This Rant - The Same As The Last

[Joker]

Mincey didn't stick with the Pats but he's played very well for the Jags...it took the sixth round pick four years to develop...don't think I'd throw BB under the bus for THAT pick

 

[Deus Irae]

How did you decide on the particular span of years 2006-9?

Contract expiration of first round picks and a need for 3 years post-draft to be fair. Going back to '05 (Sanders/Hobbs/Claridge) would be unfair. Plus, the discussion was mostly about that stretch in time anyway.


Here's 2010

McCourty
Cunningham
Spikes
Deaderick
Weston


From the looks of that, McCourty and Spikes would seem likely to stick around, which would give at least a 40% hit rate on that draft, and would improve the overall, but only slightly, to 6/24 (25%), assuming Brace makes the cut next year. Weston's gone and I think it's safety to put Deaderick and Cunningham in the "questionable" category and leave them out for the moment.

 

[Deus Irae]

Mincey didn't stick with the Pats but he's played very well for the Jags...it took the sixth round pick four years to develop...don't think I'd throw BB under the bus for THAT pick

Belichick has made a point about how the team drafts specifically for his system. Therefore, when talking about a general draft success (for example, when talking draft success with another team's fans), I'll include players like Mincey, Larsen, etc..., but when talking about the specific issues with the team, I view those players as misses. It doesn't matter that Mincey made it, because he didn't make it in the 'system' of New England.

 

[mgteich]

1) Consider which players are contributing in their 3rd year. The results would be somewhat different. The data could then go back past 2006. The hit rate would than be 50% or so, in the top rather than bottom of drafting teams, as most non-posting analysts believe of Belichick.

To consider a player a failure because a player isn't here 5 years later is about more than drafting.

2) Obviously, where a player is drafted is important.

3) For example, I would consider Sanders, Hobbs, Banta-Cain, and Meriweather to be draft successes, not draft failures.

4) To me, the much more serious problem is roster management.
Butler was a reasonable NUMBER FIVE corner for 2011, with the ability to be #3 or #4 if there were injuries, or the players ahead of him took longer to contribute than expected.

Sanders was a solid #3 safety (and certainly a solid #4), with the ability to start if those brought in were slow to produce or were injured.

One alternative is that Belichick is simply a poor judge of defensive back talent, and truly believed that their was not way that BOTH Barrett and Brown would not be better to START 2011 than Sanders. Of course, he also might believe that HIS coaching talent is so incredible that talent is irrelevant, and all that is needed is street free agents in the secondary.

BOTTOM LINE

Is it reasonable to not keep Bulter and Sanders? If EVERYTHING WORKED OUT, they would have been our #5 corner and #4 safety. Would this have been terrible?

Alternatively, one or both could have been cut, AFTER IT WAS CLEAR that Bodden, Dowling, Barrett AND Brown were all contributing, and no emergency backups in case of injury were needed.

This was NOT a salary cap issue. It was NOT a roster spot issue.

Were we posters all so unreasonable when we projected the following for many months?
CORNER: McCourty, Bodden, Arrington, Butler/Wilhite (pick one)
SAFETY: Chung, Barrett, Brown, Sanders/Meriweather (pick one)
DRAFTEE: draft one (might be a major contributer in 2011, more likely in 2012)

Would we really be a worse team with Butler and Sanders on the 53 as two of our 9 or 10 defensive backs?

Bodden and Barrett came back from injuries and weren't all we hoped them to be. These things happen. In the past, Belichick has succeeded party because of the depth of the team, and the willingness to keep veterans that other may not want. We did that this year on the defense line.

Contract expiration of first round picks and a need for 3 years post-draft to be fair. Going back to '05 (Sanders/Hobbs/Claridge) would be unfair. Plus, the discussion was mostly about that stretch in time anyway.


Here's 2010

McCourty
Cunningham
Spikes
Deaderick
Weston


From the looks of that, McCourty and Spikes would seem likely to stick around, which would give at least a 40% hit rate on that draft, and would improve the overall, but only slightly, to 6/24 (25%), assuming Brace makes the cut next year. Weston's gone and I think it's safety to put Deaderick and Cunningham in the "questionable" category and leave them out for the moment.

