Bad news from Peter King

[amazinPats]

I'll lay off when biases are no longer concealed but owned up to.

I personally find it interesting and worth noting that last week, the Patriots draft, which netted 12 players this year (including six picks in the top 100) and 2 second-round picks next year, is labeled "a strange draft" and the product of a coach/executive "drunk with the power of moving back".

This week, the Eagles draft, which netted eight players (including just two picks in the top 100) and additional picks in rounds 3-7 of next year's draft, is called "a draft clinic" and cited as an example of the way other NFL teams ought to be doing business.

I notice the Eagles piece contains a prominent quote from GM Tom Heckert while we know the Patriots have declined Mr. King's requests since King chose to accept John Tomase's word as gospel in January and February of 2008. You make it sound like these guys are just doing an honest job. I don't give a rats about the Taylor line at all - and I'm not here to tell you that the Patriots cleaned up last weekend either. But I don't know how anybody can't see what's at work here, and I can't imagine how anybody would think this you-scratch-my-back-and-I'll-scratch-yours "reporting" is acceptable from anyone.

Fair comments, I'm sure, and I hope you didn't take my comment personally. It just seems that as soon as a Peter King column comes out, (or add the name of most prominent sportswriter) and the forum threads jump with statements such as, "since so and so says the Pats are going to do this, then it is a guarantee the opposite will happen." I guess the point can be made, but it is made ad nauseum. Again, boring.

Anyway, you weren't the only one to jump on King's column today. Nothing meant personally.

 

[Pats67]

withdrawn.

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

I am not interested in him being given an award a day or a week after the draft, either. The results will be on the field soon enough.

Just give me a fair account. Don't rap them the day after the draft with some headshaking "drunk with power" comment and then a week later laud the Eagles draft (which netted less this year and next) as innovative and worthy of emulation by the other teams in the league.

You're right, it's crazy.

IMO the Patriots got two #2s for next year for nothing given that we still go Butler at #41.

So the Eagles got a 3,5,6,7 and King says :

"What would you think if I told you the Philadelphia Eagles got third-, fifth-, sixth- and seventh-round draft choices, plus half a starting cornerback for nothing in this year's draft?"

Well I'd rather have two #2s that a 3,5,6,7, thank you very much.

 

[Pats67]

Fair comments, I'm sure, and I hope you didn't take my comment personally. It just seems that as soon as a Peter King column comes out, (or add the name of most prominent sportswriter) and the forum threads jump with statements such as, "since so and so says the Pats are going to do this, then it is a guarantee the opposite will happen." I guess the point can be made, but it is made ad nauseum. Again, boring.

Anyway, you weren't the only one to jump on King's column today. Nothing meant personally.

Well, I would join you on that. I don't see the point on that.

But I personally think this is an issue of fairness. King has a hair accross because he's being taken into account for some pretty reckless reporting in the early months of 2008, and these little things are his way of getting back. The problem is that so many people read it and see it as gospel because it comes from Peter King.

 

[Ring 6]

Quick scenario, with nothing that can't be legitimately argued can't happen.....

Bodden tanks. Springs pops a hammy. Suddenly, the starting CBs are Wheatley/Wilhite/Butler.

Meriweather gets injured. Suddenly, the starting safeties are Chung/Sanders.

At that point, the O'Neal starts may become thought of as "the good ol' days" (I'm being hyperbolic, but you get my point, I'm sure). I think I understand BB's thought process about the trade, but it was a needless risk to take when he had about 50,000 picks available and could have found another way to get his O-lineman. I'm sure the money freed up helps the team with the cap, but that space could have been created either in other ways or later on in training camp once the rookies had time to be properly evaluated.

I think that the uninformed look at drafting Butler as the lynchpin in trading Hobbs, but in fact, it is the development of Wheatley and Wilhite.
I don't profess to understand BB in every scenario, but I'm very confident that he wouldn't make a trade based on a draft choice surpassing a previous starter on draft day, but would easily make the assumption that last years rookies have/will surpass the guy ahead of them this year. I think its well documented that BB won't rely on a player who has not proven anything at the NFL level, but will HEAVILY rely and take great risk on a guy he has first hand knowledge of.
Consistently all of the veterans cut, traded or allowed to walk are replaced by guys who BB has first hand knowledge of and are being elevated into a larger role.

