Ranking Belichick's drafting ability

[jmt57]

One thing to consider for those that focus on the number or percentage of misses: that doesn't matter! What does matter is the number of hits.

A second thing to consider: in a league with the largest roster of any professional sport, in a game with the most starters of any sport, and in a league with a true salary cap, bottom half of the roster players cannot be see easily and summarily dismissed. Does the name Malcolm Butler not ring a bell? For whatever reason there seems to be a prevalent attitude that beyond the top ten players on a team does not matter; that is simply not true.

Back to the original statement. Team A through trades ends up with three draft picks. One becomes a pro bowl starter, one a serviceable starter, and the third a backup.

Team B ends up with ten draft picks. Six end up as what many would label busts: two backups who never get on the field at their position (but are core special teamers), and four others that end up on the practice squad or are cut. One is a pro bowl starter, two are serviceable starters, and one is a backup who only gets on the field on third down.

According to many, Team A did a better job because they had no 'busts', and 100% made the roster. Yet the fact is that Team B had twice as many contributors on their roster, with just as many (or more) at comparable levels of play.


The draft is a huge crap shoot. It makes more sense to have more bullets in your holster rather than fewer (but bigger) bullets. I would rather be able to throw three extra darts from one step behind the standard line, than be limited to three fewer darts one step closer to the board - given that the draft is the equivalent of playing darts in a room so dark I can barely see the board.

 

[Canuck]

Nicely done. Even without looking at the details, the conclusions look right. A few things stood out to me that you did that made for a good analysis. You went into it without any preconceived notion of what the result would be. That SD finished first and you were surprised seems to support that notion. That you went back to see why SD finished first and what you found supported that conclusion, makes me think you treated all teams fairly. That you used 2000-2014 for your study was great. The longer the period being studied, the more accurate the analysis. That you noted the deficiencies in the study (ie: Slater) made me confident that you understood how the data worked.

 

[Canuck]

Harping on missed draft picks here and there is really missing the forest for the trees. So Belichick "missed" on Tavon Wilson. In the same year as Wilson was drafted, the only other team to rank in the top five in both time periods missed on almost their entire draft class. Remember warm camp body Jerel Worthy who couldn't make our team last year? He was Green Bay's 2012 2nd round pick whom they traded up to 51 to get. I'm sure Green Bay fans can name chapter and verse of who'd they'd rather have picked than the people they actually got in 2012. Bad picks and bad drafts happen to everyone.

One thing I noticed from doing this: I did the Patriots' spreadsheet first and used that as a template for the other teams. When I pasted in the new team's information, I had to adjust the formula so that it counted the 2009 and onward players but not the 2008 and previous players. I always had to adjust to account for usually 5 to 10 players fewer than the Patriots had drafted in the same time period. Not once did I have to add fields to the formula. For just one example, the Patriots have drafted 24 more players than the Saints since 2009! That's like three hidden extra draft classes. Baltimore, who love to accumulate supplemental picks had 8 fewer picks. It's like a baseball team who gets an extra inning or two to bat every game. Their averages don't have to be better than the next team to have more runs at the end of the game.

I really don't understand why people say Tavon Wilson is a bust or a wasted pick or any of the negative comments. That he is a productive member of the Patriots, doesn't seem a bust or a missed pick to me. Not every player picked is going to be a starter. Teams need back-ups and special team players too.

 

[Danger Zone]

Alright, for those wondering why I waited, it's because I wanted to see how well perception matched reality. In the case of this board, it matched up pretty well as the Belichick Patriots have been the #3 drafting team since 2000 and the #2 drafting team since 2009 by this method.

See this Excel File if you want a breakdown and if you want to check my spreadsheet formulas and my cutting and pasting skills.

Since 2000
Team Total CarAV
1. SD (!) 1936
2. GB 1915
3. NE 1848
4. CAR 1829
5. Bal 1819
League Average in this time: 1593.2
27 (Tied) DET and KC 1368
29. MIA 1348
30. OAK 1276
31. TB 1090
32. Was 1011

Honestly having SD at #1 made me question any validity of this approach, but they have had some very good teams in the past 15 years, they get credit for drafting two upper echelon QBs in Brees and Eli Manning (PFR has Rivers as a Giants pick. He'd have even more CarAV than Eli), and their list of top players is pretty impressive.

