Welcome to PatsFans.com

Relative Value & Grading The Curve

Discussion in 'Patriots Draft Talk' started by Off The Grid, May 4, 2013.

  1. Off The Grid

    Off The Grid Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    6,657
    Likes Received:
    99
    Ratings:
    +192 / 5 / -0

    #3 Jersey

    Nobody brays louder than me when Coach Bill makes a Move that I consider either stupid or insane:

    1 ~ OConnell
    2 ~ Burgess
    3 ~ Dowling
    4 ~ Mallett
    5 ~ Wilson
    6 ~ Harmon


    And so far, I'm 2 for 2 ~ OConnell & Burgess ~ as I don't think you can Grade any'f the others, yet.

    But that doesn't mean I'm not a grateful, grovelling Worshiper of Coach Bill, for indeed I am. :cool:

    Greatness does not require Perfection.

    It requires only...Greatness.

    And Coach Bill unmistakably qualifies.

    ***

    Anyway: I thought it might be interesting to snap together a quick little bit of Mathematics, to evaluate how much of a Competitive Disadvantage we've been dealing with in the Draft, over the last 12 Years. [​IMG]

    1 ~ Our average annual original position in the draft order has been an insane 27 1/3 or 27.333. I'm leaving Trades our entirely, as well as Goodell's Vile Act: I'm just going for a quick & dirty evaluation, based on the 7 Picks we nominally start with, every Year. Anyone who wants to dig deeper is more than welcome to. :cool:

    2 ~ The theoretical "Average NFL Team" ~ which is what I'm comparing us to ~ would start off with Picks #16.5, #48.5, #80.5, Et Cetera, right? Employing The Huddle Report's Version of the classic J&J Draft Value Chart, by simple addition, I get ~ let's see ~ 975 + 425 + 187.5 + 69 + 33.75 + 21.8 + 9 = 1721

    3 ~ We, on the other hand, starting off with 27.333, 59.333, Et Cetera, are looking at approximately...let's see...673 + 317 + 135 + 49 + 30 + 17 + 5, giving us...1226

    4 ~ 495 Points. Put one way, that is a 29% Average Annual Competitive Disadvantage. :eek:

    5 ~ Put another way, the Average NFL Team has gotten an average of 40% More Draft Capital to play with than us, every single Year, over the last 12 Years, not including The Goodell Raping. :eek:

    6 ~ Put yet another way, the 31 other Teams have, on average, each received an early 2nd Round Draft Pick ~ #41.5 or the 495 Point Disparity calculated, above ~ every single one of the last 12 Years!! :eek:

    12 early 2nd Round Picks each, folks. :eek:

    All 31 Teams. :eek:

    Perhaps Coach Bill the GM ain't so bad...eh?? ;)
  2. Off The Grid

    Off The Grid Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    6,657
    Likes Received:
    99
    Ratings:
    +192 / 5 / -0

    #3 Jersey

    If anyone wants to check my Math, they are cordially invited to do so ~ it would be appreciated. :cool:

    Maybe I'll go back through with other Draft Value Charts ~ I expect the difference would be significantly less...but still awfully formidable!!
  3. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    20,585
    Likes Received:
    106
    Ratings:
    +269 / 17 / -2

    The draft is meant to do exactly what you describe: to give weaker teams more draft capital. If we won the Super Bowl every year, we would spot the rest of the league a 1st round draft pick.
  4. Off The Grid

    Off The Grid Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    6,657
    Likes Received:
    99
    Ratings:
    +192 / 5 / -0

    #3 Jersey

    No kidding.

    I just illustrated that for you.

    My Point is that when comparing what Coach Bill has accomplished in the Draft to the rest of the League, one should remember that the other 31 Teams have averaged 40% more Draft Capital each...for 12 Years running!!

    40%!! :eek:
  5. PatsFanStnfrd

    PatsFanStnfrd Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2009
    Messages:
    540
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Doing more with less is genius. Doing more with less is BB's genius. He's great. Just not perfect.
  6. I.M. Fletcher

    I.M. Fletcher Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    155
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    Much has been made over the years about Mad Bill's arrogance and how he knows best, and that is why he trades down so frequently.

    Not to turn this in to another debate on whether he should or shouldnt trade down as often as he does, but I think Dr. Grid raises an important point in the discussion. When you are constantly working from behind in the count, which the Pats have been doing for a decade, you need to figure out ways to even the playing field. In the past decade we have seen different ways that has occured. First it started with market inefficiencies, drafting types of players that were constantly undervalued in other systems, that the Pats could maximize. Then it was the trade down and out strategy, which maximized overall picks going forward and protected the team having to overdraft needs. There was also the depth signing from UDFAs, which has become a really big jewel in the past 6-7 years, where signings have lead to expected players, not just hopeful players. Beyond that, it has been the ability to take problem players, with rare ability but questionable judgement, and allowing them the chance to succeed.

