The economic pinciple behind Belichick's drafting system

[convertedpatsfan]

With the draft now over, we can see the interest gained from the principle.

The Pats started the draft with 9 picks, 2 each in the first 3 rounds.

The Pats ended up using 9 picks, 5 picks in the first 3 rounds. They have another #1 for next year, plus moved what amounted to their late 4th-rounder for Oakland's 2012 2nd.

Burning the extra 1st, 2nd, and 3rd this year like many wanted would have resulted in only 1 extra 1st-round pick, with nothing for the future.

 

[NEGoldenAge]

It is worth noting the tremendous flexibility to move around the draft when you have so many picks.

 

[condon84]

You're right that not all needs were addressed. But calling Nate Solder, Gosselin's 13th overall player, a developmental LT, is a stretch. Saying Mallett is full of question marks without mentioning that he dominated SEC competition in a pro-style offense, BB couldn't wear him out in film study, and that he will likely have the strongest arm in the NFL, shows you have an Agenda. And Vereen and Dowling were taken within 13 slots of their Gosselin ranking and likely would've been gone before the next Patriots pick. Why don't you mention that Malllett was taken 34 slots AFTER his Gosselin rannking??

Ridley was a reach, but BB wanted to make the trade with the raiders and thought Ridley would be gone by the 5th, so he pulled the trigger. Again, this is a player than ran for 15 TDs in the SEC last year.

I think Soder's going to turn out to be a good player. Vereen and Dowling as well. I'm sure going to try to convince myself regardless cause that's what fans do. So I have nothing against these guys. My only problem with this draft was that the main weakness of our team was a lack of pass rush. We had 6 picks within the first three rounds and we did not use a single pick to address the situation for the future. Yes, I don't expect a rookie OLB to make an immediate impact, but what about two years, three years from now? Are we going to keep making the same excuses for the Pats why they shouldn't draft a player within the first two rounds that they can develop to play OLB? Cunningham showed glimpses last year that he's got the athletic ability to become an impact player for us. You only get these kinds of athletes within the first two rounds. The Pats had ample ammunition go get another one or two, yet we get two RBs instead (these are the picks that are pissing me off more than anything). One of these guys we could have had in the third round and the other guy way later, or might have gone undrafted. We already have two solid young guys (Benny and Woodhead), why not get a vet or two to replace Fred? It's not like the lack of RBs killed us last year when Fred and Kevin got hurt.

 

[AzPatsFan]

I think Soder's going to turn out to be a good player. Vereen and Dowling as well. I'm sure going to try to convince myself regardless cause that's what fans do. So I have nothing against these guys. My only problem with this draft was that the main weakness of our team was a lack of pass rush. We had 6 picks within the first three rounds and we did not use a single pick to address the situation for the future. Yes, I don't expect a rookie OLB to make an immediate impact, but what about two years, three years from now? Are we going to keep making the same excuses for the Pats why they shouldn't draft a player within the first two rounds that they can develop to play OLB? Cunningham showed glimpses last year that he's got the athletic ability to become an impact player for us. You only get these kinds of athletes within the first two rounds. The Pats had ample ammunition go get another one or two, yet we get two RBs instead (these are the picks that are pissing me off more than anything). One of these guys we could have had in the third round and the other guy way later, or might have gone undrafted. We already have two solid young guys (Benny and Woodhead), why not get a vet or two to replace Fred? It's not like the lack of RBs killed us last year when Fred and Kevin got hurt.

If you say go get a RB in FA what is wrong with getting an experienced OLB in FA, instead?

 

[DarrylS]

With the draft now over, we can see the interest gained from the principle.

The Pats started the draft with 9 picks, 2 each in the first 3 rounds.

The Pats ended up using 9 picks, 5 picks in the first 3 rounds. They have another #1 for next year, plus moved what amounted to their late 4th-rounder for Oakland's 2012 2nd.

Burning the extra 1st, 2nd, and 3rd this year like many wanted would have resulted in only 1 extra 1st-round pick, with nothing for the future.

That pretty much sums up the economy of BB's draft... none of these guys have to contribute on 9/12... but most can play a future role late in the season and next year.

Then next draft we have plenty of capital to wheel and deal if the situation presents itself...

