This Rant - The Same As The Last

[supafly]

Nice breakdown, Andy.

You certainly make quite a case that it's not nearly as bad as some have thought (myself included at times), especially by citing numbers and examples from other teams.

 

[Deus Irae]

Nice breakdown, Andy.

You certainly make quite a case that it's not nearly as bad as some have thought (myself included at times), especially by citing numbers and examples from other teams.

I can't read his stuff but, since you claim he's made a case, I'll look at some of it if you'll pass it on. What teams did he cite to?

 

[supafly]

I can't read his stuff but, since you claim he's made a case, I'll look at some of it if you'll pass it on. What teams did he cite to?

Quote by Andy Johnson:

The Steelers have drafted 5 defensive players during that time, 2 of which are currently starters, 2 backups, and one part-time role player.

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?

-------------------

While I personally feel as though Belichick's recent drafts have not been up to his usual high standards either (in agreement with Deus), comparing the other teams does put it in a different perspective. It certainly does not appear to be nearly as bad as some make it out to be.

 

[PittPatriot]

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

The Steelers defense has been a league standard in that time to current. They have won 2 SB and played in 3rd. Staying excellent with veterans and not having rookies make the team is preferred over sucking like we have with a revolving door of players and draftees that have been a disappointment.

As far as offense, the Steeler offense has improved over the years. They have hit on their offensive draft picks (Mendenhall/Holmes/Wallace) while we wiffed with Maroney/Chad Jackson/David Thomas/Garrett Mills in just ONE draft. Our offense has been excellent over the years - but not because we drafted well for it in the skill positions.

 

[Deus Irae]

Quote by Andy Johnson:

The Steelers have drafted 5 defensive players during that time, 2 of which are currently starters, 2 backups, and one part-time role player.

I'm going with the time mentioned, which was 2006-2008, so Andy's decision to play games with that will just have to be overruled.... I'll also note that I'm not hunting down players who might be on IR and not listed as being on a team, so that could, theoretically, make a small difference. Also, you've always been a straight shooter as a poster, so I'm taking your word for it that what you've posted is an accurate representation of Andy's writings.

The Steelers are a good choice, since they are a top defense:

Anthony Smith
Orien Harris
Lawrence Timmons
Lamarr Woodley
Ryan McBean
William Gay
Bruce Davis
Mike Humpal
Ryan Mundy

that's 4 of 9 players still on the team, as opposed to 4 of 19.

That's a landslide victory for the Steelers. One could argue that the Steelers should have drafted defense with more than 9 of their 24 picks, but that's a different issue, so here we've got Andy being misleading by ignoring the overall number of picks used. The Steelers could have gone 0-for-10 during that stretch and still evened out with the Patriots.

The Jets drafted 3 defensive players who remain on their team from 2006 to 2009.

The Jets have also been a strong defense in recent years, so this is another good choice:

First, to note that the Jets didn't draft any players on defense in 2009...

Anthony Schlegel
Eric Smith
Drew Coleman
Titus Adams
Darrelle Revis
David Harris
Vernon Gholston
Dwight Lowery

that's 3 of 8. We mock the hell out of them for Gholston, but it's still a 38% hit rate, in comparison to the Patriots 21%, and Revis is far and away the best player drafted by either team.

Landslide: Jets, with Andy again using the raw numbers to mislead about talent evaluation

The Bills have 4, despite using 4 1st rounders on defense in those years.

For the sake of keeping this post under 500 pages, I'll just tab the numbers, since it's pretty clear what Andy was trying to pull here.

3 for 14 (21%) and a team that's usually been ranked middle of the pack recently, despite its lousy record

Edge: Patriots. The hit percentage is about the same, but the Bills have drafted higher, and they don't have a Mayo from that time span. However, comparing the team to another team that has one winning record in the 2000s is really not doing much for the Patriots.

The Ravens have 5.

4 out of 10, including Ngata

Edge: Ravens

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)

3 out of 9.

Advantage: tough call, so I'll go with even. The Chargers have a better hit percentage, but it's Weddle, Cason and a stiff. Still, using a Chargers team that's gone 8-8 and 9-7 in two of the past three full seasons, is off to a 4-3 start now, and seems clearly to be in decline, and coming off basically even, is not a good thing for the Patriots. If Cromartie hadn't cried his way out of time, this would have been 4 of 10 for S.D., and edge Chargers, but it is what it is.

