Ex-Illinois coach Ron Zook lauds Tavon Wilson's versatility

[Seneschal2]

….but he did have the privilege of coaching former Patriot-great and 3 year NFL player Guss Scott. The highlight of Guss's pro career was being drafted in the 3RD ROUND by the Pats. I wonder what Ex-coach's opinion on Scott was that led us to I could find Zook's opinion on Scott.

As I've mentioned before, Scott is not a suitable example of a Pats draft bust, as he was IR'd his first two seasons in the league. Hardly poor scouting by Belichick when a highly productive draftee can't overcome his injuries to remain on the Pats roster, and prove why he was worthy enough to be drafted where he was.

 

[Ivan]

Listing of whose opinion to discount when talking about a player's ability, in order of credibility, least to 'most':

1.) Mother/Father
2.) Agent
3.) Former Coaches

I'm going to amend that to:

Pre 1) messageboard poster

1) Mel Kiper etc....etc.....

2) Draftnik/ basement dweller........

3) Guy who heard from friends that team.......was taking ....

4) Mom/Dad

5) Agent/Coach


6

 

[patfanken]

Personally I can't wait for this kid to be in the starting lineup and see all the haters start praising him.

That's a ridiculous statement. No one is hating the player. Everyone is rooting for his success. And your attempt to gain some kind of moral high ground can be only seen as being a self serving attempt to prove that you are somehow a better Pats fans than the rest of us

Nevertheless its perfectly legitimate to question the FO about the issue of "why then". Its even more legitimate to question the value we got for the 62nd pick, especially when you see what Denver paid for a pick later in the draft.

DO NOT equate fans questioning moves the Pats made, with any animosity toward Tavon Wilson.

 

[PittPatriot]

As AJ said, it is all about expectations. Wheatley and Butler were clear disappointments. Reid was a 4th that didn't develop beyond ST. Wilhite was a 4th that did develop into a meaningful (though flawed) contributor. They are exact opposites and shouldn't be grouped together. Scott was never healthy so it is hard to evaluate him wrt draft prowess.

Also have to include Meriweather (played at a high level but was an underachiever) and Sanders (player at a lower level but was an overachiever) in your assessment.

All-in-all, I would rate the Pats under Belichick as a B/B- in the context of getting what the team needs for DB help in the draft. Would be better but Butler and Wheatley were seriously unforced errors in evaluation. So I don't think history should have us leaning one way or the other on Wilson. Just have to see him on the field first.

I agree with your thoughts - and that is precisely my point:
Drafting Wilson in the 2nd round makes the expectations go to him becoming at least a starter on our team…do you agree?

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Enlighten me, Andy - my expectations might be unreal. Here is my recollection:
1. Busts: Wilhite, Wheatley, Butler, Dexter Reid, and Guss Scott (injuries or not).
2. TBD: McCourty and Ras-I (though optomistic)
3. Hits: Geno Wilson, Asante, Chung.
I am sure there are others, but this is all I recall.

There is your first problem.

Wilhite... Reid........"bust".

Wilhite and Reid were a 4th round picks. 4th rounders are not busts because they were drafted in the 4th round.

Stupid commentary like that immediately excludes you from serious consideration.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

That's a ridiculous statement. No one is hating the player. Everyone is rooting for his success. And your attempt to gain some kind of moral high ground can be only seen as being a self serving attempt to prove that you are somehow a better Pats fans than the rest of us

Nevertheless its perfectly legitimate to question the FO about the issue of "why then". Its even more legitimate to question the value we got for the 62nd pick, especially when you see what Denver paid for a pick later in the draft.

DO NOT equate fans questioning moves the Pats made, with any animosity toward Tavon Wilson.

Fans can question.

At what point is reasonable to expect them to accept a legitimate answer?

BB was looking for a versatile player for the secondary.

Versatility means doing many things over a given period.

Doing many things almost always procludes "jumping out on film".

Mediots/draftniks/"scouts" look for "jumping out on film".

Therefore, it's obvious the kid can fall through the cracks.

Seven teams worked the kid out. He didn't "fall through the cracks" on the most important evaluators.

Picking up 5 spots in the 6th round is academic. Fixation on the "better trades" is an indication of being underlying obtuse on the matter.

 

[The Gr8est]

There is your first problem.

Wilhite... Reid........"bust".

Wilhite and Reid were a 4th round picks. 4th rounders are not busts because they were drafted in the 4th round.

Stupid commentary like that immediately excludes you from serious consideration.

I would also suggest that Wheatley is not a clear bust either if the evaluation is based purely on ability when drafted. As I recall Wheatley was actually looking very good early, then he injured his wrist; the one that DIDN'T already have a titanium rod in it, ended up on IR, and never seemed to be the same after that.

Admittedly it is a small sample size, but he was looking like a promising player.

