Value? I got your VALUE right here

[cmasspatsfan]

This is my problem with this board. It's full of BB and Kraft homers. How dare u speak ill of the great BB. Didn't BB get fired in cleveland? Didn't he make the wrong decision on the 4th and 2 call? Didn't he refuse to kick a 48 yard field goal in Sb 42? instead he went for it on 4th and 13. However, some on here say we should never criticize him. Bobby Bowden was just infallible a couple of years at florida St, but was forced out last year.

No

10 characters

 

[makoute]

Just for some people to admit that their Pats-and-BB-can-do-no-wrong routine is now too often used as a way to simply shut down and ridicule any dissenting points of view--merely resting on the laurels of three SB rings, best record over the last decade, etc. as the main SUBSTANCE of an argument over what kind of players this franchise should be drafting NOW, in 2010, given the current state of the roster.

Sorry to sound greedy or spoiled, but we are in fact talking about the NEP here and not some perenially dysfunctional team that changes HCs every year and is marred by inept ownership--an organization that should have FIVE or SIX rings in the bag by now and be regarded as the greatest dynasty of all time, no questions asked.

Why has this not happened? Eric Alexander being asked to cover Dallas Clark? Reche Caldwell as Brady's only viable target? A defense the last 3 years that has had NO infusion of impact difference makers. Is it just bad luck? A helmet catch? Or might some of it also be due to Ownership and the FO falling in love with a strategy that seemingly was responsible for winning three titles, but is now is actually more of a smokescreen more to keep PSLs sold, fans in the seats, and merchandise sales ringing in like it's Christmas year after year after year as opposed to winning superbowls. In other words, a very sound BUSINESS strategy, but nowt one that takes full advantage of the window we are blessed with of having BB and Tom Brady here.

In all fairness, the reason why Alexander was even on that field was due to injury; Although, the Pats really had no business being in Indy anyways, since they really should have lost the game in San Diego.

 

[patriot lifer]

I hate the whole trade down stuff. You have a better chancing of finding elite talent at the top of the draft than in later rounds. Yes you can find gem in late rounds, but that is a more difficult way to build a team.

Since when were we trading our top rounders for late rounders? Be more specific. We either trade into future drafts or trade down a bit--nothing substantial.

 

[shmessy]

This is my problem with this board. It's full of BB and Kraft homers. How dare u speak ill of the great BB. Didn't BB get fired in cleveland? Didn't he make the wrong decision on the 4th and 2 call? Didn't he refuse to kick a 48 yard field goal in Sb 42? instead he went for it on 4th and 13. However, some on here say we should never criticize him. Bobby Bowden was just infallible a couple of years at florida St, but was forced out last year.

I hate the whole trade down stuff. You have a better chancing of finding elite talent at the top of the draft than in later rounds. Yes you can find gem in late rounds, but that is a more difficult way to build a team.

Believe me, there are plenty of us here who have, do and will criticize BB. I felt he and the coaching staff blew a 13-3 season last year down to 10-6 based on incredibly bad in-game playcalling and generally being outcoached in the 2nd halves in at least 3, and perhaps 4 of the losses.

However, regarding THIS thread's point, there are 53 players on an NFL team. You, the OP and Dan Snyder would do well to remember that fact. EVERY NFL team has great talent at the TOP ten in their roster. Where the men are separated from the boys is that the long-term winners have the best BOTTOM ten. To win in this league, over a 16 game season with 3 or more games in the playoffs, THAT is the fundamental point that you and the OP don't get.

Chicks dig the longball and children love shiny things, however, it's the Steelers, Colts and Patriots who have built long-term powerhouses in this era - - not Jerry Jones, Dan Snyder or Woody Johnson. That fact has actually begun to dawn on at least some fans.

 

[reflexblue]

I think the thing that bothers me about people complaining about the way the Patriots acquire players are as follows.

1.) There is absolutely no patience for players developing a.k.a if you don't produce immediately you are a bust see "Ron Brace is a bust" thread.

2.) Shoulda, coulda, woulda, with ZERO context. The Pats shoulda stayed put and drafted Clay Matthews! That trade ended up netting us Darius Butler, Ron Brace, Julian Edleman, and 97% of Rob Gronkowski (stole that from PatChick).

3.)Belichick has lost his touch/Why does everyone think you can't disagree with Belichick. This is not true. Most reasonable people have/do/will disagree with decisions he has made, the difference is that reasonable people understand that talent evaluation is a crap shoot at best. While Belichick might not be the best front office man, he is one of the top five or so in the NFL, and stripping him of his FO duties would certainly chase him away. So, you'll have to make do with a top 5 FO, the best coach in the league, and a team that hasn't had a losing season in a decade. I'm sorry I know you could do better.