The Dolphins have 6 though, so maybe we are onto something?

4 of 10 but mostly some poor players

Advantage: Patriots, even though they have the lower hit percentage, because the LOLphins hits kinda suck.

Congrats to Andy for finding this gem. The Patriots drafted better defensively from 2006-2008 than the winless Dolphins that are currently 23rd in points allowed!

While I personally feel as though Belichick's recent drafts have not been up to his usual high standards either (in agreement with Deus), comparing the other teams does put it in a different perspective. It certainly does not appear to be nearly as bad as some make it out to be.

So..... I call them better than the LOLphins and Bills on the basis of where they drafted and the talent on the actual hits (Miami has the better hit percentage and Buffalo is essentially the same), even with the Chargers, and behind the Jets, Ravens and Steelers. I see nothing there that should have you upgrading your opinion of the Patriots defensive drafting during that time period. What I do see is Andy trying to ignore hit percentage in favor of the raw numbers.

Here's a tip for dealing with Andy's posts. Ignore them.

 

[Ring 6]

I'm going with the time mentioned, which was 2006-2008, so Andy's decision to play games with that will just have to be overruled.... I'll also note that I'm not hunting down players who might be on IR and not listed as being on a team, so that could, theoretically, make a small difference. Also, you've always been a straight shooter as a poster, so I'm taking your word for it that what you've posted is an accurate representation of Andy's writings.

The Steelers are a good choice, since they are a top defense:

Anthony Smith
Orien Harris
Lawrence Timmons
Lamarr Woodley
Ryan McBean
William Gay
Bruce Davis
Mike Humpal
Ryan Mundy

that's 4 of 9 players still on the team, as opposed to 4 of 19.

That's a landslide victory for the Steelers. One could argue that the Steelers should have drafted defense with more than 9 of their 24 picks, but that's a different issue, so here we've got Andy being misleading by ignoring the overall number of picks used. The Steelers could have gone 0-for-10 during that stretch and still evened out with the Patriots.


The Jets have also been a strong defense in recent years, so this is another good choice:

First, to note that the Jets didn't draft any players on defense in 2009...

Anthony Schlegel
Eric Smith
Drew Coleman
Titus Adams
Darrelle Revis
David Harris
Vernon Gholston
Dwight Lowery

that's 3 of 8. We mock the hell out of them for Gholston, but it's still a 38% hit rate, in comparison to the Patriots 21%, and Revis is far and away the best player drafted by either team.

Landslide: Jets, with Andy again using the raw numbers to mislead about talent evaluation



For the sake of keeping this post under 500 pages, I'll just tab the numbers, since it's pretty clear what Andy was trying to pull here.

3 for 14 (21%) and a team that's usually been ranked middle of the pack recently, despite its lousy record

Edge: Patriots. The hit percentage is about the same, but the Bills have drafted higher, and they don't have a Mayo from that time span. However, comparing the team to another team that has one winning record in the 2000s is really not doing much for the Patriots.



4 out of 10, including Ngata

Edge: Ravens



3 out of 9.

Advantage: tough call, so I'll go with even. The Chargers have a better hit percentage, but it's Weddle, Cason and a stiff. Still, using a Chargers team that's gone 8-8 and 9-7 in two of the past three full seasons, is off to a 4-3 start now, and seems clearly to be in decline, and coming off basically even, is not a good thing for the Patriots. If Cromartie hadn't cried his way out of time, this would have been 4 of 10 for S.D., and edge Chargers, but it is what it is.



4 of 10 but mostly some poor players

Advantage: Patriots, even though they have the lower hit percentage, because the LOLphins hits kinda suck.

Congrats to Andy for finding this gem. The Patriots drafted better defensively from 2006-2008 than the winless Dolphins that are currently 23rd in points allowed!



So..... I call them better than the LOLphins and Bills on the basis of where they drafted and the talent on the actual hits (Miami has the better hit percentage and Buffalo is essentially the same), even with the Chargers, and behind the Jets, Ravens and Steelers. I see nothing there that should have you upgrading your opinion of the Patriots defensive drafting during that time period. What I do see is Andy trying to ignore hit percentage in favor of the raw numbers.

Here's a tip for dealing with Andy's posts. Ignore them.

Of course you will totally ignore that every team enters the draft with the same number of picks, some trade down for more, some trade up, so % is a foolish way to judge.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

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.