 

[DarrylS]

You are correct, because I made the mistake of posting from memory rather than just linking to an earlier post. Here's the data that I'd looked up and posted in another thread:

From 2006-2009, the Patriots drafted

Mincey
Andrews
Smith
Meriweather
Brown
Rogers
Richardson
Lua
Mayo
Wheatley
Crable
Wilhite
Ruud
Chung
Brace
Butler
McKenzie
Pryor
Richard

As defensive players. That's 19 picks from 2006-2009. Of the 19, only 4 are still with the team, and 1 (Brace) is certainly questionable as to whether he'll be sticking around.

I'd say that a 21% hit rate is poor talent evaluation. Perhaps you disagree.

Compared to what?? Alone sounds somber, but what does the long view show??

 

[Patriot Missile]

I love the Butler release. Not that the player bothered me as much as all the hateful threads about the guy. It was monotonous up until a week ago when now fan are realizing that Butler wasn't as bad as what we got now and the threads are coming back.

To be honest, Butler still sucks as a every down cb. I mean how he is better than McCourty or Arrington? Would the nickel or dime coveraqges be any better with Bodden or Butler still back there?

 

[mgteich]

EVERY DOWN BACK: Butler never was, is not, and will not be a dependable every down back, better than McCourty or Arrington.

NICKEL BACK
Bulter was an OK, but upgradable nickel back.

BOTTOM LINE
Butler would add to the quality of the team as one of three backup corners., wqith Molden and Adams.

#4, or #5 CORNER
Butler has always been useful as a dime or backup defensive back.

I love the Butler release. Not that the player bothered me as much as all the hateful threads about the guy. It was monotonous up until a week ago when now fan are realizing that Butler wasn't as bad as what we got now and the threads are coming back.

To be honest, Butler still sucks as a every down cb. I mean how he is better than McCourty or Arrington? Would the nickel or dime coveraqges be any better with Bodden or Butler still back there?

 

[Patriot Missile]

EVERY DOWN BACK: Butler never was, is not, and will not be a dependable every down back, better than McCourty or Arrington.

NICKEL BACK
Bulter was an OK, but upgradable nickel back.

BOTTOM LINE
Butler would add to the quality of the team as one of three backup corners., wqith Molden and Adams.

#4, or #5 CORNER
Butler has always been useful as a dime or backup defensive back.

Really? With my eyes I don't see much change from last year. I still see players giving up 10 yards to the WR. Anybody can do that including Adams or Molden. Scheme and the pass rush just aren't good enough no matter who you have back there. I want guys that can jam the receivers at the line of scrimmage once in awhile. We haven't seen that since Poole and Law.

 

[Ring 6]

Belichick changed his philosophy for 2011. He kicked out veteran depth BEFORE he knew that the replacements would work out.
==================================
Belichick had zero cap pressure. He chose not to keep Butler and Sanders as backup defensive backs. The alternative has been street free agents at those positions.

Butler was beaten out for his job.
Sanders has been a BB favorite. He showed up unable to praticipate in practice, then got on the field for extended play in a preseason game. Then he was cut. Sanders never had a dime thick room for error in athleticism. The decision appears to not have been about who was next up but that Sanders was just not going to help any more.

CORNER
Even if Dowling was productive in this rookie year AND Bodden returned 100% from his injuries, Butler would have been a reasonable choice as our #5 corner (and special teamer).

He was, and then Moulden was available and BB felt Moulden was better.

SAFETY
Even if Barrett was better than Page and Meriweather and Sanders, AND Brown was a solid #3 safety, Sanders is still good enough to be a solid backup.

See above. What BB saw of Sanders in camp said otherwise.

BOTTOM LINE
Sanders and Butler should have been on the 53-man roster. Our record may be no different at this point, but the quality of our defensive backfield for the rest of 2011 would be different, and this would be the case even if Bodden and Dowling were here.

I don't understand that logic. BB decided other players were better for this team. Sanders surely hasn't proven that wrong. Butler was a mess, and lost his job to Moulden.

Our 8 man defensive back group is a disgrace counting on Molden, Adams, Barrett, and Brown to back our "playoff quality" starters McCourty, Arrington, Chung and Ihedigbo. This is the worst Belichick secondary ever, and Belichick is buying the groceries, and was a secondary coach. This set of decisions is all on Belichick.

A DISGRACE? Worst ever? Last year was arguably worse, in fact we cut the guys who are gone in favor of the guys you call a disgrace.

Most sadly, this secondary is by choice. Belichick used lots of picks on the secondary. Belichick chose to say goodbye to Page, Meriweather, Sanders, Wilhite and Butler. Belichick chose not to spend to big bucks (or any bucks) on an additional defensive back.

