Kiper: Patriots Reached on Day Two

[Off The Grid]

It's not a case of one or the other. The Patriots could have made what could be viewed as a poor value, bad pick, reach, etcetera - and at the very same time could still have what could be seen as a very productive draft.

There is one singular decision, that one single pick; then there is the draft as a whole.

Can you have a good draft and also have a not so good pick?

Do people consider the two to be mutually exclusive?

Of course it's a case of one or the other.

This Thread is about Day Two, not the whole Draft.

It says so in the Title.

 

[Irish Hooligan]

I have learned to just wait and see on this type of thing. BB and the Patriots win a lot of football games. They outshine everyone on a consistent basis when it comes to overall wins vs. loses. Would I rather them just work off of Kiper's list or Mayock's? Hell no. We know what the media does, in general, because they are our primary resource. I love this board because we have posters that do individual research/film study and I like to draw from Patsfans as a resource. At any rate whether I am quenching my thirst with kool aid or Guiness in BB I trust, and when the Pats stun people I tend to take that as a positive more than anything else.

 

[Sfpat]

IF Wilson does become a good player does it really matter where we picked him?

If you look at draft picks as money in limited restricted amounts evenly distributed to all teams who are your competitiors (enemy), then yes. Wilson was available for $0.50 and BB decided to pay $100 for him. Leaves less money available for other players and allows their competitors to better spend their "money" (i.e. able to get better players for less since other good players thus fall in value). This is what the theory of value is all about.

I compare Wilson to Williams or Carter from last years draft, who both were probably overdrafted but offered some potential upside. The difference is last year the Pats got them on the cheap.

If you want to overpay for Wilson, you pay $5 for him (6th round).

 

[ctpatsfan77]

When someone thinks a move was hideous at the time it was made, NOT lambasting it because you're a fawning, unquestioning devotee of Coach Bill is not only silly, it's ridiculous.

Grid:

If you're arguing that a person who thinks the move is hideous won't lambaste it because he's a devotee, that is ridiculous. . . . if you're that much of a devotee, odds are that person won't think the move is hideous in the first place.

 

[patsfan13]

Nobody ~ at least nobody with any sense ~ is suggesting he should do anything BUT what he believes is best. Where are getting THAT from??

All I'm saying is that reasonable people can believe in Bill and admire and even worship Bill ~ I know I do ~ and STILL lambaste a move that we think was a bad one.

And we should be able to do so without others ~ not you ~ trotting out those tired old CoolAid-Stained sweeping and disparaging comments.

All Chicken Littles and Bill Bashers deserve what they get.

But criticizing Mad Bill does not make one either a Chicken Little or a Bill Basher.

You're a clearly intelligent cat. The distinction is obvious to you, at least, isn't it?

I am in the great position of not following college football (I will catch a U of Utah game when I can since I went there). I don't know squat about who's who as far as the draft goes.

I also know and BB knows that people make a lot of mstakes, which was the subject of this thread:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/899240-freakonomics-nfl.html

So I don't get all worked up about whether this guy or that guy was a reach. I view the draft as an opportunity to see where he thinks the roster is in term of the team building process.


He normally trades down to accululate more picks, by this method he has rebuilt the core of the team the past few years. This year he traded up twice in the first round. I am infering that he thinks the roster is in good shape & that he really thinks these 2 players will be significent contributors.

I don't believe anybody outworks the guy so I don't bother to second guess him. I do try to understand what he sees in the player and how he will fit on our team, understanding that there will be numerous mistakes along the way.


BTW given the state of the roster while waiting for today's pick(s), I think we will field a conpetive team when they walk on the field for the season opener against the Titans and have a good chance of winning the division again.

 

[Off The Grid]

One parting comment, because I can see I'm wasting my time, here...

Mel Kiper is a loud, obnoxious, pathetic, annoying, fool, and he is the last guy anyone should ever listen to, if they're looking for draft expertise.

JUST in case anyone's forgotten my opinion of the guy and is making the mistake of lumping me in with'm.

 

[scout]

How about if Patsfans makes a sticky for each year's draft with the member's draft analysis. We could title it Dog Day's of June.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Guys, here is the thing: We want to answer "questions" whose answers we can't know.

Could we have got Wilson in the 3rd, 4th, 5th? We all think we could. Did BB? Evidently not.

But but but Curran said, but Kiper said... yeah okay, fine. But they're not NFL personnel guys.

I drink my share of kool-aid, and I'm also well aware that like every other team, the Pats whiff. They just do.