Brees 142
Tomlinson 129
Eli 96
Vincent Jackson 72
Nick Hardwick 68
Eric Weddle 60
Antonio Cromartie 60
5 more with 50+

In comparison, here's the list of Pats draftees with 50+ CarAV in that time frame
Brady 153
Mankins 102
Light 91
Seymour 90
Wilfork 80
Asante Samuel 74
Koppen 72
Branch 52

The bottom 5 teams of that period are the ones you'd expect to be there for the most part. Well, maybe I'm surprised the Dolphins are worse than the Bills.

Now for the recent draftees.

Since 2009
Team Total CarAV
1. SEA 547
2. NE 492
3. CIN 486
4. PIT 476
5. GB 475
League Average in that time period 378.8
28. WAS 303
29. NYG (!) 283
30. NYJ 280
31. CHI 279
32. NO (!) 260

Not surprising to see the top drafters comprised of currently strong teams the bottom drafters be franchises that have all recently suffered dramatic downfalls. That's what parity is supposed to work like. That Belichick has avoided truly bad periods is a testament to his team building.

Worth the wait?

To tie in the Average Draft Position with the OPs leaders in CarAv over the same years *

Average Draft Position for CarAV Leaders Since 2000

          Total    Average Draft
  Team    CarAV      Position
1. SD      1936        17.00
2. GB      1915        22.31
3. NE      1848        25.68
4. CAR     1829        15.87
5. Bal     1819        22.18

Average Draft Position for CarAV Leaders Since 2009

          Total    Average Draft
  Team    CarAV      Position
1. SEA     547         19.28
2. NE      492         27.71
3. CIN     486         16.85
4. PIT     476         22.71
5. GB      475         24.14

* I hadn't initially used 2000 as a starting point because the Patriots lost their 1st round pick that year. Including a pick at 16 they didn't even get to use didn't seem a fair or representative that it should lower their Average from 26-ish to 25-ish.

Should be noted we also lost our 1st round pick in 2008

 

[Jercules]

Pro Bowlers is one thing, because at least that is somewhat objective (even though how a player is used makes so much difference).

But to grade a draft based on # of starters? We're the New England Patriots, starting jobs are few and far between on our rosters. If you have a terrible team, of course you're gonna draft more 'starters'--doesn't mean you had a good draft (or a better draft than a guy whose draftees have much less opportunity to land a job, because the team he is drafting for isn't terrible).

 

[convertedpatsfan]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Herm Edwards was right on the mark. You play to win the game.

The goal isn't to maximize draft pick potential. Nor is it to minimize the potential number of draft busts. You play to win the game.

Belichick drafts players who COULD contribute to the team. It doesn't mean they WILL. He doesn't guarantee them anything other than a chance to try out. They are rarely handed the job. The 1st-rounder gets no advantage over the UDFA.

So when you're evaluating drafts, it's important to understand that the point is to win games. If the unheralded FA signing (LaFell) beats out the 2nd rounder (Dobson), so be it. Other organizations would start Dobson regardless, let him rack up some numbers, and call it a successful draft pick. But again, the point isn't to maximize draft pick potential. You play to win the game.

When you look at the draft overall from all teams, we do pretty well. If you only look at the mistakes, yes, it looks bad. If you never compare to another franchise, of course it looks terrible. If you only watch Brady's INTs, you'd come to the wrong conclusion he's terrible too.

But for those who hang on every BB miss, how does he compare to other teams? What about the Ravens and the Seahawks and the Packers? How about the Colts? All of those teams have a good track record of drafting, yet have made some terrible mistakes too. Have you ever analyzed our track record against theirs?

Because I see some pretty bizarre statements in this thread that can't possibly be based on any actual facts. And I know it's the internet and 99% of it is ********, but your opinion should be based on some little bit of fact at least. I mean this isn't a Jets board FFS.

 

[slam]

To tie in the Average Draft Position with the OPs leaders in CarAv over the same years *

Average Draft Position for CarAV Leaders Since 2000

          Total    Average Draft
  Team    CarAV      Position
1. SD      1936        17.00
2. GB      1915        22.31
3. NE      1848        25.68
4. CAR     1829        15.87
5. Bal     1819        22.18

Average Draft Position for CarAV Leaders Since 2009

          Total    Average Draft
  Team    CarAV      Position
1. SEA     547         19.28
2. NE      492         27.71
3. CIN     486         16.85
4. PIT     476         22.71
5. GB      475         24.14

* I hadn't initially used 2000 as a starting point because the Patriots lost their 1st round pick that year. Including a pick at 16 they didn't even get to use didn't seem a fair or representative that it should lower their Average from 26-ish to 25-ish.

