Ohrnberger, but I can't discount the possibility quite yet.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

You said I claimed Neal didn't start until his 4th year. I clearly didn't.

I don't recall when in the game he got hurt, but getting less than a full game's worth of snaps over 3 years is hardly meaningful...in quantity if not quality. If all it takes is getting one start to make the grade, Wheatley had a helluva rookie year.

Neal went into 2004 with significant uncertainty. He hadn't show anything on the field up to that point to indicate he could be a starter or even the top interior reserve. He had no more experience on the field than Ohrnberger does now. I think Belichick knew what he had in Neal and invested the time, effort and roster spot to realize that potential. I don't know if the same can be said about Ohrnberger, but I can't discount the possibility quite yet.

Forgive me that I didn't go back to your post and quote you directly when I was responding to someone else regarding Neal. You said meaningful snaps and I said starts when responding to DB. It wasn't a direct quote of what you said. I could have just as well left that part of the sentence out and probably should have if that is where the focus is going to be.

I still can't imagine how you can consider a player who didn't play college ball, being in the starting lineup within a little over a year of being signed and that is not considered meaningful snaps.

Regardless, I wasn't the one who brought Neal, etc into the discussion, you did. The topic is about 4th round value perception or expectations. Bringing Neal, Connolly or Wendell into the discussion only hurts the argument of Ohrnberger being worth the 4th round investment because none of those players required the investment of a draft pick, all of them were higher on the depth chart than he was, all of them had more playing time than he did and all of them had more meaningful snaps than Ohrnberger did.

Of those players(and Ojinnaka), the one with the highest investment (Ohrnberger)was the teams last choice for playing time or meaningful snaps.
Isn't that how you measure value? Investment vs. Production.

 

[Metaphors]

I still can't imagine how you can consider a player who didn't play college ball, being in the starting lineup within a little over a year of being signed and that is not considered meaningful snaps.

There just weren't enough snaps to say anything meaningful about Neal's ability on the field. Less than 50 snaps (I'm guessing) against one team in one game. While it was meaningful to him personally and I'm sure his parents were thrilled, there wasn't much that the Pats could take away from that game.

If you think that game was so significant, are the snaps that Ohrnberger have taken also significant? If not, how do you draw the distinction? It was great that Neal started when everyone on the depth chart in front of him came up lame. Do you want to punish Ohrnberger because Connolly, Wendell, Mankins and Neal didn't all get injured at the same time?

The topic is about 4th round value perception or expectations. Bringing Neal, Connolly or Wendell into the discussion only hurts the argument of Ohrnberger being worth the 4th round investment because none of those players required the investment of a draft pick, all of them were higher on the depth chart than he was, all of them had more playing time than he did and all of them had more meaningful snaps than Ohrnberger did.

You are a smart guy. Didn't all of those guys have an advantage over Ohrnberger in 2009? While it is true they were higher on the depth chart in 2009, it is also true they were also actually ON the depth chart in 2008. Connolly and Wendell had a full year in the program before Ohrnberger arrived. That experience is so huge that leaving it out of your post makes no sense.

Referring to Connolly and Wendell as UDFA's is like referring to Brady as a 6th round pick. Accurate but completely irrelevant at this point. They have all played their way onto the depth chart and done very well in the opportunities they have received. That is what Ohrnberger is competing against...new guy versus experienced incumbents...not 4th round pick versus UDFA's. Are your expectations of Mallett different because he is a 3rd round pick behind a 6th rounder? Or because he is a rookie behind the league MVP?

Of those players(and Ojinnaka), the one with the highest investment (Ohrnberger)was the teams last choice for playing time or meaningful snaps.

Ojinnaka competed with LeVoir for the swing tackle spot. Ohrnberger competed with Wendell for backup interior OL.

The teams last choice for playing time was the last person to enter the program. Simple as that.

Isn't that how you measure value? Investment vs. Production.

Absolutely. The issue is when do you assess that value. Why invest in a growth stock and sell before it has had a chance to realize its potential. I think Ohrnberger has had limited opportunities because the guys in front of him have done extremely well. It could be that Ohrnberger is a waste of space and Connolly/Wendell are the best available alternatives...but that perspective doesn't fit Belichick's MO. Young players that don't have potential or aren't working hard to reach it are quickly removed without regret.

That being said, the addition of Cannon likely means that Ohrnberger is either moving up (ahead of Wendell and maybe even Connolly) or moving out. So hold off your value assessment a bit longer and everything should clear up nicely.

 

[willard]

I guess I have held more against Ohrnberger because the Patriots traded Ellis Hobbs for him and the machinations that went into selecting him. Add in the team had tried quite a few lower round draft picks on offensive line the years proceeding Ohrnberger's pick and I added that previous investment onto his shoulders.