During the same span, this weeks opponent drafted:

Mathius Kiwanuka -Starting LB
Aaron Ross - Starting DB
Zak Deossie - Reserve LB, 2-time Pro Bowl Long Snapper
Kenny Phillips - Starting DB

Terrell Thomas - Starting DB, on IR, drafted one pick after Wheatley, I was pissed at the time and I'm still pissed about this one.

Jonathan Goff - Starting LB, 16 starts in 2010, on IR

Clint Sintim - on IR

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Barry Cofield -DT, started 78 of 79 games for Giants, Signed by Washington as UFA and has started all 7 games this year.

Charles Peprah - DB, 16 starts for Green Bay since 2010, 4 interceptions during that time.

Bryan Kehl - 1 start this year for the Rams.

Gerris Wilkinson - played 58 games for Giants thru 2010, Free Agent

Michael Johnson -DB, 35 starts for Giants thru 2010, Free Agent, 111 tackles 2 sacks 3 int 2007-2010.

Jay Alford - DT, 3 starts, 32 games played, 3.5 sacks for Giants in 07-08, Free Agent.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Deandre Wright DB
Stoney Woodson DB
Robert Henderson DE
Gerrick McPhearson DB

17 picks, 5 current or would be starters, One pro bowl special teamer. One 5 year starter who left as an UFA. Giants had less picks, got better top end talent, got better mid range talent and had far less complete misses (4) than the Pats (9).

I know I'd like to have Thomas, Ross and Phillips in the secondary right about now, not to mention a real live pass rusher in Kiwanuka.

 

[Ring 6]

The Steelers defense has been a league standard in that time to current. They have won 2 SB and played in 3rd. Staying excellent with veterans and not having rookies make the team is preferred over sucking like we have with a revolving door of players and draftees that have been a disappointment.

As far as offense, the Steeler offense has improved over the years. They have hit on their offensive draft picks (Mendenhall/Holmes/Wallace) while we wiffed with Maroney/Chad Jackson/David Thomas/Garrett Mills in just ONE draft. Our offense has been excellent over the years - but not because we drafted well for it in the skill positions.

We drafted Brady, Light, Mankins, Koppen, Volmer, Solder, Gronk, Hernandez, Faulk, Ridley, Branch, and acquired Welker with a trade of a draft pick. (And Moss as well if you want to go back) How can you possibly say our offensive success isn't due to the draft?

 

[Ring 6]

I'm going with the time mentioned, which was 2006-2008, so Andy's decision to play games with that will just have to be overruled.... I'll also note that I'm not hunting down players who might be on IR and not listed as being on a team, so that could, theoretically, make a small difference. Also, you've always been a straight shooter as a poster, so I'm taking your word for it that what you've posted is an accurate representation of Andy's writings.

The Steelers are a good choice, since they are a top defense:

Anthony Smith
Orien Harris
Lawrence Timmons
Lamarr Woodley
Ryan McBean
William Gay
Bruce Davis
Mike Humpal
Ryan Mundy

that's 4 of 9 players still on the team, as opposed to 4 of 19.

That's a landslide victory for the Steelers. One could argue that the Steelers should have drafted defense with more than 9 of their 24 picks, but that's a different issue, so here we've got Andy being misleading by ignoring the overall number of picks used. The Steelers could have gone 0-for-10 during that stretch and still evened out with the Patriots.


The Jets have also been a strong defense in recent years, so this is another good choice:

First, to note that the Jets didn't draft any players on defense in 2009...

Anthony Schlegel
Eric Smith
Drew Coleman
Titus Adams
Darrelle Revis
David Harris
Vernon Gholston
Dwight Lowery

that's 3 of 8. We mock the hell out of them for Gholston, but it's still a 38% hit rate, in comparison to the Patriots 21%, and Revis is far and away the best player drafted by either team.

Landslide: Jets, with Andy again using the raw numbers to mislead about talent evaluation



For the sake of keeping this post under 500 pages, I'll just tab the numbers, since it's pretty clear what Andy was trying to pull here.

3 for 14 (21%) and a team that's usually been ranked middle of the pack recently, despite its lousy record

Edge: Patriots. The hit percentage is about the same, but the Bills have drafted higher, and they don't have a Mayo from that time span. However, comparing the team to another team that has one winning record in the 2000s is really not doing much for the Patriots.



4 out of 10, including Ngata

Edge: Ravens



3 out of 9.

