Content Post Bill Belichick's draft strategy.

[BradyFTW!]

What was "pointed out" was a lot of useless homerism, at least in terms of it holding out hope for the Patriots draftees. Of the players not bolded as starter/near starter, only Brace, Pryor and Cunningham remain from prior to last season's draft, so the 5 year plan isn't in the cards for the clear majority of the 'failed' Patriots picks.

Now, if you'd like to hold out some desperate hope regarding one of that trio becoming the next Vrabel or Bruschi, you go for it.

I'm still holding out a little hope that Cunningham could end up being a serviceable 3-4 OLB, mainly because he was decent as a rookie and he didn't really have a role in last season's defense. Brace is pretty clearly a bust, though, and Pryor shouldn't be much more than an end-of-the-roster type.

 

[Rob0729]

That's sort of disingenuous. McGinest was a beast pass rusher in college and Vrabel broke sack records in college. McG/Vrabel didn't happen to record a ton of sacks in the NFL but both were very good pass rushers that could put consistent pressure on the QB. McG has the all time post season sack record and we all saw what Vrabel was capable of in 07 when the defense was many times in rush mode.

Plus how the Pats won super bowls a decade ago is sort of irrelevant now. Since the passing rule changes 2 teams that do put a premium on pass rushers (Steelers/Giants) have 4 SBs while the Pats have none.

I meant under Belichick. Belichick didn't draft McGinest. When Belichick became head coach, McGinest was considered done. He was a reclaimation project. In fact when Belichick let Chris Slade go after the 2000 season there was a lot of debate whether to let Slade or McGinest go.

Belichick in the early 2000 didn't rely on a dominant pass rusher. He relied on deceptive schemes to keep the opposing QB off kilter. It wasn't that teams had to game plan for McGinest or Vrabel. Opposing offenses had fits because they didn't know where the rush was coming from. It was a lot of scheme with players who could execute that scheme.

As for the passing rules changes, the most significant ones came after both the Steelers and Giants won their first Super Bowls this decade. The Saints won one without a dominant pass rusher. And even though Clay Matthews was a dominant one in 2010, he was relatively quite in the Super Bowl.

Also, Mark Anderson had one less sack in the playoffs than Osi Umenyoria who led the league in post season sacks. And last year was the first time since 1986 for the Pats to have two pass rushers with double digit sacks. The Pats weren't all that bad at rushing the passer. They were not a dominant pass rush, but down the stretch they were good.

 

[bagwell368]

People, when talking about Bill you have to think of him as two distinct people. There is Bill the coach ,and Bill the GM .The reason why we have won so much and done so well is that Bill the coach is arguably the best coach in the history of the game

Good so far....

so he makes up for the gross errors that he makes as a GM.A GM is judged by how good of a roster he compiles.The defense talent- wise since the old guard was phased out has been poor.Honestly, how many years does it take to make an averagely talented defense. In this era where defenses are not allowed to touch receivers why he does not realize that the only way to impact opposing offenses is through a pass rush.

BB knows how to build a defense under normal rules - he's great at it. What's normal these days? Offense is the place teams can excel. How many great defensive teams have there been since the Pats in 2004? How about offense? Why do you think BB dealt for Welker and Moss? The value proposition is on that side of the ball.

We have seen this up close and personal against the Giants twice , but still we do not put a premium on drafting pass rushers.

You mean the 20 for 24 Brady doesn't go down or Gronk isn't hurt and we lost that game?

Our secondary is a joke after goodness knows how many 1st and 2nd round draft picks .Judging football skill positions both sides of the ball is clearly a problem for Bill all we want is for him to get help.The people complaining don't want Bill gone we are not insane but he clearly needs help in his GM capacity.

I guess you forgot about all the injuries... I just love pink hat Pats fans who were not around before Bledsoe. The Pats/BB are putting on a clinic that may not be matched in the NFL again for decades. The Pats get ripped off for Assistants left and right, BB the GM and Coach gets aped all over the leage, and yet it's not good enough...

