Right On Schedule, Brady's WR Starters Emerge

[Deus Irae]

TE- drafted the best TE in football and a (once was) top 5 tight end in the same draft.. 1 year. Dont know how you can claim it took several years.

Given that BB had been drafting the position from day one of his tenure, I think it's pretty darned easy to claim it took several years.

Seeing as how, since 2009, we've drafted 2 late 3rd round WRs, traded a 5th and 6th for Ocho, 2 7th rounders for Edelman and Ebert, signed Lloyd on the super cheap and a bunch of UFA JAGs, I dont think we've really attempted a full rebuild. We barely divested any assets in that area until this year. And a 2nd and a 4th isnt even that much... look what the Falcons gave up to get Julio.

Seeing as how drafting is not the only way to try stocking positions, I'll just note our disagreements and leave it at that.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

It depends on the time frame you're using and how you're trying to define "entire focus", I guess.

LB
DE
DB
TE

All the above either took several years or are still not fixed. The WR position has been a failed rebuild since 2009.

Failed is an absolute. An overall poor job is how I would describe it.

Obviously this is a judgment call/opinion for each of us. And this is only a disagreement of degree. However, I think it is too absolute to use "failed" to describe it.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

Given that BB had been drafting the position from day one of his tenure, I think it's pretty darned easy to claim it took several years.



Seeing as how drafting is not the only way to try stocking positions, I'll just note our disagreements and leave it at that.

A salient point. You have a solid basis for your criticism of the drafting. I would just point out -- and I believe the point you make -- is that the draft and success on the field is not a 1:1 relationship. BB's draft failing has not necessarily been a failure to field a good to decent product.

 

[Deus Irae]

A salient point. You have a solid basis for your criticism of the drafting. I would just point out -- and I believe the point you make -- is that the draft and success on the field is not a 1:1 relationship. BB's draft failing has not necessarily been a failure to field a good to decent product.

I don't disagree with the bold in terms of the product as a whole, but the lousy drafting has been the primary reason for the years of failure in attempting to rebuild the secondary. It was a major reason for the failure in attempting to stock his TE position (this also had failed trades and FAs involved), as well. The failure with the DEs has been largely a trade/FA failure as opposed to a drafting failure, and the LB failure was all but exclusively a FA-oriented failure.

Also, the reality of the situation in NE is the same that it was in Indianapolis, which is that having an all-timer at QB masks or alleviates a lot of weaknesses elsewhere, making it more difficult to see just when something has finally become adequately rebuilt.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

I don't disagree with the bold in terms of the product as a whole, but the lousy drafting has been the primary reason for the years of failure in attempting to rebuild the secondary. It was a major reason for the failure in attempting to stock his TE position (this also had failed trades and FAs involved), as well. The failure with the DEs has been largely a trade/FA failure as opposed to a drafting failure, and the LB failure was all but exclusively a FA-oriented failure.

Also, the reality of the situation in NE is the same that it was in Indianapolis, which is that having an all-timer at QB masks or alleviates a lot of weaknesses elsewhere, making it more difficult to see just when something has finally become adequately rebuilt.

No doubt having a very effective QB will mask weaknesses that would otherwise result in less W's. It's been fairly obvious that the Patriot's offensive potency has masked their defensive insufficiency. I would expand that truth in two ways though: One, I wouldn't limit the comparison to Indy. This is, for the most part, a league wide constant especially for teams consistently hovering at the top (though not exclusively). Put an upper 20% tier QB on the Jets over the last 5 years and they probably are, at minimum, a consistent thorn in the side of the Patriots' division title chases.
Second, the 'how to mask weaknesses' equation isn't limited to a highly effective QB or not. In addition to having a highly effective QB, the Patriots defensive weaknesses have not resulted in additional losses because of preparation/planning/tactics. Put a lesser coach in charge of the 2012 Patriots and they, likely, are not playing in the AFCCG even with TFB. While that is speculation/a judgment call, I certainly believe BB's planning helps mask the weaknesses/gets the additional W's.
This is not to say it has been perfect because it hasn't (not BB the coach, certainly not BB the GM, and not TFB either). The Patriots success is a combination of having the two most important positions on a football team filled with two highly effective people. Both are required to consistently win with conspicuous weaknesses.

 

[DarrylS]

As much as I want to believe the premise of this thread... heard something yesterday on one of the talk shows, about how last year no first receiver caught more than 40 balls(too lazy to verify)....

OTOH if each of the three new receivers catch 40 balls, Amendola catches 80 balls, Vereen/Washington catch 80 and the tight ends catch 100.. that is 380 balls caught which is close to the 400 completed passes last year...

But I do think that these wide receivers are extremely good.....

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

As much as I want to believe the premise of this thread... heard something yesterday on one of the talk shows, about how last year no first receiver caught more than 40 balls(too lazy to verify)....