I'd like to see the Pats medical staff do a better job on evaluating injury risks going forward to avoid drafting this type of player who seems susceptible to injuries as Wheatley was, and already had the one damaged wrist as a red flag.

Without the injuries, he may have been an acceptible player.

Now Butler?

No excuse for that one, that was just a flat out miss.

 

[Metaphors]

I agree with your thoughts - and that is precisely my point:
Drafting Wilson in the 2nd round makes the expectations go to him becoming at least a starter on our team…do you agree?

Agree with the sentiment but not really the statement itself. I think a top 100 pick has the expectation to fill immediate needs by getting meaningful snaps year #1. In subsequent years, his role should grow and snaps/production should increase.

I'm not overly concerned about "starting" as a measurement. I don't believe Aldon Smith started any games but he was clearly a big-time contributor. If Chung re-signs and Gregory turns out to be a huge success, then Wilson will obviously see the field less often. However, as you point out, being a 2nd round pick means when he is called upon (think 4th quarter drives protecting a lead, particularly in Jan/Feb), he delivers.

If Chung moves on or Gregory flames out, Wilson would be expected to step into the breach and take a starter role. Ultimately if the Pats win and Wilson does whatever is needed to help make that happen, it will be kind of difficult to fault using a 2nd round pick to acquire him. If the Pats fall short and safety turns out to be a key factor, then the Wilson pick is going to look really bad.

 

[mayoclinic]

Agree with the sentiment but not really the statement itself. I think a top 100 pick has the expectation to fill immediate needs by getting meaningful snaps year #1. In subsequent years, his role should grow and snaps/production should increase.

I'm not overly concerned about "starting" as a measurement. I don't believe Aldon Smith started any games but he was clearly a big-time contributor. If Chung re-signs and Gregory turns out to be a huge success, then Wilson will obviously see the field less often. However, as you point out, being a 2nd round pick means when he is called upon (think 4th quarter drives protecting a lead, particularly in Jan/Feb), he delivers.

If Chung moves on or Gregory flames out, Wilson would be expected to step into the breach and take a starter role. Ultimately if the Pats win and Wilson does whatever is needed to help make that happen, it will be kind of difficult to fault using a 2nd round pick to acquire him. If the Pats fall short and safety turns out to be a key factor, then the Wilson pick is going to look really bad.

I haven't read War Room by Michael Holley, but I've seen a few excerpts. And one of them mentions something to the effect that the Pats draft players with mind to filling specific roles occupied by existing players, or something to that effect.

I think that you can view Chung/Wilson/Gregory as BB's "replacement" for Chung/Meriweather/Sanders of 2009-2010. It's not clear exactly how things will shake out between Wilson and Gregory in terms of playing time, and Chung's long term situation is not yet resolved, though I personally expect the Pats to sign him to a long term contract. If the Pats end up getting something like what they had with Chung/Meriweather/Sanders in 2009-2010 but with better communication, less freelancing, less boneheaded plays and a little more coverage ability, that won't be too bad. Josh Barrett or Nate Ebner could conceivably be the "4th safety" playing mainly a ST role. The fact that McCourty, Dowling, Arrington, Moore and Dennard can all potentially play FS in the event of an injury gives the Pats added depth at the safety position.

As you say, it doesn't matter who is the "starter". I would expect Wilson to get considerable playing time as a rookie barring injury, and for his role to gradually increase. There's no need to rush him in, but there's also no reason for him not to get on the field a fair amount.

 

[RayClay]

Draft position has nothing to do with what you do after that. If an UDFA ends up an all pro and a 1st round draft pick ends up a highly valuable versatile backup you have strengthened much of your defensive backfield.

Look at Meriweather. he was a starter and an All Pro. What good is he doing us or anyone else at this point?

Draft picks are simply hired employees. If you end up with excellent employees who work together well, it doesn't matter diddly how you acquired them, you'll succeed.

I'd be pleased as punch to have a fifth round pick as a starter at safety, even if it meant a first and second rounder busted...that is, if his name was Rodney Harrison.:verycool:

 

[VJCPatriot]

Draft position has nothing to do with what you do after that. If an UDFA ends up an all pro and a 1st round draft pick ends up a highly valuable versatile backup you have strengthened much of your defensive backfield.

Look at Meriweather. he was a starter and an All Pro. What good is he doing us or anyone else at this point?

Draft picks are simply hired employees. If you end up with excellent employees who work together well, it doesn't matter diddly how you acquired them, you'll succeed.

I'd be pleased as punch to have a fifth round pick as a starter at safety, even if it meant a first and second rounder busted...that is, if his name was Rodney Harrison.:verycool:

True. At the end of the day it doesn't matter as much where they are drafted but how well they perform. 1st round picks are expected to perform for the Pats. Our record is so good with them. 2nd rounders are 50/50 expectations at best. Anything after that is gravy.