4.) I love that the franchise has been able to turn around the preception of the team here so drastically that every season that does not produce a Superbowl is a failure but don't forget where you came from. I guess if you started watching this team in 94 than what I'm saying doesn't make sense but winning in the NFL is f@#$%# HARD. Teams are so evenly matched these days that the margin for winning and losing is smaller than its ever been and all the Pats do is win. What is there to REALLY complain about?

Anyway had to get that off my chest.

:rocker: Excellent post.

 

[Patriot_in_NY]

Both cars sh%t the bed and you end up with nothing (I wanted to use another expression but I dont want to get banned)

Noooo, feel free. Get it off your chest....... Just let it all out.







the rest of us would appreciate a well deserved banning.

 

[The Brandon Five]

...Or might some of it also be due to Ownership and the FO falling in love with a strategy that seemingly was responsible for winning three titles, but is now is actually more of a smokescreen more to keep PSLs sold, fans in the seats, and merchandise sales ringing in like it's Christmas year after year after year as opposed to winning superbowls. In other words, a very sound BUSINESS strategy, but nowt one that takes full advantage of the window we are blessed with of having BB and Tom Brady here.

The Patriots do not have PSLs. That's partly why the tickets are so expensive.

 

[Off The Grid]

Good point, but I believe the question was in regards to moving up in the first round to get a stud player. Yes, I know, stud players dont always work out.

As the discussion in this thread has moved on, it appears that, overall, perhaps we have gotten some decent players in recent years, but I believew those are what the OP meant byu "value" players and not game breakers.

"Game Breakers". JEEBUS.

***

I might've hoped that ANY fan who'd had the PRIVILEGE of rooting for that 2001 Super Bowl team, in particular ~ 53 NO NAMES, if EVER there were!! ~ would have been FOREVER relieved of the vacuous notion that it's the flashy "Game Breakers" that win Championships: It's the SCRAPPERS.

 

[shmessy]

"Game Breakers". JEEBUS.

***

I might've hoped that ANY fan who'd had the PRIVILEGE of rooting for that 2001 Super Bowl team, in particular ~ 53 NO NAMES, if EVER there were!! ~ would have been FOREVER relieved of the vacuous notion that it's the flashy "Game Breakers" that win Championships: It's the SCRAPPERS.

See my post about kids and shiny objects.

 

[kdels62]

Believe me, there are plenty of us here who have, do and will criticize BB. I felt he and the coaching staff blew a 13-3 season last year down to 10-6 based on incredibly bad in-game playcalling and generally being outcoached in the 2nd halves in at least 3, and perhaps 4 of the losses.

However, regarding THIS thread's point, there are 53 players on an NFL team. You, the OP and Dan Snyder would do well to remember that fact. EVERY NFL team has great talent at the TOP ten in their roster. Where the men are separated from the boys is that the long-term winners have the best BOTTOM ten. To win in this league, over a 16 game season with 3 or more games in the playoffs, THAT is the fundamental point that you and the OP don't get.

Chicks dig the longball and children love shiny things, however, it's the Steelers, Colts and Patriots who have built long-term powerhouses in this era - - not Jerry Jones, Dan Snyder or Woody Johnson. That fact has actually begun to dawn on at least some fans.

Woah woah woah don't bring Woody Johnson into this yet he just started spending more in the last 3-4 years so unless this year totally busts he's still not prove for or against your argument.

Seriously though you can come up with a whole lot of excuses for the Pats and bring up the Super Bowl but if you're talking about today or even the last few years the Pats have been bad drafters. Lets not pretend like Brady, Moss, Welker, a consistent O-line and Beli don't make up for the deficiencies of the rest of the starters on your team. This year the O-line is no longer in that equation and that might prove to be a problem.

Honestly, the problem with the Pats "value" picks is that they're taking players that nobody really wants with those picks. They seem to think they are so smart with the guys they get but still few of them have panned out and they've missed out on blue chip talent. This year the trade back for McCourty was puzzling since there were 2 CB talents that were for the most part graded higher by draftniks, Kyle Wilson and Patrick Robinson.

 

[Off The Grid]

The Patriots are the best of all time when it comes to talent evaluation. In fact, it's an art form to them.