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

I think that the uninformed look at drafting Butler as the lynchpin in trading Hobbs, but in fact, it is the development of Wheatley and Wilhite.

I think it's both. I do think it says they feel good enough about W/W that we don't need Butler to be more than the 5th guy. But had we not drafted a CB high I think Hobbs would still be on the team.

 

[Patriotic Fervor]

Bryant had been a 5 year starter in the league prior to his Detroit experience. He'd been more successful than Bodden.

Wel-l-l-l-l, that may be true, but as with most things in life, in the end it's a matter of fit.

At least, that's how I see it.

 

[Patriotic Fervor]

I'll lay off when biases are no longer concealed but owned up to.

I personally find it interesting and worth noting that last week, the Patriots draft, which netted 12 players this year (including six picks in the top 100) and 2 second-round picks next year, is labeled "a strange draft" and the product of a coach/executive "drunk with the power of moving back".

This week, the Eagles draft, which netted eight players (including just two picks in the top 100) and additional picks in rounds 3-7 of next year's draft, is called "a draft clinic" and cited as an example of the way other NFL teams ought to be doing business.

I notice the Eagles piece contains a prominent quote from GM Tom Heckert while we know the Patriots have declined Mr. King's requests since King chose to accept John Tomase's word as gospel in January and February of 2008. You make it sound like these guys are just doing an honest job. I don't give a rats about the Taylor line at all - and I'm not here to tell you that the Patriots cleaned up last weekend either. But I don't know how anybody can't see what's at work here, and I can't imagine how anybody would think this you-scratch-my-back-and-I'll-scratch-yours "reporting" is acceptable from anyone.

Hear, hear!!!

 

[shmessy]

If all three QB's for the New England Patriots go out drinking one night in the middle of the season and drink themselves to death, the team's playoff chances will be in great doubt.

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

Bryant had been a 5 year starter in the league prior to his Detroit experience. He'd been more successful than Bodden.

Number of years as a starter is not a good way to define "success". As an example, Bodden had 6 INT playing in Romeo Crennel's defense just two years ago. Bryant's career high in INT is 2.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I'm coming late to this thread.

On the pro vs. con on Peter King: After the garbage that masqueraded as journalism during Spygate, I tend to forgive (and often join) my fellow Pats fans who are tough on the sports media. That said, I think that King is better than most and that his analysis of the Iggles Draft today was detailed and thoughtful. I too felt that he might have mentioned how brilliantly Belichick managed the Pats Draft, but that's a story that gets written every year--King was probably looking for a positive story about a team that hasn't won an NFL Championship in almost 50 years and has continued to fall short during the Reid-McNabb era. If I were making a list of the five best ownerships in the NFL today, I'd put Jeff Laurie on it, along with Bob Kraft (numbero uno), the Rooneys, Jerry Jones and a fist fight over number five.

On the debate about our D backs, I'm afraid I agree with those who are nervous and I think that too many things have to work just right for there to be a marked, season-long improvement in 2009, as has been pointed out in other posts in the thread.

 

[Sicilian]

On the debate about our D backs, I'm afraid I agree with those who are nervous and I think that too many things have to work just right for there to be a marked, season-long improvement in 2009, as has been pointed out in other posts in the thread.

And interestingly enough, I feel a number of things have to go wrong in order for us to not make an improvement. They certainly could go wrong, but why assume they will?

In my opinion, it should be expected of rookies to make an improvement in year two, it should be expected of veterans with good track records to not fall on their faces, and it should be expected that second round picks should be contributing at least something by the end of the year (maybe not the beginning, but the end). Now, not all of those things are going to happen, but it would surprise me if none of them did, and that's only way I see this secondary being worse than last year.

Again, barring injuries, which I maintain can derail any team, not just the Patriots.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

And interestingly enough, I feel a number of things have to go wrong in order for us to not make an improvement. They certainly could go wrong, but why assume they will?