 

[townes]

I think more than anything what Belichik has created with this draft strategy is leverage and flexibility every draft, and he's never dealing from weakness. I would have bet the house that he would trade their #33 but he didn't despite reports he was fielding all sorts of offers for it. I'm guessing it came down more to staying the line in demanding a 1st next year in return than wanting Dowling so badly they turned away all offers to pick him at #33. And while teams trying to trade up to that spot may have ended up getting the player they wanted without the move Belichik still sets it up so that if they really want a player in future draft's and need to deal with him they know he's not folding for less than what he really wants, and that pays off over the long term. And regardless of what he did in this draft he is always setting himself up to make the moves he wants in each draft as he has the capital to make them with.


I wanted them to go a different route in this draft but get completely why he went the way he did in it. Even though we may want front seven on defense it makes little sense to go there when the top player at need for other positions are on the board, and going offense when the rest of the league is going defense leaves you picking the best talent at their positions while others battle for the same players. Additionally Belichik has said in the pasy that he not only stacks draftees against their class but against his roster, and if he doesn't think they will beat out the player he already has on his roster then he's passing them by, and as much as we all want front 7 he apparently likes much of what he has at those positions and doesn't see this class beating them out. i think he added at least 4 prospects who will start for them in the near future and thought taking mallett was the right thing to do given his standing on their draft board and the value of a good QB prospect. They continued to replenish for the next draft and other than no pass rusher, which can be addressed in free agency, got the most out of this draft.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

I think more than anything what Belichik has created with this draft strategy is leverage and flexibility every draft, and he's never dealing from weakness. I would have bet the house that he would trade their #33 but he didn't despite reports he was fielding all sorts of offers for it. I'm guessing it came down more to staying the line in demanding a 1st next year in return than wanting Dowling so badly they turned away all offers to pick him at #33. And while teams trying to trade up to that spot may have ended up getting the player they wanted without the move Belichik still sets it up so that if they really want a player in future draft's and need to deal with him they know he's not folding for less than what he really wants, and that pays off over the long term. And regardless of what he did in this draft he is always setting himself up to make the moves he wants in each draft as he has the capital to make them with.


I wanted them to go a different route in this draft but get completely why he went the way he did in it. Even though we may want front seven on defense it makes little sense to go there when the top player at need for other positions are on the board, and going offense when the rest of the league is going defense leaves you picking the best talent at their positions while others battle for the same players. Additionally Belichik has said in the pasy that he not only stacks draftees against their class but against his roster, and if he doesn't think they will beat out the player he already has on his roster then he's passing them by, and as much as we all want front 7 he apparently likes much of what he has at those positions and doesn't see this class beating them out. i think he added at least 4 prospects who will start for them in the near future and thought taking mallett was the right thing to do given his standing on their draft board and the value of a good QB prospect. They continued to replenish for the next draft and other than no pass rusher, which can be addressed in free agency, got the most out of this draft.

Good points. I think the one about stacking the kids against his existing roster is also key. I think one of the elite guys like a JJ Watt or Dareus could start for us. But guys like Cam Heyward or Wilkerson were basically big guys who fit, not much pass rush, but could hold their own against the run. Are they really upgrades over Ron Brace or Brandon Deaderick then? My feeling is if an elite front 7 guy dropped, we would have taken him, but there was a run on DL and none of those guys presented upgrades to our existing cast. Though I thought we might move up a few when Fairley was dropping, but maybe character was a major issue there.

 

[Uncle Rico]

With the draft now over, we can see the interest gained from the principle.

The Pats started the draft with 9 picks, 2 each in the first 3 rounds.

The Pats ended up using 9 picks, 5 picks in the first 3 rounds. They have another #1 for next year, plus moved what amounted to their late 4th-rounder for Oakland's 2012 2nd.

Burning the extra 1st, 2nd, and 3rd this year like many wanted would have resulted in only 1 extra 1st-round pick, with nothing for the future.

This is a point I've made before: For all the talk of BB "trading out" of drafts, the team had 21 picks going into the last two drafts combined, and came out have made 21 picks combined — PLUS adding what will probably be a low first and high/middle second in '12.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

This is a point I've made before: For all the talk of BB "trading out" of drafts, the team had 21 picks going into the last two drafts combined, and came out have made 21 picks combined — PLUS adding what will probably be a low first and high/middle second in '12.