One big and easily observable distinction we can draw is that the Pats do what they want. That means "reaches" from the media point of view some days, and it means "steals" other days. It means "wow amazing look how many people could have drafted Gronk and Hernandez, who knew?" sometimes, and it means "um, year 4, still hasn't seen the field" other times.

By doing what they want, the Pats are toward the top of the ultimate results heap. Can't argue with that.

You probably knew better on a whole passel of picks, just like you had no idea about a whole passel of others where the Pats totally schooled you. Probably a hell of a lot more the latter than the former, based on them working in Foxboro, and you working in a badly ventilated cube farm (or wherever.)

Come on guys. The frustrating thing here is we have to talk about things we don't know about here. It's almost sad that they made the draft this public spectacle, because as lame as it is to think you're better at play-selection than professional football coaches, it's even lamer to claim to know better who was going to snatch away the pick you coveted. Same goes for Kiper, Curran, and the rest of the peanut gallery. And that would apply if you were a freaking Vikings fan, for crying out loud.

32 head coaches in the NFL, and you're not one of them. Cope. We can have fun, and no of course there's no law against spewing our opinions, but ultimately, we're fanboys (no matter how much we convince ourselves that we know what's really going on.)

Relax, enjoy, love to hate the "reaches," whatever. But let's not get all wrapped around the axle about these opinions. Nobody here knows -- maybe some of us have better arguments or better insights or whatever than others of us, but none of us are getting invites from the Pats personnel staff.

 

[Off The Grid]

Addendum: Nicely put, Brother 13...as usual.

 

[BritPat]

Closer to Draft G-nu?

Daft Guru works better

 

[Off The Grid]

Grid:

If you're arguing that a person who thinks the move is hideous won't lambaste it because he's a devotee, that is ridiculous.

FAIL!!

I...am a Mad Bill Devotee.

And I DO lambaste that Pick. :snob:

 

[resdubwhite]

Does that also answer the question of "genius" of the trade down from #62 to get #90 and #163 when the Bills later traded down #67 for #87 and #120?

Is anyone going to explain away THAT? Resdub - I'd like to hear your defense of the math there.

C'mon folks, stop twisting yourselves into pretzels to defend this. That second round was a massive screwup.

Great first round, but someone put a mickey in their drinks last night.

possibly just possibly.

he wanted a day 3 pick and he thought there was plenty to choose from when he got to 90

 

[JoeSixPat]

Here's the thing about the draft:

If there's a player you want, you have to take him before someone else does.

Sometimes people call that a reach.

For me, its very intriguing when Belichick likes a guy enough to "reach."

 

[hambone1818]

If you look at draft picks as money in limited restricted amounts evenly distributed to all teams who are your competitiors (enemy), then yes. Wilson was available for $0.50 and BB decided to pay $100 for him. Leaves less money available for other players and allows their competitors to better spend their "money" (i.e. able to get better players for less since other good players thus fall in value). This is what the theory of value is all about.

I compare Wilson to Williams or Carter from last years draft, who both were probably overdrafted but offered some potential upside. The difference is last year the Pats got them on the cheap.

If you want to overpay for Wilson, you pay $5 for him (6th round).

Again though, you're going on the faulty premise that Wilson could have been drafted in the 6th--or even picked up as an UDFA. Who's to say someone else wasn't ready to pick him later in the 2nd?

We know for a fact 7 teams worked him out. What if one of those 7 saw whatever Belichick saw...then all of a sudden someone else gets Wilson, the Pats get someone else, and maybe down the road Wilson becomes a stud. We never go through this exercise of analyzing the pick but then again we never get Wilson.

Belichick, as mentioned before, has a great track record when he goes off the board for a controversial pick, so I'll side with him. Maybe it doesn't work out, and at that point I'll criticize him for misjudging a player who was probably a reach. But right now we can only hope he had good reason to grab Wilson where he did, imo.

 

[jmt57]

Of course it's a case of one or the other.

This Thread is about Day Two, not the whole Draft.

It says so in the Title.

That is true.


My response was a more general one, to those that seem to subscribe to the theory that this one choice means the entire draft is a bad one. From reading some of the comments here over the last 14 or so hours, there appears to be many that have jumped to that conclusion.

While it is obvious to you and some others, I thought it was worth mentioning because there seems to be a sizable segment that are having difficulty differentiating between the two right now.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

How about if Patsfans makes a sticky for each year's draft with the member's draft analysis. We could title it Dog Day's of June.