What team last year had the most camp cuts signed by other teams - the Pats with ease. Why does BB need your help? So he can have a cheap belly laugh?

Did you ever stop to look at all the 4-3 DE's in college that are projected to 3-4 OLB's in the pros that were picked at #50 or earlier going back to 2006? The failure rate is gigantic. Also did you forget that Bill's biggest two FA's were both OLB's? Perhaps Bill likes his OLB's seasoned and successful, and not raw with a huge chance of failure.

 

[Rob0729]

You need to find an excuse for the defense. Both Super Bowls.

And, looking stupid has never stopped you from posting. You led the Matt Light is as good as gone charge when Solder was drafted.

First, the Giants scored fewer points vs. the Pats defense than any other team they faced in the playoffs. The Giants scored 24 point vs. the Falcons' defense, 37 vs. the Packers' defense, and 20 points vs. the 49ers' defense. The Giants scored 19 points vs. the Pats' defense (with 2 points scored on a safety vs. the Pats' offense). The defense doesn't really need that much defending, they did their job well enough holding the Giants' offense (which was one of the top offenses in the league) to under 20 points. Yes, they blew it on the final drive, but for most the game they did a good job keeping the Giants' offense in check.

Second, I never said that Light was as good as gone. I always wanted Light back as a short term bridge for Solder. I may have thought someone else was going to pay him more to play elsewhere, but anyone who knows me knows I am one of the biggest Matt Light supporters on this board. I would never had led "The Matt Light is as good as gone" charge.

I have said a lot of dumb things on this board. If you are going to accuse me of something, at least make it a real accusation. Heck, you could have gone with me predicting Chad Ochocinco would have 900-1,000 yards last season or that I thought Jermaine Cunningham would have a break out season. Unlike you though, I am willing to admit when I am wrong and I don't go to idiotic lengths to continue to refuse to admit I am wrong.

BTW, funny you never responded to my response to all your "facts". Or are you still holding out hope that Belichick changes course and keeps all four picks in the first two rounds to draft impact players like Kenneth Simms, Tebucky Jones, and Tony Simmons that the Pats got in the past from such strategies.

 

[bagwell368]

I meant under Belichick. Belichick didn't draft McGinest. When Belichick became head coach, McGinest was considered done. He was a reclaimation project. In fact when Belichick let Chris Slade go after the 2000 season there was a lot of debate whether to let Slade or McGinest go.

Belichick in the early 2000 didn't rely on a dominant pass rusher. He relied on deceptive schemes to keep the opposing QB off kilter. It wasn't that teams had to game plan for McGinest or Vrabel. Opposing offenses had fits because they didn't know where the rush was coming from. It was a lot of scheme with players who could execute that scheme.

As an aside, I believe McGinest was considered done due to injuries, not quality of play. Slade was trash.

 

[bagwell368]

Matt Light? Another BB boondogle (Borges said so - along with Seymour). Matt Light was easily the best T we had last year, just as Waters was the best G. I'd like both to stay, but at least one if not two. If both retire, and Vollmer continues with his health issues, this OL with Connolly as a below average -> poor Center, and 2nd year men Solder and Cannon, along with Mankins (when he finally gets back) is going to be one thin line, which is why I'm pretty sure we are drafting a G in our first five picks, and potentially a C if one of the early/mid 3rd rounds drops down to our pick.

BB's hit rate on OL's is very high and this draft is deeeep in G's.

 

[Rob0729]

As an aside, I believe McGinest was considered done due to injuries, not quality of play. Slade was trash.

Yes, that was the case, but McGinest was considered done. And what saved him was Belichick transforming him from an attack, hand in the ground DE to more of a read and react, standing OLB (although he would play hands in the ground on certain sub packages). McGinest under Belichick was a smart player who really didn't scare you based on his physical skills, but more because of the mental part of the game with his physical skills. McGinest was the master of the delayed blitz. He could fake out the best defenders with a quick move to make them think he was going to defend the flat or drop back in coverage and then juke into a blitz. But that was in part of the genius of the Crennel/Belichick defenses and the fact that there were seven guys on the line doing deceptive things like that.