In my opinion, it should be expected of rookies to make an improvement in year two, it should be expected of veterans with good track records to not fall on their faces, and it should be expected that second round picks should be contributing at least something by the end of the year (maybe not the beginning, but the end). Now, not all of those things are going to happen, but it would surprise me if none of them did, and that's only way I see this secondary being worse than last year.

Again, barring injuries, which I maintain can derail any team, not just the Patriots.

I didn't say anything about it being "worse than last year," just that things have to break well for there to be a "marked season-long improvement." I stand by that.

Conversely, "it should be expected" that our starting QB isn't going to go down in the first quarter of the first game and "it should be expected" that an unknown receiver won't catch a ball on his helmet with Rodney on his back and...well, you get the idea.

 

[Deus Irae]

Number of years as a starter is not a good way to define "success". As an example, Bodden had 6 INT playing in Romeo Crennel's defense just two years ago. Bryant's career high in INT is 2.

The rest of his career he was a non-starter for 2 seasons and essentially JAG (or less) otherwise. A cornerback is not only good if he gets INTs. Bryant was no great shakes, but Bodden's a one year wonder with a 6 year career. I won't compare skills because they played in two distinct styles of defense, but Bryant was more consistent and had the better overall success prior to their respective Lions exiles. I could see someone arguing that they were about the same by weighing the Romeo season extra heavily the way you have, but that still just puts Bodden as a possible training camp cut. I grant you that I don't expect Bodden to back off of a tackle during an exhibition game the way Bryant did.

 

[Deus Irae]

And interestingly enough, I feel a number of things have to go wrong in order for us to not make an improvement. They certainly could go wrong, but why assume they will?

In my opinion, it should be expected of rookies to make an improvement in year two, it should be expected of veterans with good track records to not fall on their faces, and it should be expected that second round picks should be contributing at least something by the end of the year (maybe not the beginning, but the end). Now, not all of those things are going to happen, but it would surprise me if none of them did, and that's only way I see this secondary being worse than last year.

Again, barring injuries, which I maintain can derail any team, not just the Patriots.

What teams have had the injury bonanza in the defensive backfield with the severity and consistency that the Patriots have had since 2005? Do you think it's just a coincidence that the Patriots DBs get hurt more than womens' feelings at an "I'm dumping you for your sister" episode of Jerry Springer?

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

The rest of his career he was a non-starter for 2 seasons and essentially JAG (or less) otherwise.

He started as a UDFA, you are always going to be a non starter for a while when entering the league that way. I watch a lot of Browns games when they don't play at the same time as the Patriots - Bodden was a better CB in the two years before he got the 6 INT than Bryant was; that 6 INT season was not a surprise to me after watching the year before.

 

[Deus Irae]

He started as a UDFA, you are always going to be a non starter for a while when entering the league that way. I watch a lot of Browns games when they don't play at the same time as the Patriots - Bodden was a better CB in the two years before he got the 6 INT than Bryant was; that 6 INT season was not a surprise to me after watching the year before.

I disagree with your claim that Bodden was better in those two previous seasons. I'll leave it at that, because it really doesn't much matter to the main point anyway.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

But Bodden's success occured in a Romeo defense, which bodes (no pun intended) well for his adaptation to our scheme. Bryant was more of an unknown at the time of his signing IMO.

Bodden's "success" was limited. An UDFA RAC did not draft, he got his shot at starting due to injury, and after playing well for part of a season they immediately rewarded him with an overpriced extension. He struggled after landing that first big deal and missed several games the following season. And after the next season inspite of 6 picks they traded him to Detroit. He struggled there but more significantly he whined and exhibited substantial ego (built in large part apparently by Ocho Stinko's equally ego driven assessment of him...he owned the Bungles who accounted for half of his 6 INTS in 2007) given his circumstances. Bill demands his players check egos at the door...

This is from a Browns site on the eve of his release by Detroit:

The trade of CB Leigh Bodden and a third-round pick to the Detroit Lions for Pro Bowler Shaun Rogers now seems as lopsided as ever. The Lions announced that they are ready to part ways with Bodden after the cornerback voiced his displeasure with the coaching staff of former head coach Rod Marinelli.