Advantage: tough call, so I'll go with even. The Chargers have a better hit percentage, but it's Weddle, Cason and a stiff. Still, using a Chargers team that's gone 8-8 and 9-7 in two of the past three full seasons, is off to a 4-3 start now, and seems clearly to be in decline, and coming off basically even, is not a good thing for the Patriots. If Cromartie hadn't cried his way out of time, this would have been 4 of 10 for S.D., and edge Chargers, but it is what it is.



4 of 10 but mostly some poor players

Advantage: Patriots, even though they have the lower hit percentage, because the LOLphins hits kinda suck.

Congrats to Andy for finding this gem. The Patriots drafted better defensively from 2006-2008 than the winless Dolphins that are currently 23rd in points allowed!



So..... I call them better than the LOLphins and Bills on the basis of where they drafted and the talent on the actual hits (Miami has the better hit percentage and Buffalo is essentially the same), even with the Chargers, and behind the Jets, Ravens and Steelers. I see nothing there that should have you upgrading your opinion of the Patriots defensive drafting during that time period. What I do see is Andy trying to ignore hit percentage in favor of the raw numbers.

Here's a tip for dealing with Andy's posts. Ignore them.

Not to mention your counts are wrong, and you keep moving the goalposts on the timeframe/

 

[BAM!]

Here's the thing... if you want to only include up to 2009 I agree he has made some mistakes... the draft is not an exact science and mostly a crap shoot. If you agree that AJ Smith is one of the top evaluators in the league go back and take a look at his drafts, he has certainly made his defensive mistakes as well.

The other thing here is from 06-09, 11 of the 19 defensive picks (52%) were picked in round 4 or later... the majority of that (9 of 11 or 81%) being drafted in rounds 6 & 7. So right off the bat you are counting guys that don't have a very high % of sticking with the team as a starter to begin with... something that will definitely skew the numbers if you're looking at them in a vacuum.

 

[Ring 6]

Here's the thing... if you want to only include up to 2009 I agree he has made some mistakes... the draft is not an exact science and mostly a crap shoot. If you agree that AJ Smith is one of the top evaluators in the league go back and take a look at his drafts, he has certainly made his defensive mistakes as well.

The other thing here is from 06-09, 11 of the 19 defensive picks (52%) were picked in round 4 or later... the majority of that (9 of 11 or 81%) being drafted in rounds 6 & 7. So right off the bat you are counting guys that don't have a very high % of sticking with the team as a starter to begin with... something that will definitely skew the numbers if you're looking at them in a vacuum.

Which is why he used a % to make it look bad. He had an answer in mind so he framed the question the way that would get him closest to the answer. Of course since I consistently point out his deceptively veiled version of the truth, he pretends to have me on ignore, however somehow seems to respond when it suits him.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

Here's the thing... if you want to only include up to 2009 I agree he has made some mistakes... the draft is not an exact science and mostly a crap shoot. If you agree that AJ Smith is one of the top evaluators in the league go back and take a look at his drafts, he has certainly made his defensive mistakes as well.

The other thing here is from 06-09, 11 of the 19 defensive picks (52%) were picked in round 4 or later... the majority of that (9 of 11 or 81%) being drafted in rounds 6 & 7. So right off the bat you are counting guys that don't have a very high % of sticking with the team as a starter to begin with... something that will definitely skew the numbers if you're looking at them in a vacuum.

That doesn't help the argument for the Pats drafting defensive players during that time. The Patriots have needed defensive replacements since their last SB Championship. Every year they continued to lose key players like Law, McGinest, Vrabel, Seymour, Samuel, Bruschi, Harrison, etc, etc, and they attempted to replace them with 6th and 7th round scrubs? To invest so little was a mistake, one that we are still paying for to this day The fact that they invested so little and willfully ignored the restocking of their defense cost them the 2006 championship as well as the chance to do something in the playoffs last year IMO.

The defense was essentially ignored again this year except for the annual high draft pick spent on yet another CB that shockingly won't be playing this year. Hopefully the 2010 class players can step up but even if they do, we still need Safeties, we still need Corners, we still need LB's, we still need pass rushers and we still have the worst passing defense in the league. Maybe at some point this team will realize that they need to invest more on defense, that you're not going to win a championship with a defense that can't stop anyone. The defense is boring, predictable and worst of all ineffective. I hope they step up and prove me wrong but I'm not going to hold my breath.