Patchicks original post highlighted how hard it is to find offensive line talent and they could not have done better in hindsight drafting a different offensive lineman. He is still on the team so as a fan I hope he emerges as a future starting center, but last years eye test says he still seems too slow and not sturdy enough in his base and the most likely current OL not to be here in 2011.

Reading this thread emphasized the extremely good value we have received from our offensive line play. I would say this group has had the greatest value of any group in the Dynasty era. Going forward with Vollmer and Solder at tackle and Mankins and Connoly/Cannon at guard is a promissing future.

 

[everlong]

It's fun playing retroactive GM. I actually thought Ornnberger when drafted was going to move to center and be the long term replacement for Koppen. I was comfortable with where they drafted him and wasn't exceptionally high or low on him. I wouldn't have been surprised to see him become a starter and I'm not surprised his career went as it did either.

To the earlier comment about people liking Jones-Drew over Maroney. I'm sure there were some people but I don't remember them. I fell for Maroney's talent set as much as the next guy and really thought he was going to be the real deal. Nobody knew he had a ten cent head and questionable heart. I like Jones-Drew just nowhere near as much as LM. I didn't like Addai coming out at all.

I did hate the Chad Jackson pick and thought he had bust written all over him and wanted Wallace over Tate.

 

[MaineMan]

In 2009, the Pats spent about 2260 SVC on 12 prospects. At #123, Ohrnberger accounted for 49 SVC, roughly 2% of total draft pick expenditures (Butler "cost" 10 times as much).

My guess is that they were interested in him as a long term developmental prospect and had good information that other teams were interested, too, and decided to spend the 49 SVC to ensure they got him rather than risk waiting for him as a later pick or UDFA.

Seriously, this "OMG!! BB spent A DRAFT PICK on a guy who hasn't contributed yet!!" stuff seems kinda over the top. After the first 100, there's not an enormous difference between the guys who get picked and UDFAs. It's just a question of how much you want to get there ahead of another potential suitor.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

In 2009, the Pats spent about 2260 SVC on 12 prospects. At #123, Ohrnberger accounted for 49 SVC, roughly 2% of total draft pick expenditures (Butler "cost" 10 times as much).

My guess is that they were interested in him as a long term developmental prospect and had good information that other teams were interested, too, and decided to spend the 49 SVC to ensure they got him rather than risk waiting for him as a later pick or UDFA.

Seriously, this "OMG!! BB spent A DRAFT PICK on a guy who hasn't contributed yet!!" stuff seems kinda over the top. After the first 100, there's not an enormous difference between the guys who get picked and UDFAs. It's just a question of how much you want to get there ahead of another potential suitor.

OMG!!!!!!!Yes that's it! That's exactly the point I was making! And you've summed it up so well. I can see you really paid attention. Well Done!!!!!

 

[dryheat44]

Sigh....this thread had such promise.

 

[patchick]

Seriously, this "OMG!! BB spent A DRAFT PICK on a guy who hasn't contributed yet!!" stuff seems kinda over the top. After the first 100, there's not an enormous difference between the guys who get picked and UDFAs.

Thanks, that's pretty much what I was aiming at. And with the Pats drafting an amazing 25 players in 2009 & 2010, they'll inevitably have plenty of misses to point to. (For comparison, the Jets drafted 7 players in that same time period.)

 

[mrscruff]

I also think that drafts like 2010 which had ridiculous depth (Aaron Hernandez available in the 4th round) skew the expectancy level of the fanbase regarding players selected later in other drafts.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

Rich Ohrnberger gets beaten up a lot around here as a bad draft mistake. Not without reason; he was drafted in round 4, has done precious little in 2 seasons, and was waived outright at the start of last season.

This morning I was contemplating what constitutes a "mistake" in a draft process that's by its nature imprecise. It made me wonder, who should the Pats have drafted instead of Mr. Ohrnberger?

I looked back at the 2009 draft, and found the 18 offensive linemen were drafted after him, a plethora of choices. And not one of them is a regular NFL starter today.

Not. One.

What's more, none of the 4 lineman drafted before Ohrnberger are starting either. You have to go all the way up to the #78 overall pick, Louis Vasquez, to find a starting OL.

That's 23 consecutive OL picks from the mid-3rd on. The huge majority were cut in their first 2 years, a handful are out of football, not one is starting. That's just how the draft is.