- They take Ben Watson in the first round when they just drafted a TE in the first round 2 years prior.
- They take Marquise Hill in the 2nd round (RIP) when they already had 3 DE's who were very young.
- Traded a 3rd round pick for All pro Duane Starks
- Signed all pro Monty Beisel to solve their MLB issues.
- Trade two draft picks for Chad Jackson. Even though the Pats had one of the worst WR core in the NFL, they ask Chad Jackson to go tackle people on special teams in the AFC title game after he just healed from a nagging hamstring the entire season. Then he tears his ACL.
- Their most consitant and best pick in the 2006 draft was a kicker
- Passed on a 6-0, physical cover CB Terrell Thomas for a 5-9 injury prone Terrance Wheatley who just healing a broken wrist.
- Took a QB in the 3rd round Kevin O'Connel to mock the rest of the NFL
- Signed Fernando Bryant and Jason Webster and called it a day in FA. Then they cut them both and sign Deltha O'Neal a couple days before the NFL season and feel they've solved their CB issues.
- Traded a 3rd and a 5th for monster DE/OLB Derrick Burgess

As you can see, the Pats flat out own the NFL when it comes to talent evaluation. I really don't understand how the OP can upset.

Brother BatMan, I almost NEVER agree with you, but I laughed FIVE TIMES on that post, alone!! :rocker:

 

[Off The Grid]

The Jets have gotten damn lucky lately with injuries though, which helps make up for their lack of depth, which was caused by having no draft picks. Their starting OL hasn't missed a start in 5 years. If one goes down this year, then uber-raw Vlad Ducasse has to step in. A Greene injury, and LT is their feature back. If one of the ILBs goes down, then I believe it is Lance "One Defensive Snap last season for the Seahawks" Laury who starts. A DE injury, and they're looking at Vernon Gholston getting a lot of playing time.

The Patriots, on the other hand, are down to their 3rd LG and not in horrible shape. It would take two RB injuries before we start losing sleep. ILB is full of young depth, with the 3rd ILB having started 16 games last season. At OLB and DE, the 3rd options aren't horrible worse from the 2nd. CB depth was at an all time high. Safety depth probably is.

Hitting on early round picks makes you look good on paper. Making decent late round picks prepares you for the injury-waiting-to-happen that is the NFL.

Nicely, nicely put.

 

[Off The Grid]

Just for some people to admit that their Pats-and-BB-can-do-no-wrong routine is now too often used as a way to simply shut down and ridicule any dissenting points of view--merely resting on the laurels of three SB rings, best record over the last decade, etc. as the main SUBSTANCE of an argument over what kind of players this franchise should be drafting NOW, in 2010, given the current state of the roster.

Sorry to sound greedy or spoiled, but we are in fact talking about the NEP here and not some perenially dysfunctional team that changes HCs every year and is marred by inept ownership--an organization that should have FIVE or SIX rings in the bag by now and be regarded as the greatest dynasty of all time, no questions asked.

Why has this not happened? Eric Alexander being asked to cover Dallas Clark? Reche Caldwell as Brady's only viable target? A defense the last 3 years that has had NO infusion of impact difference makers. Is it just bad luck? A helmet catch? Or might some of it also be due to Ownership and the FO falling in love with a strategy that seemingly was responsible for winning three titles, but is now is actually more of a smokescreen more to keep PSLs sold, fans in the seats, and merchandise sales ringing in like it's Christmas year after year after year as opposed to winning superbowls. In other words, a very sound BUSINESS strategy, but nowt one that takes full advantage of the window we are blessed with of having BB and Tom Brady here.

VERY, very strong post.

***

Coach Bill is simply The Best in All the Land: The best Head Coach, the best DC, the best Trader, and...I'm starting to wonder, ere these last two Pioli-less Drafts, if he's also the best Talent Evaluator, something I NEVER would have given him credit for, before!!

***

But he is FAR from perfect.

And there's nothing wrong ~ we're FANS, after all!! ~ with criticizing and analyzing his moves...especially when some decisions are just flat out STUPID.

***

Being brilliant does NOT preclude one from occasional acts of Stupidity...Can we all agree on that, I pray??

 

[Sicilian]

I think two things come into play here (which have really already been mentioned, but oh well):

1) In today's NFL, depth is key. Every year the Pats (and every NFL team) have injuries to key starters, and the backups end up playing a huge role. Spreading out the value 1-53 instead of 1-20, helps mitigate the impact of those injuries.

2) The draft is such a crap shoot many times, that taking two players who could be good, versus one player who has a better chance (but still isn't a lock) is not a bad strategy. If you could guarantee me that a player we take high up is going to be a pro bowler, then sure, sign me up (and I'm sure BB would agree). But absent of that guarantee, two chances in the second round spreads out your risk. The odds of both players failing is less than that of the one higher picked player, though the upside of both is probably lower. It's a tradeoff.