That is what I think is missing from the defense more than a dominant pass rusher. It is the deception that teams don't know what the Pats' defense is going to do before the snap. It is something that the offense has, but not the defense. Now that the defense is getting a little more mature along with a full offseason, they might throw some of that stuff in this year.

 

[Ron Sellers]

Matt Light? Another BB boondogle (Borges said so - along with Seymour).

A little help please: what is this in reference to?

 

[kudzif]

First, the Giants scored fewer points vs. the Pats defense than any other team they faced in the playoffs. The Giants scored 24 point vs. the Falcons' defense, 37 vs. the Packers' defense, and 20 points vs. the 49ers' defense. The Giants scored 19 points vs. the Pats' defense (with 2 points scored on a safety vs. the Pats' offense). The defense doesn't really need that much defending, they did their job well enough holding the Giants' offense (which was one of the top offenses in the league) to under 20 points. Yes, they blew it on the final drive, but for most the game they did a good job keeping the Giants' offense in check.

Second, I never said that Light was as good as gone. I always wanted Light back as a short term bridge for Solder. I may have thought someone else was going to pay him more to play elsewhere, but anyone who knows me knows I am one of the biggest Matt Light supporters on this board. I would never had led "The Matt Light is as good as gone" charge.

I have said a lot of dumb things on this board. If you are going to accuse me of something, at least make it a real accusation. Heck, you could have gone with me predicting Chad Ochocinco would have 900-1,000 yards last season or that I thought Jermaine Cunningham would have a break out season. Unlike you though, I am willing to admit when I am wrong and I don't go to idiotic lengths to continue to refuse to admit I am wrong.

BTW, funny you never responded to my response to all your "facts". Or are you still holding out hope that Belichick changes course and keeps all four picks in the first two rounds to draft impact players like Kenneth Simms, Tebucky Jones, and Tony Simmons that the Pats got in the past from such strategies.

Robo , the Giants had 40 minutes in time of possession , and the defence did not force a single 3 and out. The Giants shortest possession was like 9 plays which essentially doomed the offense to horrible field position the whole game.If you know football you know that starting field position affects scoring greatly.So even though they conceded 21 points let us not pretend they played well .Their inability to get off the field on third down adversely affected the offense , and hence the team.

 

[Rob0729]

Robo , the Giants had 40 minutes in time of possession , and the defence did not force a single 3 and out. The Giants shortest possession was like 9 plays which essentially doomed the offense to horrible field position the whole game.If you know football you know that starting field position affects scoring greatly.So even though they conceded 21 points let us not pretend they played well .Their inability to get off the field on third down adversely affected the offense , and hence the team.

Part of the reason why the Giants had the ball for 40 minutes was because the Giants had the ball for most of the first 12 minutes because the offense's only play in that time was a safety which not only gave points to the Giants, but it took only 8 seconds off the clock. You can't blame the defense for that.

The Giants had eight drives. In those drives:

- Only two went for more than 50 yards, four drives didn't go 40 yards
- Four drives were forced to punt
- Two were field goals and one was off a 33 yard drive
- Two drives were for TDs

That isn't a dominant performance, but should be good enough to win any game if the offense is doing their job. In fact, if you look at the Patriots' drive chart, the only significant difference is that the Pats got a safety (Brady's stupidity to throw it away to a place where no receiver was even close to), an INT (a bad throw by Brady that was way off target), and two three and outs. That isn't significant.

And I agree the field position battle was huge, but you forget the field position battle goes both ways. Two of Giants' field goals were off of short drives that they started with excellent field position. One was started on their 35 and went 45 yard. The other started on the New England 48 off an INT and only went 33 yards. If the offense didn't give the Giants the field position on those drives, the Pats win the game.

I do know football. That's why I understand that games are won and lost at all phases of the game. To pin the blame on the Super Bowl loss on the defense is stupid. It was lost in all phases and it was a game that went down to the wire (just like every Patriots' Super Bowls under Belichick) and could have been won or lost on any one of a handful of plays. Those plays just went against the Pats.

