Scouts Inc. casts critical eye on Pats' draft strategy

[BradyFTW!]

I LOVE how the microscope is on the Patriots screwing up...as if THEY are teh only team that does....OR that there is ANY REAL HANDLE on the draft at all....SInce the era of heavy draft analysis the late Buschbaum..Kiper...it's been some 25 years I believe...a LOT of data..analysis...and STILL it's a real hit or miss situation..TOO MANY intangibles here..IF there was someone who HAD all this down to anything close to a science they'd be working for an NFL team...Easy to look back and be critical..HARDER to really get into the mind heart of any of these young players and see what WILL happen..if drafted. I think BB does a solid job employing many strategies..many things..and of course there are misses. EVERY club has them. And it's quite different drafting in the LOWER parts of the first round than the top ten every year like the perennial losing franchises, who have higher picks and do NOT improve.

Amnorix has a reasonable point. The Pats have missed on a pretty large number of first-day picks in the last couple of years: even a Pats apologist like myself has to admit that. More importantly, though, their hits have tended to be singles or doubles rather than home runs. I don't think that Maroney was a bad pick or a bust, for example, but we definitely didn't knock it out of the park with him.

Our best picks since 2005 have been Mayo and Meriweather: two borderline-Pro Bowl talents (for now) who were picked in the first round and have some consistency issues. I'm confident that that will get sorted out, though, and that they will continue to improve. And I have a lot of optimism that last year's draft and this year's will really rejuvenate the team's attitude and talent level.

 

[Sicilian]

I think the two sides here are arguing two different angles... those who agree with the article are saying "trading down is not always a good thing", and those opposing them are hearing "it's never a good idea to trade down." I don't think that's anyone's argument.

I think it's been shown that the Pats have employed all three tactics in the last decade (trading up, trading down, and staying put) and have had mixed results with all three. Thus the only thing that can be argued is the timing of each move. Looking at each individual case, the debate can rage as to whether that was a smart place to trade down or not.

 

[Deus Irae]

Yes, but the whole reason why they had the #7 pick to trade down was because they traded out of the previous draft to get the 49ers' 2008 first rounder. So even if you are inclined to ignore the 7-to-10 trade down, you still have to account for the initial one that got them the high pick in the first place.

Entirely different purposes. One is trading out of a draft the team didn't like, the others are trading down in the same draft to choose from a pool of players they do like.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I LOVE how the microscope is on the Patriots screwing up...as if THEY are teh only team that does....OR that there is ANY REAL HANDLE on the draft at all....SInce the era of heavy draft analysis the late Buschbaum..Kiper...it's been some 25 years I believe...a LOT of data..analysis...and STILL it's a real hit or miss situation..TOO MANY intangibles here..IF there was someone who HAD all this down to anything close to a science they'd be working for an NFL team...Easy to look back and be critical..HARDER to really get into the mind heart of any of these young players and see what WILL happen..if drafted. I think BB does a solid job employing many strategies..many things..and of course there are misses. EVERY club has them. And it's quite different drafting in the LOWER parts of the first round than the top ten every year like the perennial losing franchises, who have higher picks and do NOT improve.

Williamson has been scouting football players at different levels for six years. Before joining ESPN and Scouts Inc. in 2005, he was both an NFL and college scout for the Cleveland Browns. Before that, he spent three seasons as assistant recruiting coordinator at the University of Pittsburgh and followed J.D. Brookhart from Pitt to the University of Akron, where Williamson was the director of football operations.

Sounds like this guy had a whole year as an NFL scout and in Cleveland under RAC's predecessor before ESPN tapped him... Prior to that he was a college recruiter scouting HS athletes. Maybe one day he will have a shot at developing his own pro drafting strategy, although I wouldn't hold my breath. I bet if that happens Bill won't critique it, even though he'd at least be overqualified to... Scouts don't often understand teambuilding, particularly when they come out of college where talent turns over annually and to a large extent talent wins. Even though much of it doesn't project well at the next level. Our scouts are taught how to evaluate talent to project for the pros for this specific system and scheme. We generally don't rate or rank players the way generic scouting services do. Despite that, the resentment of our methodology by all the generic gurus is palpable...