Should be noted we also lost our 1st round pick in 2008

When you account for two lost first round picks due to commissioner decisions, the Pats could very well have made up the near 100 point gap to the #1 spot. If those two picks were made and had as productive a career as Deion Branch (52 CarAV), Pats are #1.

 

[Richard Camembert]

It's interesting that the top teams by this metric seem to have drafted from lower in the pack, generally twentieth or lower. Which means good teams draft strongly and bad teams keep making the same mistakes.

 

[Canuck]

When you account for two lost first round picks due to commissioner decisions, the Pats could very well have made up the near 100 point gap to the #1 spot. If those two picks were made and had as productive a career as Deion Branch (52 CarAV), Pats are #1.

To get an accurate analysis, you can't just adjust a stat for the Patriots and not the other teams. In this case you would have to adjust the stats for ALL teams for loss of picks due to commissioner decisions.

 

[Danger Zone]

To get an accurate analysis, you can't just adjust a stat for the Patriots and not the other teams. In this case you would have to adjust the stats for ALL teams for loss of picks due to commissioner decisions.

While likely that memory fails me, what other teams have forfeited a significant draft pick?

Saints lost a 2nd round pick in 2012 and 2013.

Any others?

 

[Canuck]

While likely that memory fails me, what other teams have forfeited a significant draft pick?

Saints lost a 2nd round pick in 2012 and 2013.

Any others?

• 2011 Lions forfeit seventh-round pick for tampering with Chiefs players
  

• 2008 49ers forfeit fifth-round pick for tampering with Bears linebacker Lance Briggs
  

• 2008 Patriots forfeit first-round pick for Spygate scandal
  

• 2002-05 Broncos forfeit 2005 third-round pick, 2002 third-round pick for circumventing salary cap between 1996 and 1998
  

• 2001-02 49ers forfeit 2002 third-round pick, 2001 fifth-round pick for salary cap violations
  

• 2001 Steelers forfeit third-round pick for exceeding 1998 salary cap
  

 

[DarrylS]

For years I have lamented those who have repeatedly said BB does not know how to draft, or his draft choices are crap... and have repeatedly said that in the absence of a longitudinal study of all teams it was folly to make that claim.

Nice to see it quantified.. the NFL draft is at best hit or miss.. you never know.

 

[slam]

I did some more number crunching, breaking things down by round. The "ACarAv" stat means what the average return of all players drafted by a team from that round. The overall is the simple addition of all the round averages, so what an average draft would look like if it was comprised of one pick per round for all teams.

Round   ACareerAV  League Rank  League Avg
                     (of 32)      CarAV
1          41.0          4        33.6
2          18.9         24        22.6
3           8.3         32        14.6
4          12.2         13        11.8
5          10.1         11         8.5
6          13.4          1         6.9
7           8.4          6         5.9
Overall    112.2        12       103.9

Since it was mentioned in another thread, if you were to take out Brady the 6th round return would fall to 5.2 which is ranked 23rd.

So, a wide variance in return from round to round. Top four for first round picks are amazing since they rarely draft near the top. The "worst" 1st round pick according to CarAV is TE Daniel Graham who only had a 10 year career and was good for 30 catches with plus blocking. Yes, the rating liked him less than Maroney and Meriweather. Round 2's rating is below average, but I expect that to improve in the coming years since the Pats currently have three young to prime players enjoying productive to Pro Bowl level careers in Vollmer, Gronk, and Jamie Collins along with others still contributing like Chung, Darius Butler, Vereen, and Spikes even if Dobson never gets going.

It's shocking to see Belichick rated as the worst in anything, but the record on 3rd round picks is, to this metric, the worst in the league. Who knows why? When the best picks over that time period are Nick Kaczur and Ellis Hobbs, that's not saying much. Is there a systemic reason that third round picks are so dismal? Or is this just small sample size?