    With all of these resources that Mad Bill has plugged in to and has as many resources available to get the absolute maximum value from every facet. With that said, I would say that Mad Bill has every reason to be full of arrogance, whereas his moves are based more heavily on the opposite. If it was arrogance, he wouldnt be trading down away from high end talent that he could surely coach up in to superstars, but does knowing that its better to have more picks because he isnt going to hit on every one. He signs more UFDAs than anyone, with more resources put towards that end than other teams, because he knows players can come from anywhere and anyone can prove him wrong. He constantly takes guys who have had issues that need to be overcome, not because hes the greatest counsel, but because people can overcome and prove themselves. The genius of mad bill is not his own ability, but his willingness to allow people to prove themselves. People are the greatest resource in Bill's world, and it will continue to prove him Genius.
  7. manxman2601

    manxman2601 On the Roster

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Messages:
    8,618
    Likes Received:
    181
    Ratings:
    +384 / 7 / -1

    #24 Jersey

    There are other offsets though. Successful teams might be able to attract better value FAs for example or have a better chance of re-signing their own at more friendly rates. Better teams don't have to continually search for a QB, they are better able to plan long-term and their very success filters down through the organisation making that success endemic.

    The success of the organisation as a whole makes that 40% much less of a handicap than it appears on paper.

    you are right though. People criticise BB's drafting but they're getting hung up on a relatively short period between '06 and '09. Aside from that, BB's drafting has been good. and if the last three drafts are as good as I think they will be, I think there's at least one more SB in the offing.
  8. Off The Grid

    Off The Grid Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    6,657
    Likes Received:
    99
    Ratings:
    +192 / 5 / -0

    #3 Jersey

    Ah...Good Points, my Friend, good Points.

    But please bear in mind: I'm talking, specifically, about evaluating Coach Bill's Drafts.

    And to that extent, a Team's Success ~ our Team's Success ~ actually makes it more difficult ~ not less ~ for Draft Picks to crack the Roster and to thus render Coach Bill's Drafts successful. [​IMG]
  9. Off The Grid

    Off The Grid Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    6,657
    Likes Received:
    99
    Ratings:
    +192 / 5 / -0

    #3 Jersey

    A tremendous & original Post, Brother Fletcher!! Outstanding!! [​IMG]

    1 ~ "When you are constantly working from behind in the count, which the Pats have been doing for a decade, you need to figure out ways to even the playing field." Beauty!! :rocker:

    2 ~ "I would say that Mad Bill has every reason to be full of arrogance, whereas his moves are based more heavily on the opposite. If it was arrogance, he wouldn't be trading down away from high end talent that he could surely coach up in to superstars, but does so knowing that it's better to have more picks because he isn't going to hit on every one."

    Beautiful. :cool: And any emphasis was mine, Fellow Readers.

    3 ~ "The genius of Mad Bill is not his own ability, but his willingness to allow people to prove themselves. People are the greatest resource in Bill's world, and it will continue to prove him Genius."

    Exquisite, Brother Fletcher!! :rocker:
  10. Coach42

    Coach42 Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    898
    Likes Received:
    27
    Ratings:
    +54 / 3 / -12

    #87 Jersey

    Great post. No team in the league has had to work as hard as the Pats in the draft. When you measure their results against this back drop their drafting prowess becomes much more impressive. Especially after the last 3 draft classes. Arguably the best three year run since the early 90's.

    The one tool BB used most masterfully, which we used last year, was the second first round pick. That second first rounder essentially leveled the playing field for years points wise. It gave the team the option of trading back for another future 1 or multiple picks in any given draft basically allowing the team to control its drafting fate. Those additional points negated the deficit you so beautifully illustrated above. While trading back and into the future might be the most boring thing ever for a fan its a game changer for GM's of winning teams. I don't think its a coincidence that BB worshiper Mike Lombardi traded for future picks in his first draft for the Browns.
  11. patsinthesnow

    patsinthesnow PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    211
    Ratings:
    +319 / 10 / -1

    #87 Jersey

    Great post, OTG.

    I'm with you on O'Connell and Mallett. I still remember your Mallett meltdown on here the day we drafted him. :D

    I'll never understand why BB drafted third round QBs when Brady was 31 and 34. Way too high for developmental QBs. Especially when one of them proved to be terrible and the other is on the brink of being terrible.
  12. everlong

    everlong Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2007
    Messages:
    5,878
    Likes Received:
    88
    Ratings:
    +151 / 1 / -1

    #12 Jersey

    The second part of this would be to add up the actual value of the final picks to see how much the Pats made up in the differential. Trading into the next year and picking up guy like Wilfork, Mayo, Soldier, Gronk and others with picks of much greater value than the original picks probably cut into that average differential loss.
  13. Metaphors

    Metaphors Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Messages:
    3,670
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    I think you have to classify risks as "insane" or "stupid" if there is a near 100% chance of the risk not ending up in the "reward" side of the ledger. All of the players you mention have an element of risk to them:

    O'Connell - Raw with questionable college experience. Prototype physical characteristics.
    Burgess - On downside of career. Still young enough to be a difference-maker for championship run.
    Dowling - Injuries and limited speed. Provided much needed height and physicality.
    Mallett - Off-field maturity. 1st round talent.
    Wilson - Low draft ranking. Skill set to play all over secondary.
    Harmon - Low draft ranking. Speed and closing ability as centerfielder.