 

[Pats726]

Sounds like this guy had a whole year as an NFL scout and in Cleveland under RAC's predecessor before ESPN tapped him... Prior to that he was a college recruiter scouting HS athletes. Maybe one day he will have a shot at developing his own pro drafting strategy, although I wouldn't hold my breath. I bet if that happens Bill won't critique it, even though he'd at least be overqualified to... Scouts don't often understand teambuilding, particularly when they come out of college where talent turns over annually and to a large extent talent wins. Even though much of it doesn't project well at the next level. Our scouts are taught how to evaluate talent to project for the pros for this specific system and scheme. We generally don't rate or rank players the way generic scouting services do. Despite that, the resentment of our methodology by all the generic gurus is palpable...

Great points on this...and some insight into Mr Williamson as well.

 

[IcyPatriot]

Other than the QB position ... if it can be proven that draft stars = Super Bowls then they have a point. So what team in the last say 10-20 years has won a SB based on the stars they drafted at the top of the draft?

Draft high and pay high draft super stars?

Draft for value ans sign super stars as FA's.

I don't think Scouts inc. can make a valid argument based solely on the draft. Belichick himself has said the draft is just a piece of the player acquisition puzzle. We won 3 SB's with a combination of good drafting and good FA signings.

 

[signbabybrady]

Entirely different purposes. One is trading out of a draft the team didn't like, the others are trading down in the same draft to choose from a pool of players they do like.

I understand there is a difference between trading down and trading out but what I don't get it is what is your logic to ignoring one and focusing on the other?

Seems to me that it has been very common for one to lead to the other. Example we traded back a few times this year twice in the first RD and another time in the second (others as well) and we were able to get two picks in the third plus some out of the moves which then allowed us to trade one into the next season. To me it is pretty simple they went in with 4 picks in the top 54 or so and wound up with 4 picks in top 64 or so and two picks they didn't originally have one in the third and a two next year.

While your statement that the later a pick the less likely for success is obviously accurate but I would imagine the difference in success of the top 54 picks compared to the top 64 is very negliglible and well worth the risk of picking up that many extra picks.

 

[signbabybrady]

IMO anyone who really criticizes the strategy is just a fan who is annoyed by constantly having the tease of the Patritos are on the clock (and seeing talent X) only to see Trade across the banner or Media pandering to this crowd.

again I am not saying BB is infallable but I am saying is that the criticism on any of the bad picks between 06-08 should go to other areas - the scouts, the people making the picks, the general talent in each draft but not a philisophy thats results are so evident its ridiculous.

 

[BSR]

And you're welcome to do so. I continue to maintain that the article offers a legitimate argument. And there we stand.

You've done a lousy job of defending that position but go right ahead.

 

[Marqui]

IMO anyone who really criticizes the strategy is just a fan who is annoyed by constantly having the tease of the Patritos are on the clock (and seeing talent X) only to see Trade across the banner or Media pandering to this crowd.

again I am not saying BB is infallable but I am saying is that the criticism on any of the bad picks between 06-08 should go to other areas - the scouts, the people making the picks, the general talent in each draft but not a philisophy thats results are so evident its ridiculous.

Thats what I'm thinking too.

 

[Amnorix]

I LOVE how the microscope is on the Patriots screwing up...as if THEY are teh only team that does....OR that there is ANY REAL HANDLE on the draft at all....SInce the era of heavy draft analysis the late Buschbaum..Kiper...it's been some 25 years I believe...a LOT of data..analysis...and STILL it's a real hit or miss situation..TOO MANY intangibles here..IF there was someone who HAD all this down to anything close to a science they'd be working for an NFL team...Easy to look back and be critical..HARDER to really get into the mind heart of any of these young players and see what WILL happen..if drafted.

I agree with all of this. I think it is also why, in part, BB stocks up on draft picks. If you're more than likely going to hit at a 50% rate with, say, picks in the first three rounds, then better to hit at 50% with 6 picks per year than with 3.

I think BB does a solid job employing many strategies..many things..and of course there are misses. EVERY club has them. And it's quite different drafting in the LOWER parts of the first round than the top ten every year like the perennial losing franchises, who have higher picks and do NOT improve.

I agree, and it's not my habit or practice to be overly critical. I don't expect every pick to succeed because that is unrealistic. There is, however, little doubt that the picks actually made in the 2005, '06 and '07 drafts were largely ineffective, especially after the first round. You can forgive '07 as many picks were traded for players like Welker and Moss, and BB has himself said that the '07 draft was very weak, but that still leaves '05 and '06. Those weak drafts sewed the seeds of the failure of the '09 campaign in particular, as those players would be in their prime as third and fourth year players now.