OTOH if each of the three new receivers catch 40 balls, Amendola catches 80 balls, Vereen/Washington catch 80 and the tight ends catch 100.. that is 380 balls caught which is close to the 400 completed passes last year...

But I do think that these wide receivers are extremely good.....

I hear ya. There has been exactly one training camp and one preseason game to make a judgment. That just ain't enough. It's way too early to believe anything other than 'there's some encouraging signs'. It's the same thing with Blount. He's all but declared a productive member of the team after only one, relatively small encouraging sign.
I like the optimistic path you laid out to a sufficient amount of total receptions. I'm certainly in favor of your plan

 

[mgteich]

Let's break this down. Your predictions include.

1) a 22 reduction in the number of receptions

2) a loss at TE of only 15 catches (without Hernandez and with Gronk out at the moment)

3) rookies (we can include Edelman) producing 10 more catches than the #2/#3/#4 receivers last year

4) Amendola catching 80 passes

5) An INCREASE by over 20 catches by the RB's
===============================

I would increase Amendola to 102 to match last year's totals.
===============================
The question is what is the likelihood of all of this happening, and what are the consequences of it not.

As much as I want to believe the premise of this thread... heard something yesterday on one of the talk shows, about how last year no first receiver caught more than 40 balls(too lazy to verify)....

OTOH if each of the three new receivers catch 40 balls, Amendola catches 80 balls, Vereen/Washington catch 80 and the tight ends catch 100.. that is 380 balls caught which is close to the 400 completed passes last year...

But I do think that these wide receivers are extremely good.....

 

[Bruins29]

Well we did win a couple of super bowls with teams that did not have a guy over 60 receptions. Granted the defenses of those teams were elite but the O still put up points when it had to.

The D is hopefully re-surging. Amendola and Gronk are upgrades over what we had then (and who knows what you get from the 4 rookies) We now clearly have a superior running game to one of those SB years.

I think we may just be heading back to a much more balanced situation where you get production from many players instead of focusing on one or two particular weapons. It worked well in the past.

 

[Deus Irae]

Let's break this down. Your predictions include.

1) a 22 reduction in the number of receptions

2) a loss at TE of only 15 catches (without Hernandez and with Gronk out at the moment)

3) rookies (we can include Edelman) producing 10 more catches than the #2/#3/#4 receivers last year

4) Amendola catching 80 passes

5) An INCREASE by over 20 catches by the RB's
===============================

I would increase Amendola to 102 to match last year's totals.
===============================
The question is what is the likelihood of all of this happening, and what are the consequences of it not.

The numbers on their own are meaningless. It's the impact of the numbers that's going to matter.

Hell, the real issue is going to probably be the same as it's been for the last several seasons: the health of the team during the playoffs. That's the luxury of having TFB and BB.*


*I'm minimizing the impact of talent a bit in order to emphasize just how significant I think the coach/QB duo is in New England. It does matter if Welker's more talented than Amendola or vice versa, etc..., but the Brady/BB duo makes that sort of question really only matter in high end situations where all other things are equal.

 

[mgteich]

I'm fine if it doesn't matter to you whether we complete 300 passes or 400 and who will be the receivers. That choice is yours. There are others who are interested.

And yes, health in the playoffs is always critical. Perhaps we should stop discussing the depth of the team (or anything at all) until we get the playoff injury reports.

Numbers do matter. I agree that the impact is even more important. For example, there is an impact of expecting Amendola to catch 60 passes or 120. There is an impact of expecting Brady to complete 300 or 400 passes.

The numbers on their own are meaningless. It's the impact of the numbers that's going to matter.

Hell, the real issue is going to probably be the same as it's been for the last several seasons: the health of the team during the playoffs. That's the luxury of having TFB.

 

[Deus Irae]

I'm fine if it doesn't matter to you whether we complete 300 passes or 400 and who will be the receivers. That choice is yours. There are others who are interested.

And yes, health in the playoffs is always critical. Perhaps we should stop discussing the depth of the team (or anything at all) until we get the playoff injury reports.

Numbers do matter. I agree that the impact is even more important. For example, there is an impact of expecting Amendola to catch 60 passes or 120. There is an impact of expecting Brady to complete 300 or 400 passes.

If Amendola has 200 catches but the team loses 8 games, the 200 catches were basically useless. but the team goes If Ridley gains 2000 yards, but he's only running in the 4th quarter with the Patriots up by 21 points, his 2000 yards don't mean anything. If Brady passes for 6000 yards, but it's because the team kept falling behind on the way to an 8-8 season, the 6000 yards won't be worth a damn.

What matters is the impact. The numbers, on their own, don't mean anything, because there are too many variables left unaccounted for.

 

[patsfan13]

One aspect of this equation being overlooked, ile Welker's YAC was pretty good the YAC of the other WR's was awful IIRC. Given the increase in speed on the out side I see no reason while the Yards per completion and YAC won't be higher than last year.