I think it's hard to argue with the strategy if you really think about it. Where one can argue is in the selection of players at those spots. Though with Brace showing improvement, there's a chance that our 2009 draft netted 4 starters in the 2nd round. How can that be viewed as a bad thing?

 

[Reckedtrek]

If you're rebuilding a team (or at least overhauling a defense or offense) one way to do it is have 4 picks in the first two rounds as opposed to two picks in the first two rounds for two or three years in a row. Would you rather have 3 very good to great players (assuming ALL first round picks are) and 3 good to very good players (assuming all second round picks are) or...

Would you rather have 2 very good to great (1st round assumed great) players and about 10 (TEN!!!) good to very good (assumed, 2nd round) players?

If you have one or two holes to fill to make a good team great, maybe the fewer picks are the best idea and you better hope 2 out of the 3 are a direct hit.

but if you are rebuilding an entire unit, you need a baseline, solid level of player, and then find the stars after the fact if one of the second rounders turns out to be a surprise.



BB isn't perfect. NO ONE is. But if you point out his mistakes, then also point out the successes as well, and vice versa. a 3rd and a 5th for Burgess Vs. trading a 7th round pick (Cassel) for the 34th pick overall about 3 years later.

 

[The Brandon Five]

I think two things come into play here (which have really already been mentioned, but oh well):

1) In today's NFL, depth is key. Every year the Pats (and every NFL team) have injuries to key starters, and the backups end up playing a huge role. Spreading out the value 1-53 instead of 1-20, helps mitigate the impact of those injuries.

2) The draft is such a crap shoot many times, that taking two players who could be good, versus one player who has a better chance (but still isn't a lock) is not a bad strategy. If you could guarantee me that a player we take high up is going to be a pro bowler, then sure, sign me up (and I'm sure BB would agree). But absent of that guarantee, two chances in the second round spreads out your risk. The odds of both players failing is less than that of the one higher picked player, though the upside of both is probably lower. It's a tradeoff.

I think it's hard to argue with the strategy if you really think about it. Where one can argue is in the selection of players at those spots. Though with Brace showing improvement, there's a chance that our 2009 draft netted 4 starters in the 2nd round. How can that be viewed as a bad thing?

Exactly. It's like having an investing strategy to only buy the stocks that go up. There are no guarantees, and there are always surprises in both directions.

 

[sbpatfan]

If you're rebuilding a team (or at least overhauling a defense or offense) one way to do it is have 4 picks in the first two rounds as opposed to two picks in the first two rounds for two or three years in a row. Would you rather have 3 very good to great players (assuming ALL first round picks are) and 3 good to very good players (assuming all second round picks are) or...

Would you rather have 2 very good to great (1st round assumed great) players and about 10 (TEN!!!) good to very good (assumed, 2nd round) players?

If you have one or two holes to fill to make a good team great, maybe the fewer picks are the best idea and you better hope 2 out of the 3 are a direct hit.

but if you are rebuilding an entire unit, you need a baseline, solid level of player, and then find the stars after the fact if one of the second rounders turns out to be a surprise.



BB isn't perfect. NO ONE is. But if you point out his mistakes, then also point out the successes as well, and vice versa. a 3rd and a 5th for Burgess Vs. trading a 7th round pick (Cassel) for the 34th pick overall about 3 years later.

The thing I don't understand is almost everyones' infatuation with labeling a 1st rounder as a "great" player and a second rounder as "pretty good" or whatever they hell people are saying. Any player from any round can become anything. The draft is a gamble at every pick. The round or position where a player is picked does not set the bar for how good or bad they'll be. The only thing a first rounder has over a second rounder is greater expectations.

 

[Sicilian]

BB isn't perfect. NO ONE is. But if you point out his mistakes, then also point out the successes as well, and vice versa. a 3rd and a 5th for Burgess Vs. trading a 7th round pick (Cassel) for the 34th pick overall about 3 years later.

This is a great point. It's like saying, "Aside from 10 games, we were 0-7 last year!"

Also, I think the Patriots take an approach that if they're going to pick someone in the 1st round, they better be damn sure they're going to be a player. Otherwise they take their chances later.