Let's not act like the Giants blew the Pats out and the Pats were totally outclassed. The Pats had the lead for most of the second half until 1:04 left in the game and the offense still had a shot to win it at that point. It was a close game that could have gone either way.

 

[randomk1]

I'm still holding out a little hope that Cunningham could end up being a serviceable 3-4 OLB, mainly because he was decent as a rookie and he didn't really have a role in last season's defense. Brace is pretty clearly a bust, though, and Pryor shouldn't be much more than an end-of-the-roster type.

Pryor is pretty decent imo....he just can't stay healthy.

 

[randomk1]

A little help please: what is this in reference to?

Borges : "On a day when they could have had impact players David Terrell or Koren Robinson or the second-best tackle in the draft in Kenyatta Walker, they took Georgia defensive tackle Richard Seymour, who had 1 sack last season in the pass-happy SEC and is too tall to play tackle at 6-6 and too slow to play defensive end. This genius move was followed by trading out of a spot where they could have gotten the last decent receiver in Robert Ferguson and settled for tackle Matt Light, who will not help any time soon."


If i'm not mistaken

 

[Huckleberry1]

Good so far....



BB knows how to build a defense under normal rules - he's great at it. What's normal these days? Offense is the place teams can excel. How many great defensive teams have there been since the Pats in 2004? How about offense? Why do you think BB dealt for Welker and Moss? The value proposition is on that side of the ball.



You mean the 20 for 24 Brady doesn't go down or Gronk isn't hurt and we lost that game?



I guess you forgot about all the injuries... I just love pink hat Pats fans who were not around before Bledsoe. The Pats/BB are putting on a clinic that may not be matched in the NFL again for decades. The Pats get ripped off for Assistants left and right, BB the GM and Coach gets aped all over the leage, and yet it's not good enough...

What team last year had the most camp cuts signed by other teams - the Pats with ease. Why does BB need your help? So he can have a cheap belly laugh?

Did you ever stop to look at all the 4-3 DE's in college that are projected to 3-4 OLB's in the pros that were picked at #50 or earlier going back to 2006? The failure rate is gigantic. Also did you forget that Bill's biggest two FA's were both OLB's? Perhaps Bill likes his OLB's seasoned and successful, and not raw with a huge chance of failure.

You posted someone else's comments as mine. I never said anything you quoted there.

 

[Huckleberry1]

People, when talking about Bill you have to think of him as two distinct people. There is Bill the coach ,and Bill the GM .The reason why we have won so much and done so well is that Bill the coach is arguably the best coach in the history of the game,so he makes up for the gross errors that he makes as a GM.A GM is judged by how good of a roster he compiles.The defense talent- wise since the old guard was phased out has been poor.Honestly, how many years does it take to make an averagely talented defense. In this era where defenses are not allowed to touch receivers why he does not realize that the only way to impact opposing offenses is through a pass rush.We have seen this up close and personal against the Giants twice , but still we do not put a premium on drafting pass rushers. Our secondary is a joke after goodness knows how many 1st and 2nd round draft picks .Judging football skill positions both sides of the ball is clearly a problem for Bill all we want is for him to get help.The people complaining don't want Bill gone we are not insane but he clearly needs help in his GM capacity.

This the post you quoted, it was a response to my post, not something I wrote.

 

[Triumph]

First, the Giants scored fewer points vs. the Pats defense than any other team they faced in the playoffs. The Giants scored 24 point vs. the Falcons' defense, 37 vs. the Packers' defense, and 20 points vs. the 49ers' defense. The Giants scored 19 points vs. the Pats' defense (with 2 points scored on a safety vs. the Pats' offense). The defense doesn't really need that much defending, they did their job well enough holding the Giants' offense (which was one of the top offenses in the league) to under 20 points. Yes, they blew it on the final drive, but for most the game they did a good job keeping the Giants' offense in check.

Its wasnt only the final drive. Manning had a 75% completion percentage for that game. In the 4th quarter he completed 10 of 14 for 118 yards and 7 first downs.