He spent 'bucks' on adding Iedigbo, Barrett, and Moulden who beat out the guys he 'chose to say goodbye to.
Are you saying that with McCourty, Arrington, Bodden, Dowling and Butler and Wilhite also in camp that he should have been spending money at corner? Were you saying that then?

GOING FORWARD
We still are favored to get into the playoffs. We still have as good a chance as any AFC team to reach the SB.

I would note that bettors still have us as the havvy divvison favorite, the AFC favorite and the 2nd most likely team to win the Super Bowl.

Yes but they don't know we are a disgrace, right?

 

[Ring 6]

The main problem with this team, Bill has too much contol. He is not a good talent evaluator and fails to listen to his scouts. People say Bodden was a good cut because he was injury prone, guess what Bill went out and drafted the most injury prone DB in the 2nd round. Bill is a good coach when given talented players, he is not a good grocery shopper.

Please explain how this team built by the poor talent evaluator, essentially from scratch has been the most successful team for the last decade, and had one of the few greatest decades of any team in NFL history.

 

[Deus Irae]

Compared to what?? Alone sounds somber, but what does the long view show??

I don't know what you mean by "the long view", but the point really isn't that BB has sucked drafting since day one. The point is that the team's drafting, particularly on the defensive side of the ball, went from pulling in the Richard Seymours and Vince Wilforks of the world to pulling in almost nobody.

Here's the BB defensive draft list from 2001-2005, since I think it's fair to give BB a pass on that first year's draft....

Richard Seymour
Brock Williams
Hakim Akbar
Leonard Myers
T.J. Turner
Jarvis Green
Ty Warren
Eugene Wilson
Dan Klecko
Asante Samuel
Tully Banta-Cain
Ethan Kelley
Vince Wilfork
Marquise Hill
Gus Scott
Dexter Reid
Christian Morton
Ellis Hobbs
James Sanders
Ryan Claridge


20 picks, with a higher hit rate and more/better top end players (Seymour/Wilfork/Warren/Samuel v. Mayo). When you add in the players from previous years (Bruschi, etc...) and the solid veteran additions (Vrabel, Pfifer...) the defensive decline we've seen becomes not just understandable, but inevitable, IMO.

 

[mgteich]

I have no issue with the addition of special teamer Ihedigbo.
=======================================
We all have our opinions with regard to choosing Moulton, Adams and Barrett over Butler, Sanders and Page.

And no, I did not suggest adding anyone IN ADDITION to a healthy 6 corners of Bodden, McCourty, Arrington, Dowling, Butler and Wilhite. I suggested that we need five healthy corners and that Butler and Wilhite should compete of a spot. As with all rookie corners, I hoped that Dowling would be a serious contributer in his first year, but considered that unlikely. I considered him a fine #9, being able to play corner or safety. HOWEVER, if both Sanders and Butler were useless as backups at nickel and dime, then Belichick should have brought in additional players. We have Moulton and Adams. Apparently you think there was no one better in free agency than the two of them.

The issue is not choosing Barrett over Sanders. The issue is cutting Sanders before we had any clue that Barrett could produce and that Brown or Ihedigbo could be a solid backup.

We seem to think that Bodden and Dowling had freak injuries after season started. There was a serious question with regard to both being 100%, before the 53 man roster was set.
======
And yes, we will remember this thread when we consider how our secondary produces. We will count you as thinking that Moulton is a quality nickel. After all why else would be cut Butler AND Sanders AND Wilhite AND not bring in anyone else.

Butler was beaten out for his job.
Sanders has been a BB favorite. He showed up unable to praticipate in practice, then got on the field for extended play in a preseason game. Then he was cut. Sanders never had a dime thick room for error in athleticism. The decision appears to not have been about who was next up but that Sanders was just not going to help any more.


He was, and then Moulden was available and BB felt Moulden was better.


See above. What BB saw of Sanders in camp said otherwise.


I don't understand that logic. BB decided other players were better for this team. Sanders surely hasn't proven that wrong. Butler was a mess, and lost his job to Moulden.


A DISGRACE? Worst ever? Last year was arguably worse, in fact we cut the guys who are gone in favor of the guys you call a disgrace.


He spent 'bucks' on adding Iedigbo, Barrett, and Moulden who beat out the guys he 'chose to say goodbye to.
Are you saying that with McCourty, Arrington, Bodden, Dowling and Butler and Wilhite also in camp that he should have been spending money at corner? Were you saying that then?


Yes but they don't know we are a disgrace, right?