While you were contemplating what constitutes a "mistake" You may have made a few of your own:

Round 4. Pick 109. TJ Lang-Green Bay 28 games 3 starts
Round 4. Pick 133. Tyrone Greene-San Diego 15 games 7 starts
Round 6. Pick 193. Matt Slauson- NYJ 19 games 16 starts all in 2010
Round 7. Pick 246. Lance Louis- Chicago- 16 games 4 starts in 2010
UDFA Ramon Foster- Pittsburgh 26 games 12 starts

That's 5 OL who have started and are projected to be starters (or in completion for a starting job) in 2011 drafted in the fourth round and beyond. And 4 of them were drafted after Ohrnberger. I guess 5 doesn't make as good of an argument as 0 does. You may have to adjust the statement where you claimed 23 OL "the huge majority were cut in their first 2 years, a handful are out of football, not one is starting."


Yep, it must have just been a bad year for OL. Just bad luck for the Patriots, I guess. Not their fault there was just no talent on the OL that year.

Except for maybe:
1st and 2nd rounders
Jason Smith- 20 starts
Andre Smith- 6 starts
Eugene Monroe- 28 starts
Alex Mack- 32 starts
Michael Oher-32 starts
Eric Wood- 24 starts
Eben Britton-22 starts
Max Unger-17 starts
Andy Levitre-32 starts
Phil Loadholdt-31 starts
Sebastion Vollmer-24 starts
William Beatty- 6 starts

3rd round
Antoine Caldwell-10 starts pick 77
Louis Vasquez-24 starts pick 78

4th round-UDFA
TJ Lang-3 starts
Tyrone Green- 7 starts
Matt Slauson- 16 starts
Lance Louis-4 starts
Ramon Foster- 12 starts

Thanks, that's pretty much what I was aiming at. And with the Pats drafting an amazing 25 players in 2009 & 2010, they'll inevitably have plenty of misses to point to. (For comparison, the Jets drafted 7 players in that same time period.)

24 players drafted in 09-10, 12 each year.


I don't know why people get all worked up on this board when there is a debate regarding a certain player. There's nothing personal here, I just don't think he is a very good player. I didn't like the pick at the time and he's done nothing yet to prove me wrong.

PC's summary of OL in the 2009 draft was flat out wrong, and even if it wasn't it's still a flawed theory. The success or failure of players drafted after Ohrnberger should have no bearing as to whether or not is he considered a successful pick. Do you think BB looks at it that way? I assure you he doesn't.

 

[patchick]

Armchair Quarterback, I appreciate the time you obviously spent reviewing the stats, but I'm a little puzzled by what you think they say. Don't your numbers show that the overwhelming majority of the players drafted past the top 100 picks fail to contribute? So how does that lead to the conclusion that we should be able to expect more than we've gotten from any given late pick like Ohrnberger?

I obviously haven't been getting my point across well, so I'm going to be a glutton for punishment and try one more approach....

The "hit rate" on late draft picks is really low. Even if the Pats draft better than average they will always have some misses along the way. In other words: Having failed draft picks is a virtual statistical certainty. If you look for them -- at any team -- you're sure to find them. Therefore, the ability to find a failed draft pick means absolutely nothing.

That's the problem with the reaction to Ohrnberger (or fill in the draft disappointment of your choice.) It's the outrage, the personal ire at Belichick over the fact that he was so incompetent as to make a failed pick, and the use of that failed pick as justification for beating up on the team's whole approach to the draft. You have to take a broader view. Are there disturbing trends in the team's draft history? How does it compare to other teams?

That's why the topic of this thread was "perspective." Even looking higher up in the draft, you have to evaluate with the understanding that perfection isn't achievable. No fan expects perfection on the field -- a 100% passing percentage, say, or 16 straight shutouts. Yet a surprising number seem to take anything less than perfection in the draft as something to get furious about.

Consider Brace and Butler, 2 2nd-round disappointments. You can't go missing on 2nd-rounders, right? Right...not routinely. But in the post Pioli era, the Patriots have made 7 2nd-round picks (not counting Dowling, who is TBD). Early results show those picks netting out to 2 Pro Bowl-caliber players (Gronkowski, Vollmer), 3 more players expected to start this year (Chung, Cunningham, Spikes) and 2 players who are still with the team but have been clear disappointments. How does that compare with the yield you'd expect from 7 2nd rounders? I think answers to that question will vary, but I'd rather debate that than listen to fuming over how BB sucks because Brace is a stiff.

(btw, sorry about the 25 vs 24. i made the mistake of using the patriots draft history list at nfl.com which for some reason has stryker sulak as a pats pick!)

 

[State]

Rich has done as much in the pros as his college sidekick, Rimington Trophy winner A.Q. Shipley.

But one was probably drafted too high.

Shipley was taken in the seventh round and, if he stood taller than about 5'11", could actually see himself suit up.

check out this photo with him on his tippy toes to try to be as tall as 6'2" Richie. Potential Penn State Problem #2: Musical Chairs For Dancing Bears - Black Shoe Diaries

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

Armchair Quarterback, I appreciate the time you obviously spent reviewing the stats, but I'm a little puzzled by what you think they say. Don't your numbers show that the overwhelming majority of the players drafted past the top 100 picks fail to contribute? So how does that lead to the conclusion that we should be able to expect more than we've gotten from any given late pick like Ohrnberger?