The WORST 1st round picks in the BB era are Watson (who was 32 overall wasn't he? or was that Graham...), and Maroney... I won't start a Maroney argument all over again, but if Maroney is your biggest "bust" in the first round in 10 years, you're doing something right:

Seymour (HOF)
Wilfork (Pro-Bowl)
Warren (Pro-Bowl calibur)
Graham (devastating blocker and decent enough receiver)
Watson (meh)
Maroney (better than he gets credit for in some circles, but not a 1st round value thus far)
Meriweather (borderline pro-bowl)
Mayo (DROY)
Mankins (pro-bowl)

That's an EXCELLENT track record in the most important round of the draft. Misses in the first can handcuff your team.

EDIT: Should have read the whole thread. Someone posted almost this exact same thing already Sorry.

 

[Off The Grid]

Even though the original poster seems to think this is black and white, he does raise a good point. Why don't the Patriots continue to do what works best for them? Sure, the value argument makes sense on paper, but in reality, look at our first round picks in the BB era through '08.

Richard Seymour
Daniel Graham
Ty Warren
Vince Wilfork
Benjamin Watson
Logan Mankins
Laurence Maroney
Brandon Meriweather
Jerod Mayo

When Laurence Maroney is the worst of 9 players, that's pretty damn good, considering he is an average NFL running back who has had some injuries. All of these other guys (with the possible exception of Watson) have contributed to the team's success and earned numerous honors.

When you look at the later rounds of the draft, the Patriots, like any other team, have had their share of hits, but also have tons of misses. I'm not talking about guys who didn't become stars; I'm talking about guys they've just whiffed on. For the sake of making this simple, let's look at the 2nd and 3rd round, which are usually the picks they trade for when sacrificing their position in the 1st round.

Adrian Klemm
J.R. Redmond
Matt Light
Deion Branch
Eugene Wilson
Bethel Johnson
Marquise Hill
Ellis Hobbs
Nick Kaczur
Chad Jackson
David Thomas
Terrence Wheatley
Shawn Crable
Kevin O'Connell

The '09 and '10 drafts may prove to be more valuable, but virtually all of these players were deemed "steals" at the time they were drafted. Of these 14 players, Light and Branch are the only ones whose talent and accolades could be considered worthy of the actual "steal" designation. Meanwhile, O'Connell, Crable, Wheatley, Thomas, Jackson, and Johnson barely saw a snap with the team.

The fact the Patriots have had so much success in the first round makes me wonder why they are so eager trade down.

It's always bad when the analysts praise the Patriots for a great draft, saying they made the "smart" decision. In recent years, the media has gotten out of control, proclaiming Belichick the king of every draft, when in fact these were some of the worst picks of any team in the league. Hopefully Vollmer will continue to prove to be a true "first-round value" who dropped into the second round, but until that happens, the last player they've drafted who fits that bill was Deion Branch eight years ago. Yes, eight.

WOW.

You're joking about all that...right?

 

[condon84]

Just for some people to admit that their Pats-and-BB-can-do-no-wrong routine is now too often used as a way to simply shut down and ridicule any dissenting points of view--merely resting on the laurels of three SB rings, best record over the last decade, etc. as the main SUBSTANCE of an argument over what kind of players this franchise should be drafting NOW, in 2010, given the current state of the roster.

Sorry to sound greedy or spoiled, but we are in fact talking about the NEP here and not some perenially dysfunctional team that changes HCs every year and is marred by inept ownership--an organization that should have FIVE or SIX rings in the bag by now and be regarded as the greatest dynasty of all time, no questions asked.

Why has this not happened? Eric Alexander being asked to cover Dallas Clark? Reche Caldwell as Brady's only viable target? A defense the last 3 years that has had NO infusion of impact difference makers. Is it just bad luck? A helmet catch? Or might some of it also be due to Ownership and the FO falling in love with a strategy that seemingly was responsible for winning three titles, but is now is actually more of a smokescreen more to keep PSLs sold, fans in the seats, and merchandise sales ringing in like it's Christmas year after year after year as opposed to winning superbowls. In other words, a very sound BUSINESS strategy, but nowt one that takes full advantage of the window we are blessed with of having BB and Tom Brady here.

Excellent post.

However, the "bargain basement" strategy has been Kraft's strategy from the very beginning. The only difference is that in the past we've hit homeruns in getting Vrabel, Poole, Hamilton, Antowan etc while we've failed pretty bad on FAs like Burgess, O'Neal, Galloway, Springs etc recently.

As far as the draft is concerned, our strategy has always been to maximize each pick; whether that's trading them for multiple picks on later rounds, trading for an earlier pick next draft, or drafting a player that represents a better value. I think it's stayed pretty constant. The main problem has been the evaluation of players.