4th and 5th round are slightly above average, and 6th and 7th are among the best in the league heavily weighted by finds like Brady, Edelman, Cassel, Banta-Cain, and David Givens.

What interests me most is that the overall ranking of draft picks is ranked 12th. If all you knew about any pick was that it was a Belichick pick, you'd expect it to be only slightly better than league average from that position. But the wheedling he does consistently creates more opportunities to gain extra value, so that a Belichick draft class is much better than league average.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

I did some more number crunching, breaking things down by round. The "ACarAv" stat means what the average return of all players drafted by a team from that round. The overall is the simple addition of all the round averages, so what an average draft would look like if it was comprised of one pick per round for all teams.

Round   ACareerAV  League Rank  League Avg
                     (of 32)      CarAV
1          41.0          4        33.6
2          18.9         24        22.6
3           8.3         32        14.6
4          12.2         13        11.8
5          10.1         11         8.5
6          13.4          1         6.9
7           8.4          6         5.9
Overall    112.2        12       103.9

Since it was mentioned in another thread, if you were to take out Brady the 6th round return would fall to 5.2 which is ranked 23rd.

So, a wide variance in return from round to round. Top four for first round picks are amazing since they rarely draft near the top. The "worst" 1st round pick according to CarAV is TE Daniel Graham who only had a 10 year career and was good for 30 catches with plus blocking. Yes, the rating liked him less than Maroney and Meriweather. Round 2's rating is below average, but I expect that to improve in the coming years since the Pats currently have three young to prime players enjoying productive to Pro Bowl level careers in Vollmer, Gronk, and Jamie Collins along with others still contributing like Chung, Darius Butler, Vereen, and Spikes even if Dobson never gets going.

It's shocking to see Belichick rated as the worst in anything, but the record on 3rd round picks is, to this metric, the worst in the league. Who knows why? When the best picks over that time period are Nick Kaczur and Ellis Hobbs, that's not saying much. Is there a systemic reason that third round picks are so dismal? Or is this just small sample size?

4th and 5th round are slightly above average, and 6th and 7th are among the best in the league heavily weighted by finds like Brady, Edelman, Cassel, Banta-Cain, and David Givens.

What interests me most is that the overall ranking of draft picks is ranked 12th. If all you knew about any pick was that it was a Belichick pick, you'd expect it to be only slightly better than league average from that position. But the wheedling he does consistently creates more opportunities to gain extra value, so that a Belichick draft class is much better than league average.

Great post.

I think one other variable that hasn't been considered is whether BB swings for the fences in certain rounds.

While hard to quantify, I think the general consensus is that we rarely go for high-boom, high-bust potential in the 1st round. Generally, he's been really good there. But I do think sometimes he takes a lot more chances in the 2nd and 3rd rounds trying to unearth stars rather than potential starters.

It may be that he thinks he can take a mid-to-late round guy and coach them into a decent player, so he takes more chances in the 2nd and 3rd trying to find big potential guys. You see a lot of injury gambles like with Dowling and Crable and Gronk in those rounds.

Only BB would be able to say for certain, but he may swing for the fences sometimes rather than hitting the safe single because he feels confident he can get those later in the game.

 

[AzPatsFan]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Herm Edwards was right on the mark. You play to win the game.

The goal isn't to maximize draft pick potential. Nor is it to minimize the potential number of draft busts. You play to win the game.

Belichick drafts players who COULD contribute to the team. It doesn't mean they WILL. He doesn't guarantee them anything other than a chance to try out. They are rarely handed the job. The 1st-rounder gets no advantage over the UDFA.

So when you're evaluating drafts, it's important to understand that the point is to win games. If the unheralded FA signing (LaFell) beats out the 2nd rounder (Dobson), so be it. Other organizations would start Dobson regardless, let him rack up some numbers, and call it a successful draft pick. But again, the point isn't to maximize draft pick potential. You play to win the game.

When you look at the draft overall from all teams, we do pretty well. If you only look at the mistakes, yes, it looks bad. If you never compare to another franchise, of course it looks terrible. If you only watch Brady's INTs, you'd come to the wrong conclusion he's terrible too.

But for those who hang on every BB miss, how does he compare to other teams? What about the Ravens and the Seahawks and the Packers? How about the Colts? All of those teams have a good track record of drafting, yet have made some terrible mistakes too. Have you ever analyzed our track record against theirs?