It shows that there are at least 5 players that are starters/projected starters/in direct competition for a starting job going onto 2011 taken in the fourth round and lower. You claimed that there were zero, that's a serious miscalculation on your part. It also drastically alters your "tale of draft perspective".

I obviously haven't been getting my point across well, so I'm going to be a glutton for punishment and try one more approach....

The "hit rate" on late draft picks is really low. Even if the Pats draft better than average they will always have some misses along the way. In other words: Having failed draft picks is a virtual statistical certainty. If you look for them -- at any team -- you're sure to find them. Therefore, the ability to find a failed draft pick means absolutely nothing.

Ok great, nothing groundbreaking here. Does that mean we can't discuss the quality of these picks or express an opinion on them on a football messageboard?

That's the problem with the reaction to Ohrnberger (or fill in the draft disappointment of your choice.) It's the outrage, the personal ire at Belichick over the fact that he was so incompetent as to make a failed pick, and the use of that failed pick as justification for beating up on the team's whole approach to the draft. You have to take a broader view. Are there disturbing trends in the team's draft history? How does it compare to other teams?

Outrage? Personal Ire? Belichick incompetent? Failed draft approach? You are taking an extreme amount of liberties with my words if you are trying to associate those thoughts with mine. I didn't like the Ohrnberger pick, simple as that. Not liking the Ohrnberger pick means I think Belichick is incompetent? Come on, that's quite a leap.

That's why the topic of this thread was "perspective." Even looking higher up in the draft, you have to evaluate with the understanding that perfection isn't achievable. No fan expects perfection on the field -- a 100% passing percentage, say, or 16 straight shutouts. Yet a surprising number seem to take anything less than perfection in the draft as something to get furious about.

While you're preaching your brand of perspective, you could probably use a little of it for yourself. Not being wild about a pick does not mean I think BB is incompetent, does not mean I expect perfection.

Consider Brace and Butler, 2 2nd-round disappointments. You can't go missing on 2nd-rounders, right? Right...not routinely. But in the post Pioli era, the Patriots have made 7 2nd-round picks (not counting Dowling, who is TBD). Early results show those picks netting out to 2 Pro Bowl-caliber players (Gronkowski, Vollmer), 3 more players expected to start this year (Chung, Cunningham, Spikes) and 2 players who are still with the team but have been clear disappointments. How does that compare with the yield you'd expect from 7 2nd rounders? I think answers to that question will vary, but I'd rather debate that than listen to fuming over how BB sucks because Brace is a stiff.

I'm confused, did you just call Brace and Butler disappointments. Weren't they in the same draft class as Ohrnberger? Where's the magical line in the sand to cross where you can criticize these two players and yet take me to task for doing the same with Ohrnberger.

(btw, sorry about the 25 vs 24. i made the mistake of using the patriots draft history list at nfl.com which for some reason has stryker sulak as a pats pick!)

I like using profootballreference's draft history list. The customizable draft chart can be useful.
New England Patriots All-Time Draft History - Pro-Football-Reference.com

 

[MaineMan]

Round 4. Pick 109. TJ Lang-Green Bay 28 games 3 starts
Round 4. Pick 133. Tyrone Greene-San Diego 15 games 7 starts
Round 6. Pick 193. Matt Slauson- NYJ 19 games 16 starts all in 2010
Round 7. Pick 246. Lance Louis- Chicago- 16 games 4 starts in 2010
UDFA Ramon Foster- Pittsburgh 26 games 12 starts

Just to be clear, I've also had serious doubts about Ohrnberger so far.

However, citing the players above and their starts (mostly gained through injury opportunities) seems like a false comparison, differences in blocking schemes aside. GB, CHI and PIT have been three of the shakiest O-lines in the NFL for the past couple seasons at least, and while the starters for SD and the Jets have been top notch, the O-line depth for those teams has been virtually non-existent for a couple years. Meanwhile, Ohrnberger has been attempting to break onto perhaps the best (starters) and deepest O-line crew in the league.

IOW, promoting the impression that these guys are better than Ohrnberger because of what they've "accomplished" in terms of playing time in comparison seems to me similar to saying that Colt McCoy is a better pick than Aaron Rogers was (early on) because he managed to beat out Delhomme and Wallace right away.

While I have my doubts about the abilities of Lang and Louis, I happen to think that Greene, Slauson and Foster are all actually pretty good and probably better players than Ohrnberger. However, this argument doesn't really help their case for me.