 

[Ring 6]

That doesn't help the argument for the Pats drafting defensive players during that time. The Patriots have needed defensive replacements since their last SB Championship. Every year they continued to lose key players like Law, McGinest, Vrabel, Seymour, Samuel, Bruschi, Harrison, etc, etc, and they attempted to replace them with 6th and 7th round scrubs? To invest so little was a mistake, one that we are still paying for to this day The fact that they invested so little and willfully ignored the restocking of their defense cost them the 2006 championship as well as the chance to do something in the playoffs last year IMO.

The defense was essentially ignored again this year except for the annual high draft pick spent on yet another CB that shockingly won't be playing this year. Hopefully the 2010 class players can step up but even if they do, we still need Safeties, we still need Corners, we still need LB's, we still need pass rushers and we still have the worst passing defense in the league. Maybe at some point this team will realize that they need to invest more on defense, that you're not going to win a championship with a defense that can't stop anyone. The defense is boring, predictable and worst of all ineffective. I hope the step up and prove me wrong but I'm not going to hold my breath.

What do you want them to do, invent picks?
First of all, this cherry picked time frame starts 2 years after winning the SB and 2 years into it was a 16 and 0 season, so lets not talk like they were 2 and14 when these picks were made.
Secondly, 2 of 3 1s were on defense.
3 of 5 2s were on D.
1 of 4 3rds were on D
2 of 5 4ths were on D
9 of 19 5ths thru 7ths were spend on D

Looks like a pretty well split approach with an emphasis in early rounds on D.
We have the best offense in the NFL, are you criticizing using 37% of the 1sts and 2nds, 47% of all picks on offense?

 

[JoeSixPat]

The Dolphins have 6 though, so maybe we are onto something?

Of course! On a team as bad as the Fins its much easier to find a roster spot as a mediocre player!

I'm always amazed when stat-crazed NFL fans get so caught up in the numbers they can't see the game.

Every move Belichick makes, he makes because he considers it in the best interest of the team.

Belichicks moves have brought the Patriots unprecedented success in the modern era of the NFL and three Super Bowl rings. He's doing something right and that includes personnel moves.

You can ask yourself why Belichick made the moves that he made - but he made them with much more information at his disposal than anyone here has, and again, did everything to help the team win long term.

Who knows? Going "all in" with his DB backups could be a Belichickian motivation technique to get the most out of guys who he thinks could develop. What's clear is that he thinks the guys he cut are not worth keeping around.

That's not to say that he doesn't make mistakes or have regrets. I think he's admitted as such on numerous occasions. I'm sure he's wishing he was able to obtain certain guys in free agency that he just couldn't get too.

But people act as if the draft, free agency, player development, not to mention strategy - is a science. It's not a science.

It's an art.

There's so many variables it's mind boggling, and stats never tell the whole picture. The only thing we know for sure is that Belichick, with as much information at his disposal as he can gather, is putting the best guys he can on the field to try to win. We'll probably never know the full story.

Wondering why Belichick made the moves he did is natural. But the one thing I do know is that Belichick made every move with the best interests of the organization in mind. Trying to figure out why that is should be fun.

Of all the guys out there practiced in the Art of managing and coaching football, there's no one I would prefer more than Belicihck.

 

[Ring 6]

Not to mention your counts are wrong, and you keep moving the goalposts on the timeframe/

Another reason using the % argument is flawed, and simply an attempt to manipulate facts.

From 2006 to 2009
Patriots had 12 picks in rounds 1-3 and 24 in rounds 4-7
The Jets had 11 1 to 3s and 12 4 to 7s.
Yes we had more picks in the 4th to 7th than the Jets had picks. 1/3 of our were in the first 3 and just about half of there were in the top 3. Clearly comparing 'hit percentage' in terms of building a team is silly. It also should be noted that we were a better team than them throughout this entire period, so our 36 picks had a tougher roster to make than their 23.

The Steelers had 14 1 to 3s and 20 4 to 7s. Also 13 of those were on D not 9. Interesting that we had a similar # of picks, they had a more early we had more late, and they have 1 more defensive player on their roster and the same on offense. Looks like the results are awfully close doesnt it?

The Chargers had 10 1 to 3 and 17 4 to 7s, a similar split to us yet they have fewer players to show for, illustrating the point.

