I didn't mean to be critical of the Pats. I was only providing the numbers that I have for the AFCE in answer to Darryl's question about the drafting of players. I'm perfectly happy with the results, as all Pats fans should be also.
I don't agree though that going 3/3, 3/7 or 3/10 is the same. If the Pats are trading down to acquire more picks they are technically leaving better players on the table.
Here is a hypothetical that might help explain why 3/3 = 3/7 = 3/10.
Before that, let's keep in mind that 32 teams draft 256 players, or on average eight per team.
Team A trades up, and rather then 8 draft picks they end up with three.
One turns out to be an above average, pro bowl caliber player.
One turns out to be a starter, but not pro bowl caliber.
One turns out to be a backup.
Team B does not trade at all, and their compensatory pick nets zero (7 picks).
One turns out to be an above average, pro bowl caliber player.
One turns out to be a starter, but not pro bowl caliber.
One turns out to be a backup.
Two land on the practice squad, but never make the game day roster.
Two are released.
Team C trades down and ends up with ten picks.
One turns out to be an above average, pro bowl caliber player.
One turns out to be a starter, but not pro bowl caliber.
One turns out to be a backup.
Three land on the practice squad, but never make the game day roster.
Four are released.
In terms of number of pro bowl caliber players, the result for each team was the same.
In terms of number of starting players, the result for each team was the same.
In terms of backups, the result for each team was the same.
In spite of those identical results, there is a wide variance in the percentage of 'hits' and 'misses'.
To me the goal is to obtain as many contributors as possible. That is why I would much prefer to look at the raw number of hits, and dismiss the number of misses or percentage of hits or misses.
Hope that makes sense to all.