    O'Connell didn't realize his potential, but is it stupid to draft a QB late on day 2 that had his physical potential? If you do this every couple of years, you only have to hit it once to have your QB of the future and avoid the crash the Colts experienced 2 years ago. Consider how screwed the Colts would have been if the 2012 and 2013 draft classes were switched. If you never try to get developmental QBs, you pass up opportunities to hit on the most important position in all of sports.

    Getting Burgess wasn't a controversial move. He was a scheme fit and filled a needed role. The price paid (future 3rd plus another pick I think) was the issue. The 2010 draft looked to be stacked and the Pats had plenty of ammo available to them. Burgess didn't meet expectations but I don't recall him flaming out completely. Unless you are fundamentally against trading future draft capital (and then you miss out on Welker and Moss), this seems like a reasonable risk that just didn't work out.

    As far as I can tell, Dowling's injuries with the Pats (hip and thigh) aren't related to his college injuries. So besides being unlucky, I'm not sure you can draw any conclusions. Unless you contend he is so genetically flawed that independent body parts will continue to fail in series for the rest of his career...and that was evident before the draft. As a scheme fit, Dowling's size and ball skills fit a niche that was sorely lacking with the Pats DBs. And he seemed to find his stride as a sub, inside cover guy (sorely needed in the playoff games) before his injury last year.

    Classifying the Mallett pick as insane seems...well, insane. His only risk factor coming out of college was off the field. And he seems to have been a model Patriot for 2 years now. Take away the off-field stuff and he likely goes in the 1st round (4 QBs in top 12) and certainly by the early 2nd. As mentioned earlier with O'Connell, the backup/developmental QB position is a necessary investment that, almost by definition, will bust more than it works out. To have a 3rd round QB advance to the point where he is the only other QB on a championship-caliber team within his first 2 years, that seems to be victory already. If he can just man this position for the next 2 years and leave after his rookie contract, the pick would have been worth it. If he develops into anything more, the pick would become gold.

    Wilson and Harmon are effectively on your list for the same reason. That horse has been beaten enough in other threads.

    All of these moves had associated, known risks with them. Not all of them work out. But if these moves were stupid, then so were the moves to acquire Russell Wilson, Colin Kaepernick, 2007 Randy Moss, Mankins, Vollmer, Hernandez and Gronkowski. All risks that could have gone sideways (or nowhere) very easily but turned out to be gems.

    That is why I look at team-building more like scoring a boxing match than a baseball batting average. You can be technically clean with a conservative style and be a solid boxer...but you are limiting your ceiling. But if you also follow your instincts and take reasonable chances when the time is right, you can maximize your chances of being great. You know not all of your punches are going to land, but it is better than dancing around jabbing and hoping to win on points.
  14. Snake Eyes

    Snake Eyes Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Messages:
    5,183
    Likes Received:
    65
    Ratings:
    +113 / 12 / -9

    O'Connell - While he was athletic he also had poor mechanics and was noted for poor decision making, especially under pressure. Not what I want in a QB prospect.

    Burgess - For me the price we paid was the bigger issue.

    Dowling - Injury cases are exponentially more risky. When one is injured the body compensates and adjusts by shifting tension schemes to other areas, think of it as something of a ripple effect. His injuries with the Pats could very well stem from his college injuries.
  15. Off The Grid

    Off The Grid Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    6,657
    Likes Received:
    99
    Ratings:
    +192 / 5 / -0

    #3 Jersey

    I didn't say that getting Burgess was a controversial move, did I? ;)

    I said it was a stupid move.

    I said so the day it was made.

    And so it was.
  16. Off The Grid

    Off The Grid Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    6,657
    Likes Received:
    99
    Ratings:
    +192 / 5 / -0

    #3 Jersey

    That's a fair Question, Sir.

    My answer, however, would be "Yes."

    His mental Potential ~ like Mallet's ~ is what I took issue with.

    And I was proven dead right on that account.

    Hopefully, I will ultimately be proven dead wrong on Mallet's account.

    *And I philosophically oppose burning off perfectly good 3rd Rounders on developmental QuarterBacks.

    Why not wait until Day 3?

    From what I've seen, ere the last 3 Drafts, some of the better QuarterBack Prospects are Day 3.
  17. Off The Grid

    Off The Grid Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    6,657
    Likes Received:
    99
    Ratings:
    +192 / 5 / -0

    #3 Jersey

    What an asinine thing to say. :rolleyes:

    Your extrapolating my harsh criticism of Move A to mean that I would've harshly criticized Move B is one of the stupidest things I've ever read.

    I actually loudly applauded every one of those Patriot Picks, thanks.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>