 

[goheels22002]

These draft evaluations in the absence of the context of trades and free agent signings are sort of like rating a restaurant on its appetizers without trying the entree and the dessert.

The biggest crapshoot in the whole roster building process is the draft. It's very difficult to know how a college kid who has been coddled his whole life will integrate into a pro football setting with the added dimension of handing him a gazillion dollars and living in a strange city.

The Patriots have had their share of hits and who knows what the percentage is that works? And what does it matter if the roster is XX% homegrown talent as long as the team is competitive?

Nobody in the league is as good as the Patriots at taking guys mid- to late-career and getting production out of them. There are hits and misses there, too, but think about guys like Junior Seau, Rodney Harrison, Mike Vrabel, Corey Dillon, Randy Moss, Wes Welker and Deion Branch II. There are many others.

Talent evaluation is best done in the addition-subtraction mode taking into account all the players that come and go in a given year or period. Belichick and his staff have done a fine job of that.

 

[Ring 6]

I have no issue with the addition of special teamer Ihedigbo.

He beat out Sanders for reserve safety.

=======================================

We all have our opinions with regard to choosing Moulton, Adams and Barrett over Butler, Sanders and Page.

And considering the circumstances there isnt much room in the most generous of analysis to criticize the difference.

And no, I did not suggest adding anyone IN ADDITION to a healthy 6 corners of Bodden, McCourty, Arrington, Dowling, Butler and Wilhite.

Your words:

Belichick chose not to spend to big bucks (or any bucks) on an additional defensive back.

Not sure how I could interpret that differently.

I suggested that we need five healthy corners and that Butler and Wilhite should compete of a spot.

They did, failed, and were cut.

As with all rookie corners, I hoped that Dowling would be a serious contributer in his first year, but considered that unlikely. I considered him a fine #9, being able to play corner or safety.

And when the season started BB considered him a starter.

HOWEVER, if both Sanders and Butler were useless as backups at nickel and dime, then Belichick should have brought in additional players.

I think that it is reasonable to assume that BB was not expecting Meriwhether to lose his job. It seems that you expected him to predict this happening and replace him before camp? Where was the replacement coming from? He brought in every safety that was on the market during camp.
I would also think that BB was disappointed and did not expect Sanders to show up unable to participate in practice.
With those 2 being reasonable to expect to be counted on and Barrett who clearly he was/is high on and Brown who was on the roster last year in addition to Chung, again, without ESP where is the expectation that there is obvious need?
Did Meriwhether and Sanders crap out and hurt the quality at S? Of course, I just don't know how you expect to replace guys that appear to be reliable BEFORE they prove otherwise.

We have Moulton and Adams. Apparently you think there was no one better in free agency than the two of them.

You just said you werent calling for signing FAs behind the 6 corners we had. Apparently you think after cutdowns there were better ones and BB just felt it would be cool to sign the lesser players and have fun?

The issue is not choosing Barrett over Sanders. The issue is cutting Sanders before we had any clue that Barrett could produce and that Brown or Ihedigbo could be a solid backup.

Sanders was cut because he went out on the practice and exhibition field and showed he didnt deserve to make the team. I don't know why you struggle to get that.

We seem to think that Bodden and Dowling had freak injuries after season started. There was a serious question with regard to both being 100%, before the 53 man roster was set.

Both were ready week 1. How many corners did you want to keep?


======

And yes, we will remember this thread when we consider how our secondary produces. We will count you as thinking that Moulton is a quality nickel. After all why else would be cut Butler AND Sanders AND Wilhite AND not bring in anyone else.

Well you can make up any number of opinions and attribute them to me if you wish, but that is kind of childish isn't it?
The fact is that Butler beat out Wilhite when there was only room for one or the other. Moulden was signed AFTER BUTLER MADE THE 53 and was chosed over Butler. What has Butler done on the field that makes you think he was worth keeping, and how do you get that beating out Butler and quality nickel are the same thing?
I actually have made no judgment in this thread, I have simply clarified the decisions that were made and put them in the proper context to unmuddy your meandering post.

 

[Ring 6]

These draft evaluations in the absence of the context of trades and free agent signings are sort of like rating a restaurant on its appetizers without trying the entree and the dessert.

The biggest crapshoot in the whole roster building process is the draft. It's very difficult to know how a college kid who has been coddled his whole life will integrate into a pro football setting with the added dimension of handing him a gazillion dollars and living in a strange city.

The Patriots have had their share of hits and who knows what the percentage is that works? And what does it matter if the roster is XX% homegrown talent as long as the team is competitive?