So I don't think it's unfair to say that the Patriots had some mediocre drafts in those years. Hopefully, they have made the adjustments necessary, or otherwise taken actions, to try to improve their player evaluations so that future drafts are better. Certainly '09 seemed to be a significant improvement, and I'm very hopeful for '10 as well.

 

[Amnorix]

Amnorix has a reasonable point. The Pats have missed on a pretty large number of first-day picks in the last couple of years: even a Pats apologist like myself has to admit that. More importantly, though, their hits have tended to be singles or doubles rather than home runs. I don't think that Maroney was a bad pick or a bust, for example, but we definitely didn't knock it out of the park with him.

Our best picks since 2005 have been Mayo and Meriweather: two borderline-Pro Bowl talents (for now) who were picked in the first round and have some consistency issues. I'm confident that that will get sorted out, though, and that they will continue to improve. And I have a lot of optimism that last year's draft and this year's will really rejuvenate the team's attitude and talent level.

I agree with all of this except that the comments on the Maroney pick. I wouldn't call him a bust, but it's a weak single at best (to borrow your anology). It looks far worse when you analyze the RBs that went after him -- DeAngelo Williams (1st), Joseph Addai (1st), Maurice Jones-Drew (2nd), Leon Washington (4th). There were some other less than spectacular picks at RB before the 4th, certainly, but just among the "top prospects" at RB, it's clear that Maroney wasn't the best choice for the Patriots.

 

[Gator Mike]

*Bump*

I was looking for something else when I ran across this and chuckled.

Has there been a better rookie class in the NFL than this one? Nice job in April, BB. I'm thrilled with the production we're getting from our young guys.

 

[DarrylS]

*Bump*

I was looking for something else when I ran across this and chuckled.

Has there been a better rookie class in the NFL than this one? Nice job in April, BB. I'm thrilled with the production we're getting from our young guys.

To say the least, this is an outstanding draft class...

Two years after Pioli left, who would've thunk..

Our front office is a "system front office".....

 

[IllegalContact]

well....I can say that for the jets, the drafting of gholston and sanchez is going to set them back for a very long time

 

[Uncle Rico]

I thought it was kind of silly when people ripped the Pats for all their draft-day trading this year. I mean, they made all their picks -- 12 of them (some lower than originally set, some higher). AND they added what now looks like the 33rd pick this year.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

They were correct in their very specific criticisms about not upgrading the pass rush in the draft and that the Patriots had a relatively ordinary running back lineup, by NFL standards, following the past draft. They couldn't have foreseen the development of BJGE (even many here wanted him cut) and of course Woodhead was a Jet.

They obviously whiffed on the idea that no "difference makers" can be had by the trade down philosophy, and even in identifying all of the recent difference makers, which would have to include Vollmer and Chung as well. I have hopes to someday add Tate and Brace to that list of difference makers too.

In this draft it's looking like McCourty, Gronkowski, Hernandez, and Mesko are already difference makers and perhaps Cunningham and Spikes are on the cusp.

The past two drafts, and the next one, is going to set the table for the next 5 years and there is nobody I'd rather have "picking the groceries" than BB.

 

[ausbacker]

There's been some epic bumps in the past few days.

 

[Fencer]

Probably the number of guys in the league regarded by the original author as "difference makers" is a couple hundred. Number of those drafted the past few years? Low 10s, tops. So by that standard, if you count no more than one of Mayo, Meriweather, Gost, and Vollmer, Pats weren't doing great in their recent drafts -- but if you count even one, and look at their draft position, they weren't doing badly at all.

McCourty, however, he'd probably concede in retrospect is a difference-maker. Gronkowski perhaps as well.

It was a good draft.

And that's even before we note that the past couple of weeks, the defense has been playing pretty well despite lacking much in the way of "difference-making" talent.

 

[JackBauer]

I dunno. We're 11-2 with a bevy of talented youth at key positions and we have seven picks in the first four rounds of next year's draft. Assuming we don't bust on those picks and assuming the sterling 2009-10 draft picks continue to develop, BB and his draft strategy have the Patriots positioned for a few years of postseason runs in the peak of Brady's career.

Of course if you want to go all Captain Hindsight there are questionable picks in BB's quiver, but it happens to the best of them. Just look at the poop Bill Polian has reeled in in recent years.