The Ravens 13 1 to 3 and 18 4 to 7s. We had 1 fewer higher pick and 6 more low picks, so clearly percentage is a flawed measure, yet in the end they have 4 as well. Btw, Dues Irae moved the goalposts on this one too, as the Ravens were 5 of 13 not 4 of 10.

The Bills interestingly had the most similar distribution with 13 1 to 3s and 21 4 to 7s. It should be noted though that they had 6 1s in 4 years.
Also very interesting that with the most similar distribution (despite another case of Dues moving the goal posts on the numbers) they were an identical 4 of 19.

So, the conclusion is obvious. Despite the miserably failed attempt to use 'hit percentage' to mean anything when compared to a cross section of the the best teams in the conference, the Patriots have pretty much exactly the same amount of players (within 1 in either direction) on defense left from those drafts, and the only difference is the Pats ended up with a lot more late round picks to take chances on that the other teams, and as expected most didnt work out.
Despite the sensationalism, there is nothing to see here, other than the draft is what the draft is.

 

[Ring 6]

Of course! On a team as bad as the Fins its much easier to find a roster spot as a mediocre player!

.

Yeah, kind my point. When you stink you pick higher and the picks have worse players to beat out than the picks of a good team do.
When you consider that and add in consideration of the rounds drafted in Dues Irae's "analysis" being laughable.

 

[Deus Irae]

Here's the thing... if you want to only include up to 2009 I agree he has made some mistakes... the draft is not an exact science and mostly a crap shoot. If you agree that AJ Smith is one of the top evaluators in the league go back and take a look at his drafts, he has certainly made his defensive mistakes as well.

The other thing here is from 06-09, 11 of the 19 defensive picks (52%) were picked in round 4 or later... the majority of that (9 of 11 or 81%) being drafted in rounds 6 & 7. So right off the bat you are counting guys that don't have a very high % of sticking with the team as a starter to begin with... something that will definitely skew the numbers if you're looking at them in a vacuum.

Belichick is deliberately trading down, so the "the picks were in lower rounds" doesn't hold water. The picks are in lower rounds because of deliberate actions by the man making the picks.

 

[Ring 6]

Belichick is deliberately trading down, so the "the picks were in lower rounds" doesn't hold water. The picks are in lower rounds because of deliberate actions by the man making the picks.

So. When you trade down and get a shot at a late round pick that doesnt mean the late round pick should have the same 'hit rate'. It means COMBINED they should, which they do.
If yuor argument is he hasn't hit a lot of 5ths through 7ths, duh.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

What do you want them to do, invent picks?
First of all, this cherry picked time frame starts 2 years after winning the SB and 2 years into it was a 16 and 0 season, so lets not talk like they were 2 and14 when these picks were made.
Secondly, 2 of 3 1s were on defense.
3 of 5 2s were on D.
1 of 4 3rds were on D
2 of 5 4ths were on D
9 of 19 5ths thru 7ths were spend on D

Looks like a pretty well split approach with an emphasis in early rounds on D.
We have the best offense in the NFL, are you criticizing using 37% of the 1sts and 2nds, 47% of all picks on offense?

The cherry picked time frame was the period they needed draft the replacements for Law, Harrison, Bruschi, Seymour, Vrabel, McGinest, etc. I never acted like they were 2-14. The talent that they won their championships with was getting old and needed to be replaced by new draft picks. The Law's, Bruschi's, Seymour's etc, are all long gone and the only legit replacement has been Mayo, maybe McCourty but he's looked bad in his second season. Chung is average at best until he proves otherwise.

They had 8 defensive draft picks in the first three rounds from 06-09.
The players they used those picks on were:

Mayo
Chung
Brace
Meriweather
Butler
Wheatley
Crable
McKenzie

What you responded to was my comment one 37Harrison's
"The other thing here is from 06-09, 11 of the 19 defensive picks (52%) were picked in round 4 or later... the majority of that (9 of 11 or 81%) being drafted in rounds 6 & 7."

So if late round picks shouldn't be expected to contribute (52%) than shouldn't higher picks result in a better crop of talent than Wheatley, Crable, McKenzie, Butler, Meriweather and Brace?

Lack of attention and bad evaluation of talent has cost this team and will continue to cost this team. They need to invest more resources and better evaluation in their defense. The proof is on the field. That is, unless you're happy with this defense and don't think it needs to be improved.

 

[JoeSixPat]

If we could just get Bobby Grier back, everything would be OK.