Oh please yes. Simple system, incorporating both long-term and short-term factors so we can point the finger the year after and for years to come:

A+ = pro bowl or DROY/OROY pick rookie year; 4-5 years out not only still with the team, the problem is how to structure his contract to keep him

A = plays majority of snaps, makes at least 1 game-winning/changing play; 4-5 years out, see above.

B = contributes in rookie year, solid contributor in successive years...


etc.

Check 'em year by year, so our **** is objectively checkable.

 

[patfanken]

One parting comment, because I can see I'm wasting my time, here...

Mel Kiper is a loud, obnoxious, pathetic, annoying, fool, and he is the last guy anyone should ever listen to, if they're looking for draft expertise.

.

You also forgot to add he's a simpering Ravens suck up, and still pissed at the Pats about the Raven's loss last year (and never fails to mention how the Raven should have won that game when he gets a chance)

 

[ivanvamp]

and perhaps you would have drafted Jamarcus Russel with the first over all pick, or any number of busts in round one. I don't care when a guy is taken or whether he could have been had in the later rounds. I just care about how they perform.

?? If I knew what Brady would become and knew that I was absolutely going to be able to get him in the 6th round, I certainly wouldn't have wasted a pick on another QB (Russell wasn't drafted in 2000, obviously).

So I guess I'm wondering what the point of this exercise is.

The reason it matters when you take him is because if nobody else was going to take Wilson in the first 4 rounds, the Pats could have waited until later (seeing as though they traded their other 2nd round pick for later picks) to make that selection. In the meanwhile, they could have added potentially better talent as well (like a Kendall Reyes or something).

But whatever. I hope the kid turns out to be the next Rodney Harrison, and I'll definitely be rooting for him big-time.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

When someone thinks a move was hideous at the time it was made, NOT lambasting it because you're a fawning, unquestioning devotee of Coach Bill is not only silly, it's ridiculous.

When someone on a message board thinks a move was hideous based on their limited and largely second hand ability let alone total lack of experience to scout NFL players and they lambaste a HOF HC with Bill's credentials that individual is pretty self absorbed and arrogant - not to mention probably relatively ignorant. I question Bill plenty although I've been known to fawn him on occasion because hell, he's the best at what he does in his industry, maybe ever. I have learned more by simply observing him than I ever could have by reading pundits or watching broadcast film and being a football fan...

I hated the Moss signing, even moreso after 2007 the extension, and I wasn't a fan of the Ochocinco experiment, or the Mallett pick although I understand the reasoning for making it, and while I've figured out why he doesn't coddle any players I still don't entirely get why he has to alienate some of them at contract time. But that said, it's hard to argue with the simple fact that his way works more often than not, at least in the short run, and this organization has the track record to prove it. Whereas if anyone on his message board was running the show, present company included, I shudder to think how differently the last decade might have unfolded...

No one is saying Bill is perfect and it's the kneejerk naysayers who always have to fall back on the kookaid drinker insult to make themselves feel superior to those who don't get their displeasure even as they make jackasses of themselves.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

OK, OK. Let's just hope Wilson doesn't bust in training camp and BB puts him on the 53 just to spite us.

You have to admit BB has been pretty good about cutting his losses with players when it's clear it's not going to work out. Taylor Price would probably still be on a lot of rosters after investing a 3rd only two drafts ago. Butler and Tate were shipped out pretty quickly as well when their development stopped. And Haynesworth was cut pretty quickly despite everyone loving that trade a year ago.

Meriweather and Maroney were 1st rounders who started, with Big Bang Clock even going to the Pro Bowl a few times, but once they weren't working out, they were shipped out pretty quickly.

BB does what he feels is best for the team, and if that means admitting a mistake, he does it pretty quickly and honestly.

On a separate note, here's a bit of what Kiper had to say about our 2005 draft:

New England Patriots: C

Guard Logan Mankins was a reach in the first round but the Patriots obviously like his size and nastiness,

...

Tackle Nick Kaczur could play guard as well but came off the board a little early

...

and Matt Cassel is a big project at quarterback.

FWIW, in re-drafts, Mankins goes as high as 3 (NFL.com) and as low as 19th (Kiper's, because he still can't let it go and still puts Cassel, Heath Miller, Michael Roos, Antrel Rolle, and Ronnie Brown ahead of Mankins). Kaczur was easily well worth a 3rd, and probably was worth a high 2nd. And yeah, Cassel is a big project, as is pretty much every 7th round QB...

All this talk about who was a reach and who dropped is all based on lists created by people who know more about football than me, but nowhere near as much as the people who actually make the choices.