It's absolutely incredible, especially when you consider where the picks are made. This isn't just a volume thing either; we've made 16 picks in the top 3 rounds over the past 3 drafts. Quantity AND quality picks. Even if every pick this year busts, we've picked up 6 starters and 4 potential starters already with those quality picks at the top of the previous 2 drafts.

 

[borg]

By the time the Jets and Dolphins made their second picks, the Pats had secured 5 players plus a 1st rounder in 2012. Are people seriously upset by the draft dividend advantage that BB has created. The depth on this roster will be this team's greatest asset now and well into the future, as long as the dividend is maintained.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Worth noting, 2 other teams already have 2 first round picks in 2012, Buffalo and SD. A few more may be added to that list if the league year ever starts...And Bedard believes the Patriots leaked the possible Mallett selection to NFLN in order to gauge interest. Apparently Miami took the bait but didn't offer enough. Mallett and Hoyer are both here for the same reason. To develop into sufficient quality QB's to back up Brady for a season or two and then be potentially be flipped paying higher dividends. There is more than one way to achieve value...if you're investing for the long haul.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

Worth noting, 2 other teams already have 2 first round picks in 2012, Buffalo and SD. A few more may be added to that list if the league year ever starts...And Bedard believes the Patriots leaked the possible Mallett selection to NFLN in order to gauge interest. Apparently Miami took the bait but didn't offer enough. Mallett and Hoyer are both here for the same reason. To develop into sufficient quality QB's to back up Brady for a season or two and then be potentially be flipped paying higher dividends. There is more than one way to achieve value...if you're investing for the long haul.

That makes sense. I was surprised by the Mallett pick, but even more surprised that NFLN was reporting it well before the pick was made.

And you're right on about investing for the long haul. It's one of the luxuries of having a stable FO with a vision towards staying competitive every year.

 

[Seacoast Fan]

The "economic principle" is right, only to a certain point. The interest you earn on a bank account...dollar bills...is fungible. Players are not. The economic principle assumes that a first round pick and a second round pick next year are worth more than a first round pick this year, and always will be, and thus, if you can keep doing that deal year after year, its great, since you get that second round pick as "interest." But, if your team needs a QB THIS YEAR and the first round pick you could have taken (to use an extreme example, admittedly) is Peyton Manning or Aaron Rogers, but you trade that pick away and take some guy ...QB or not... in next year's second round who washes out....then the principle has "worked" but at the same time you have failed your team.
So, while I understand the concept, and it works if the goal is always to have an extra second round pick, then great. But, I am a bit sceptical and I personally think that at some point, it is better to actually use that extra first round pick.
Now, having said all that, in BB I trust.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

The "economic principle" is right, only to a certain point. The interest you earn on a bank account...dollar bills...is fungible. Players are not. The economic principle assumes that a first round pick and a second round pick next year are worth more than a first round pick this year, and always will be, and thus, if you can keep doing that deal year after year, its great, since you get that second round pick as "interest." But, if your team needs a QB THIS YEAR and the first round pick you could have taken (to use an extreme example, admittedly) is Peyton Manning or Aaron Rogers, but you trade that pick away and take some guy ...QB or not... in next year's second round who washes out....then the principle has "worked" but at the same time you have failed your team.
So, while I understand the concept, and it works if the goal is always to have an extra second roound pick, then great. But, I am a bit sceptical and I personally think that at some point, it is better to actually use that extra first round pick.
Nww, having said all that, in BB I trust.

The goal is not to have an extra 1st or an extra 2nd, but rather to make the best move for the team. It just so happens that the irrationality that develops in the draft allows for great deals to be had.

The equation is balanced on what you are getting vs. what you could get. Classic example was #33, where we had trade offers but none were worth more than what we felt we could get with the player chosen.

The philosophy isn't to trade down whenever possible, or else we would have done so with #33. Nor is it to maximize each individual transaction in a vacuum without consideration of player values. For example, we took less on the deal with Houston to pick up extra picks that we would later spin to the Raiders for their 2nd next year. We could have made that deal anyways, but we wanted to take Ridley and Mallett. We took less in one deal to maximize the value of another deal while still taking two prospects we wanted.