Bodden wore out his welcome pretty early in Detroit after pouting about not receiving the starting spot at his position. Although it’s insane that he wasn’t given the starting job and then moved to the left side of the field where he was less comfortable, Bodden’s me-first, douchebaggey confident attitude most likely did not win him any friends in the Lions organization, which was a major factor in the Lions’ decision to cut him loose. That and the fact that Bodden was due a $8.6 million roster bonus.

Bodden wasn’t bad with the Browns, and the team surely could have used him in their paper-thin secondary this past season. However, the last thing the organization needs is another mentally unstable ego. Here’s your evidence (this is Bodden talking in December about a new coaching staff in Detroit):

“If they bring somebody in that respects the way that I play, because I’m one of the best in the league, and if a coaching staff can respect that, then I’ll be happy anywhere.”

One of the best in the league? Not even the No. 1 on an 0-16 team? If you say so. But would it be worth exploring Bodden as an option for the Browns? After all, he is about to become a free agent. My guess would be no, and I think Eric Mangini’s attitude towards treating whiny veterans would reflect a little too close to Marinelli’s rather than Romeo Crennel’s let-the-inmates-run-the-asylum approach for Bodden’s liking anyway."

RAC may have played similar schemes in Cleveland, but his coaching style was the anthesis of Belichick's. Bill is all about accountability and responsibility and sacrificing personal achievement for the greater good.

Players are offered and sign prove it deals for a reason, usually flags of some sort. Sometimes it works out for everyone, other times it doesn't. If he plays well here he will chase his market. If he doesn't he won't be back here anyway.

Springs is what he is - 34 and oft injured. Bodden is on a prove it deal. Wheatley and Whilhite are sophomores with little experience here let alone as NFL starters. Butler is a rookie 2nd rounder from a class devoid of top tier talent at the position. Both he and Wheatley are considered undersized...and Wheatley ended his rookie season on IR after his first start. If that doesn't give you pause the way we historically blow through DB's...

 

[eom]

can we stop this 'anything can happen' injury nonsense?

yeah, anything CAN happen, and I would have liked to keep hobbs, too, but if that means a logjam at one position, then you're thin at another.
you don't get unlimited roster spots, and I can just as easily play that anything can happen injury schtick at whatever position they end up being one deeper at for trading hobbs.

 

[Sicilian]

I didn't say anything about it being "worse than last year," just that things have to break well for there to be a "marked season-long improvement." I stand by that.

Conversely, "it should be expected" that our starting QB isn't going to go down in the first quarter of the first game and "it should be expected" that an unknown receiver won't catch a ball on his helmet with Rodney on his back and...well, you get the idea.

What I mean is, the Patriots are going to make decisions based on the idea that they know what they're doing and have done their job. If they feel like Wheatley and Wilhite are improving and Butler was a good pick, why should they carry 6 dbs, costing money and a roster spot, for the chance that they were wrong. At some point you have to trust your decisions and try to improve other areas of the team.

And the Brady injury, again, is not a matter of personnel, and actually makes my point. One, no one was legitimately concerned about the QB situation until Brady went down. Two, EVERYONE was concerned about the QB situation AFTER he went down, and it turned out to be fine for the most part. Things have just as good a chance of working out as they do failing miserably, and I think personnel wise we are in a better position than we were going into last year.

What teams have had the injury bonanza in the defensive backfield with the severity and consistency that the Patriots have had since 2005? Do you think it's just a coincidence that the Patriots DBs get hurt more than womens' feelings at an "I'm dumping you for your sister" episode of Jerry Springer?

Don't have access to all the data, but I'm assuming you're implying that something the Pats are doing is causing db injuries? It's possible, we certainly seem to have worse luck than others in that regard, but somehow I just think with all the resources at their disposal that if their training staff was inadequate, or their program was causing injuries, they would adjust.

Statistically, we're an anomaly, but that doesn't mean you can build a team around reactionary injury concerns.