Stats & Info: How Giants, Eli came through - Giants Blog - ESPN New York

If you beleive there is nothing wrong with the Pats passing defense I sure hope that Belichick doesnt think the same.

Second, I never said that Light was as good as gone. I always wanted Light back as a short term bridge for Solder. I may have thought someone else was going to pay him more to play elsewhere, but anyone who knows me knows I am one of the biggest Matt Light supporters on this board. I would never had led "The Matt Light is as good as gone" charge.

You did and I will find the post if its still there and it should be. Last years draft. I questioned whether BB would put Bradys life in the hands of a rookie LT. At the time, I didnt bother to say anything after Light was resigned.

The moral of the story is to clean up your own yard before attempting to clean up somebody elses.

I have said a lot of dumb things on this board. If you are going to accuse me of something, at least make it a real accusation. Heck, you could have gone with me predicting Chad Ochocinco would have 900-1,000 yards last season or that I thought Jermaine Cunningham would have a break out season. Unlike you though, I am willing to admit when I am wrong and I don't go to idiotic lengths to continue to refuse to admit I am wrong.

I am not wrong about the constant trading down hurting this team. The lunch pail approach has run its course. The Woodheads and Edelmans are great stories, they really are.

The Pats are getting beat by better players.

BTW, funny you never responded to my response to all your "facts". Or are you still holding out hope that Belichick changes course and keeps all four picks in the first two rounds to draft impact players like Kenneth Simms, Tebucky Jones, and Tony Simmons that the Pats got in the past from such strategies.

What do Bobby Griers draft picks have to do with today?

 

[Off The Grid]

I will spell this out: No Championships in 11 years!!

"I will spell this out."

 

[Sciz]

How do we know that Belichick doesn't always get the guy he would have taken had he not traded down? Would McCourty be a better player if he had been taken at 23 instead of 27? Or Dowling if he had been taken at 22 instead of 33? Or Spikes at 58 instead of 62? Chung at 23 instead of 34 and then Brace at 34 instead of 40? Ridley at 60 instead of 73? Heck, Mayo at 7 instead of 10?

 

[Off The Grid]

For Those Who Can't Quite Grasp The Facts:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/13/909820-coach-bill-mad-genius-trading-back.html

Every one of us has benefited IMMENSELY from Mad Bill's Genius at Trading.

Mad Bill DOES cash in his Trade Backs...even WHILE building a PipeLine the Envy of the entire LEAGUE!!

Coach Bill The Mad (Genius) ~ Trading Back!!

For the education of those of you who think that Mad Bill's incessant Trade Backs ~ trading a 3rd for a Deferred 2nd, that sort of thing ~ disappear down some Rabbit Hole...And for the amusement of those who know better...I thought I'd invest a little time in doing some quick and dirty Mathematics.

What I'm going to do here is simply add up the Book Values ~ that's Draft Value Chart Dollars, for those scoring at home!! ~ of the Picks we've ended up with, in recent years, and compare them to what we would've ended up with if Mad Bill had simply stood pat ~ a simple exercise, but I'm kind of curious, myself!!

1 ~ To save myself a lot of work, I'm going to stick to the approximate Book Values of the first 3 Rounds, and I'll also take the liberty of rounding off, if the mood strikes me!!

2 ~ To further clarify things, I'll also include the applicable Trade Downs..and Trade Ups!!

3 ~ I've excluded trades for Players ~ Wes Welker, Matt Cassel, Deion Branch ~ and Comps, of course.

2007

Before All Trade Backs: #24, 28, and 91 = 740 + 660 + 136 = 1536 Points.

1 ~ #28 to Miners for 2008 1st Rounder ~ #07.
2 ~ #91 to Raiders for 2008 3rd Rounder ~ #69.

After Trade Backs: #24 = 740 = 740 Points.

Change = - 796 Points.

2008

Before All Trade Backs: #62 + 94 = 284 + 124 = 408.

1 ~ #7 to Saints for #10 + #78.
2 ~ #69 to Bolts for 2009 2nd Rounder ~ #47.