So while the total numbers of completions may be lower the total yards could be the same or greater.

My interest is whether this Offense will have the versatility, upside, (and yes ) health to excel in the playoff's against good D's.

 

[fgssand]

I'm with you on all three evaluations. Thompkins may have the lowest ceiling of the three, but he's playing at the highest level right now, and that matters a whole lot. When you're talking about young guys, people fall in love with ceiling way too much, seemingly forgetting that most players never reach theirs. Whatever Thompkins' ceiling is, he's a good player right now, and that's something that you should gladly trade a good deal of ceiling for. I believe that he can become a legitimate starter in the NFL.

Dobson has the highest ceiling, but he needs to be more physical, run better routes, and improve his hands a bit in order to reach that ceiling. I think he'll be good enough to contribute this year, but at the moment Thompkins looks like the more polished player.

Boyce is the wildcard, for me. Seems like he only has one real weakness in his game, but unfortunately it's a really important one. He's great at getting open, but needs to get a lot better at catching the ball. Of the three, he's the one with the highest odds of amounting to nothing, IMO, but at the same time his ceiling is also pretty high.

The only weakness I have heard about with Boyce is blocking inexperience.......he seems to catch the ball quite well from what I have seen at training camp as well as all the draft reports I read.

I have been to about 7 practices this year and I have rated thompkins and Dobson as 1a and 1b with Boyce a really close 2a. Also, Sudfeld has done nothing but catch everything thrown his way and looks really solid out there.

I really hate to get too excited because its so early in the season and they are rookies, but, we really may have something quite special going on here this year with these four rookies.

By the way DA looks really good as well, I won't say he is better than welker, but, he is younger, bigger, faster and can get open on the outside.

 

[mgteich]

We have 4 receivers on the field at a time (between WR and TE's). Amendola, Dobson/Thompkins and 2 TE's will likely be the base set. All 3 will be out there when we play 1 TE. Absent injuries, there is little room for Boyce to get reps. He is likely to be inactive. When was the last time that the #4 WR receiver had lots of reps? This is especially relevant given the TE talent on the roster.

The only weakness I have heard about with Boyce is blocking inexperience.......he seems to catch the ball quite well from what I have seen at training camp as well as all the draft reports I read.

I have been to about 7 practices this year and I have rated thompkins and Dobson as 1a and 1b with Boyce a really close 2a. Also, Sudfeld has done nothing but catch everything thrown his way and looks really solid out there.

I really hate to get too excited because its so early in the season and they are rookies, but, we really may have something quite special going on here this year with these four rookies.

By the way DA looks really good as well, I won't say he is better than welker, but, he is younger, bigger, faster and can get open on the outside.

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

Very excited to see the WRs again tonight. Will be excited all year. Dobson, Boyce, Amendola and Thompkins all have great excitement with them. Can't wait to see them again tonight. Should be playing a lot tonight

 

[Joker]

Very excited to see the WRs again tonight. Will be excited all year. Dobson, Boyce, Amendola and Thompkins all have great excitement with them. Can't wait to see them again tonight. Should be playing a lot tonight

Warren Zevon - Excitable Boy - YouTube

 

[AzPatsFan]

I don't disagree with the bold in terms of the product as a whole, but the lousy drafting has been the primary reason for the years of failure in attempting to rebuild the secondary. It was a major reason for the failure in attempting to stock his TE position (this also had failed trades and FAs involved), as well. The failure with the DEs has been largely a trade/FA failure as opposed to a drafting failure, and the LB failure was all but exclusively a FA-oriented failure.

Also, the reality of the situation in NE is the same that it was in Indianapolis, which is that having an all-timer at QB masks or alleviates a lot of weaknesses elsewhere, making it more difficult to see just when something has finally become adequately rebuilt.

DI,

You are so sure that you could do a much better job than Belichick you are letting it color your judgement. You are making a fool of yourself. Patching the WRs, or other squads like the DTs, with a couple of late picks, and a few scrub veterans is NOT rebuilding. It is making do while your real attention is elsewhere.

Adding Kelly, or a 6th and 7th rounder is NOT rebuilding the DTs. It is patching until you can address the job thoroughly.

No matter how you try, BB has rebuilt the team with only 2 players left from the SB clubs, Tom and Vince. He has never won less than 10 games a season while doing it, and did it in 4 years, even making a SB appearance with an obviously weak club, with glaring holes.

Rebuilding the secondary includes finding a minimum of 10 or more likely a dozen players capable of playing in ther NFL. It is NOT a one year project.

 

[JoeSixPat]

I think it's safe to lock the the "Bring Back Brandon Lloyd" threads now!

 

[303PatsFan]

I think it's safe to lock the the "Bring Back Brandon Lloyd" threads now!

Why so? IMO, the receivers are doing just fine.