Because I see some pretty bizarre statements in this thread that can't possibly be based on any actual facts. And I know it's the internet and 99% of it is ********, but your opinion should be based on some little bit of fact at least. I mean this isn't a Jets board FFS.

But you have to understand that the draftnik critics are all Junior GM wanna-bes abut never-wases. In their own minds they never miss and draft nothing but Al Pros.

 

[jmt57]

Great post.

I think one other variable that hasn't been considered is whether BB swings for the fences in certain rounds.

While hard to quantify, I think the general consensus is that we rarely go for high-boom, high-bust potential in the 1st round. Generally, he's been really good there. But I do think sometimes he takes a lot more chances in the 2nd and 3rd rounds trying to unearth stars rather than potential starters.

It may be that he thinks he can take a mid-to-late round guy and coach them into a decent player, so he takes more chances in the 2nd and 3rd trying to find big potential guys. You see a lot of injury gambles like with Dowling and Crable and Gronk in those rounds.

Only BB would be able to say for certain, but he may swing for the fences sometimes rather than hitting the safe single because he feels confident he can get those later in the game.

I am thinking that the third round AV is low primarily due to two factors: injuries, and lack of injuries.

While that sounds contradictory, let me expand on that thought. Two third round picks suffered injuries very early in their careers and were never the same (J.R. Redmond, Tyrone McKenzie). Two backup quarterbacks were drafted in the third round; they were never called upon to play (i.e., lack of injuries). Granted Kevin O'Connell - in my opinion perhaps the worst draft pick BB has made with the Pats - had other issues, but the book is still open on Ryan Mallett's NFL career.

That's not to say there haven't been any other misses besides KOC in the third - there have been - but those factors may skew the numbers a bit. On the other hand if you factor in value received from trades, the round looks much better - though still far less productive than one would hope or expect it to be.

Season Drafted - Overall Pick - Career AV - Player
2000 --- 3.76 --- 9 --- RB J.R. Redmond
2001 --- 3.86 --- 1 --- DB Brock Williams
2002 --- none, traded away (Daniel Graham [19])
2003 --- none, traded away (Eugene Wilson [31], Dan Klecko [8])
2004 --- 3.95 --- 1 --- DB Guss Scott
2005 --- 3.84 --- 28 --- CB Ellis Hobbs
2005 --- 3.100 --- 37 --- OT Nick Kaczur
2006 --- 3.86 --- 9 ---- TE David Thomas
2007 --- none, traded away (Matt Slater [0], Ron Brace [6])
2008 --- 3.78 --- 0 --- LB Shawn Crable
2008 --- 3.94 --- 0 --- QB Kevin O'Connell
2009 --- 3.83 --- 13 --- WR Brandon Tate
2009 --- 3.97 --- 1 --- LB Tyrone McKenzie
2010 --- 3.90 --- 1 --- WR Taylor Price
2011 --- 3.73 --- 22 --- RB Stevan Ridley
2011 --- 3.74 --- 1 --- QB Ryan Mallett
2012 --- 3.90 --- 0 --- DE Jake Bequette
2013 --- 3.83 --- 7 --- CB Logan Ryan
2013 --- 3.91 --- 3 --- S Duron Harmon
2014 --- none, traded away (Bryan Stork [7], Jon Halapio [0])

 

[slam]

I think now would be a good time to remind people that Belichick is one of the best drafters as a whole, though for any individual pick he is only slightly above average. His trading back of a third round pick for three later picks today pretty much quadrupled expected value back since for Belichick rounds 3-7 seems to be a plateau with Round 3 actually the worst round historically.

 

[Gronkowski123]

the last two picks are bums come on

 

[Canuck]

Special teams are an integral part of a team. Draft lists compare players based on the position they play. Very seldom do scouting reports that make up draft lists take into account the ability of players to play special teams. Belichick takes into account a players position ability but also the players ability to play special teams.
Thus they can have players listed higher on their draft board because of their special teams ability then the traditional draft lists done with the likes of those on the NFL, etc.

 

[slam]

the last two picks are bums come on

I don't watch college football, I don't know these guys from Adam. I just know that past performance suggests that Belichick knows what he's doing. Just like if Warren Buffett started investing heavily in Radio Shack or Sears, I'd trust him more than my lying eyes.