After Trade Backs ~ And Downs: #10, 62, 78, and 94 = 1300 + 284 + 200 + 124 = 1908.

Change = + 1500 Points.

2009

Before All Trade Backs: #23, 58, and 89 = 760 + 320 + 145 = 1225.

1 ~ #23 to Ravens for #26 (5th Rounder doesn't weigh, here).
2 ~ #26 to Packers for #41, #73, and #83.
3 ~ #47 to Raiders (Again: Later Rounders don't apply, here) for #40.
4 ~ #73 to Jaguars for 2010 2nd Rounder ~ #44.
5 ~ #89 to Titans for 2010 2nd Rounder ~ #47.

After All Trade Backs ~ And Ups + Downs: #40, 41, 58, and 83 = 500 + 490 + 320 + 175 = 1485.

Change = + 260 Points.

2010

Before All Trade Backs: #22, 53, and 85 = 780 + 370 + 165 = 1315.

1 ~ #22 to Broncos for #24 (And Aaron The Navigator!!).
2 ~ #24 to CowBoys for #27 and #90.
3 ~ #44 to Raiders for #42.
4 ~ #47 to Cards for #58 and #89.
5 ~ #58 to Hoosten for #62 (And Zoltan The Space Emperor...of Space!!).
6 ~ #89 to Panthers for 2011 2nd Rounder.

After All Trade Backs ~ And Ups + Downs: #27, 42, 53, 62, and 90 = 680 + 480 + 370 + 284 + 140 = 1954.

Change = + 641 Points.

2011

Before All Trade Backs: #28, 60, and 92 = 660 + 300 + 132 = 1092.

1 ~ #28 to Saints for #56 and 2012 1st Rounder.
2 ~ #60 to Hoosten for #73 and change.
3 ~ #92 to Raiders for 2012 2nd Rounder.

After All Trade Backs ~ And Downs: #33, 56, and 73 = 580 + 340 + 225 = 1145.

Change = + 53 Points.

2012

Before All Trade Backs: #31, 62, and 93 = 600 + 284 + 128 = 1012.

After All Trade Backs ~ So Far!!: #27, 31, 48, 62, and 93 = 680 + 600 + 420 + 284 + 128 = 2112.

Change = + 1100 Points!!

Let's Tally That Up, Shall We??

2007 = - 0796 Points.
2008 = + 1500 Points.
2009 = + 0260 Points.
2010 = + 0641 Points.
2011 = + 0053 Points.
2012 = + 1100 Points.

Total = + 2758 Points!!

That's like getting 4 1st Rounders ~ #26 ~ in 6 years...for FREE!! :rocker:

Put another way...

That's like getting 10 2nd rounders ~ #63 ~ TEN Second Rounders!!! ~ for FREE!!!

So much for those who think that Mad Bill's just hiding those Picks under'is mattress!!

 

[JoeSixPat]

That's a pretty thin argument... especially when Belichick has had them one play away from winning two additional Super Bowls in that 7 year period.

Ultimately there's only so much a coach or GM can do. The players need to accept responsibility for executing the plays, and stopping a catch or making one.

If two plays pan out differently that same coach has 5 Super Bowl rings in 10 years.

Would your point still be the same if those two plays had gone differently?

What happened to the NE high powered offense? It got shut down, both games.

And, the defense could not hold the lead. Thats why this Super Bowl loss was no where near as bad as 07 because you expected it to happen.

I have no shortage of constructive criticisms regarding play calling, player utilization and personnel myself.

But that wasn't the question.

Both the '07 and '11 teams were one play from winning the Super Bowl. We all know that one failed catch or one failed stop in each of the games by heart.

If the catch or stop had been made, would you really be decrying Belichick's ability having "only" won 5 Super Bowls in the last 10 years?

The teams would have been no different - it just boils down to that one play.

Because Belichick "only" won 3 Super Bowls and "only" had the team one play away from 2 more, you REALLY feel that he's lost his mojo?

 

[ctpatsfan77]

this OL with Connolly as a below average -> poor Center,

Why did the Pats pay him like a starter then? They certainly didn't need to.