Nobody in the league is as good as the Patriots at taking guys mid- to late-career and getting production out of them. There are hits and misses there, too, but think about guys like Junior Seau, Rodney Harrison, Mike Vrabel, Corey Dillon, Randy Moss, Wes Welker and Deion Branch II. There are many others.

Talent evaluation is best done in the addition-subtraction mode taking into account all the players that come and go in a given year or period. Belichick and his staff have done a fine job of that.

You kind of have to also consider when players were drafted as well. The expectation of what you get out of, or what is considered successful in a 5th or 6th round pick vs a 1st or 2nd is significant. Listing all the picks as if they have an equal expectation of success is silly, and the work of someone trying to sensationalize to make a point.

 

[Deus Irae]

These draft evaluations in the absence of the context of trades and free agent signings are sort of like rating a restaurant on its appetizers without trying the entree and the dessert.

The biggest crapshoot in the whole roster building process is the draft. It's very difficult to know how a college kid who has been coddled his whole life will integrate into a pro football setting with the added dimension of handing him a gazillion dollars and living in a strange city.

The Patriots have had their share of hits and who knows what the percentage is that works? And what does it matter if the roster is XX% homegrown talent as long as the team is competitive?

Nobody in the league is as good as the Patriots at taking guys mid- to late-career and getting production out of them. There are hits and misses there, too, but think about guys like Junior Seau, Rodney Harrison, Mike Vrabel, Corey Dillon, Randy Moss, Wes Welker and Deion Branch II. There are many others.

Talent evaluation is best done in the addition-subtraction mode taking into account all the players that come and go in a given year or period. Belichick and his staff have done a fine job of that.

1.) Branch was already a known quantity, as he was someone from the system.

2.) Where are you getting mid to late career for Welker? He was 26 when the Patriots got him, and was clearly an improving player.

3.) Harrison, Vrabel, Dillon.... all early in BB's tenure, and Dillon was a rb, which is just about as easy a fit as you'll find.

4.) Seau was a HOFer, as was Moss. Additionally, Moss was... well, I'll say that Moss was Moss, which is why his improved play wasn't exactly mysterious.

Where are these types of players coming from since the start of 2008, and why have you chosen to ignore the likes of Thomas, Bodden, Burgess, et al...?

Also, in general, you've gotten your analogy wrong. The draft is the meal's entree, not an appetizer or desert.

 

[Ring 6]

You are correct, because I made the mistake of posting from memory rather than just linking to an earlier post. Here's the data that I'd looked up and posted in another thread:

From 2006-2009, the Patriots drafted

Mincey
Andrews
Smith
Meriweather
Brown
Rogers
Richardson
Lua
Mayo
Wheatley
Crable
Wilhite
Ruud
Chung
Brace
Butler
McKenzie
Pryor
Richard

As defensive players. That's 19 picks from 2006-2009. Of the 19, only 4 are still with the team, and 1 (Brace) is certainly questionable as to whether he'll be sticking around.

I'd say that a 21% hit rate is poor talent evaluation. Perhaps you disagree.

Interestingly in the Steelers in that timeframe drafted 5 defensive players that are still on the team, 2 starters, 2 backups, and a part time starter.

 

[Ring 6]

Interestingly in the Steelers in that timeframe drafted 5 defensive players that are still on the team, 2 starters, 2 backups, and a part time starter.

They also drafted 5 players on offense that remain on the team, while the Patriots drafted 4 and used a pick to trade for wes Welker.
So I guess the Steelers cant evaluate talent either

 

[Ring 6]

Interestingly in the Steelers in that timeframe drafted 5 defensive players that are still on the team, 2 starters, 2 backups, and a part time starter.

The Jets drafted 3 defensive players who remain on their team from 2006 to 2009.
The Bills have 4, despite using 4 1st rounders on defense in those years.
The Ravens have 5.
The Chargers have 4 including a 1st rounder that has started 4 games in 3 years. (Thats better than drafting Meriwhether who is no longer here, right)
The Dolphins have 6 though, so maybe we are onto something?

 

[Ring 6]

In fairness it should also be pointed out that those picks included:

2 1sts
4 2nds
3 3rds
2 4ths
6 6ths
3 7ths

So when evaluating perspective would include that almost half 9/19 were 6th or 7th rounders.
Only 61 of the 148 D players drafted in the 6th or 7th round in 2006 to 2009 are even in the league still, much less on the team that drafted them.