Let's not get so worked up over, 'we used a 2nd round pick' over him! And focus more on if he can contribute to a secondary that needed shoring up in a bad way. BB doesn't draft on name recognition, he drafts based on how he feels the player will fit in with OUR team. Not the other 31 teams in the NFL.

 

[Ivan]

That's a ridiculous statement. No one is hating the player. Everyone is rooting for his success. And your attempt to gain some kind of moral high ground can be only seen as being a self serving attempt to prove that you are somehow a better Pats fans than the rest of us

Nevertheless its perfectly legitimate to question the FO about the issue of "why then". Its even more legitimate to question the value we got for the 62nd pick, especially when you see what Denver paid for a pick later in the draft.

DO NOT equate fans questioning moves the Pats made, with any animosity toward Tavon Wilson.

Unfortunately he's right Ken. There are posers here who have labelled Wilson as "garbage," have claimed he ruined their draft, and are calling him the player that will be the surprise cut, and it's clear that's what they want so it will show they were right and Belichick wrong. Whether they are actually Patriot fans or trolls is the real question because it makes no sense for Patriot fans to want him to fail yet there they are.


Pretty much everyone questioned the Wilson pick, myself included, but the people being called into account here are those who have gone way beyond questioning the pick and have deemed it ruinous and are clearly placing their own opinion of prospects way above the team's scouting and analysis of the prospects, and they are doing so after a draft that clearly addressed the Patriots needs on defense as aggressively as possible, so while they should be thrilled they are still angry and are still pounding their fisties and feeties on the basement floor.

 

[RayClay]

True. At the end of the day it doesn't matter as much where they are drafted but how well they perform. 1st round picks are expected to perform for the Pats. Our record is so good with them. 2nd rounders are 50/50 expectations at best. Anything after that is gravy.

Let's not get so worked up over, 'we used a 2nd round pick' over him! And focus more on if he can contribute to a secondary that needed shoring up in a bad way. BB doesn't draft on name recognition, he drafts based on how he feels the player will fit in with OUR team. Not the other 31 teams in the NFL.

To extend my thought, yes it matters how you draft and how you work free agency. The way this is measured is by performance.

Consistent regular season success is probably the best measurement, though having this without playoff and ultimately Super Bowl success can indicate a flaw (let's say great passing, big time wins but playoff failure, indicating lack of defense/running etc.)

Do the Patriots, Steelers, Colts (won one with Peyton) and *horrors* Giants draft, FA sign well? absolutely, because they acquire players that make their systems work well consistently. Steelers and Giants seem to stock their defenses for playoff success, along with good coaching.

This isn't rocket science. If your team earns "best draft" every year then sucks when it comes to playing, you might have multiple problems, but acquiring the right players is likely to be one of them. You need to have a system capable of success and acquire the right players to man that system, period.

 

[State]

If you'll recall the pick, (ESPN) John Gruden immediately mentioned how coach Zook had wondered why people weren't touting Wilson, when they came to look at Mercilus and Janoris Jenkins.

It was actually pretty hilarious as, once again, Kiper got caught totally befuddled, fuming about how all these coaches (like ex coach Gruden) didn't know what they were talking about.

Just as a point of fact, Tavon Wilson was not on the first team all big ten team or even on the second all big ten.

He was put on honorable mention--by the media in big ten country. No one ever mentions that except for yours truly.

None of the opposing coaches respected him enough to vote him as the top player or two (or three or four) at his position, even though he a had been three year starter.

And considering Zook's penchant for being a great recruiter but a poor coach--FOUR freakin' guys taken from his team in the top 48 this year and they go 2-6 in the Big Ten--he has been fired. Zook's teams woefully underperformed. They had the talent, that's for sure.

Tavon Wilson's versatility is not in question here.

 

[BradyManny]

That's a ridiculous statement. No one is hating the player. Everyone is rooting for his success. And your attempt to gain some kind of moral high ground can be only seen as being a self serving attempt to prove that you are somehow a better Pats fans than the rest of us

Nevertheless its perfectly legitimate to question the FO about the issue of "why then". Its even more legitimate to question the value we got for the 62nd pick, especially when you see what Denver paid for a pick later in the draft.

DO NOT equate fans questioning moves the Pats made, with any animosity toward Tavon Wilson.

There was nothing ridiculous about his post, Ken.

Implicit in the questioning of the Wilson pick is a questioning of his worth and his value. It's not about animosity - but people who question that pick are, of course, intrinsically saying they don't think he was worth a 2nd round pick.

I think it's natural for fans to want to get behind Wilson and prove these folks wrong. He's been made an underdog by the reaction to that pick both nationally and amongst Patriot fans. And a natural reaction to that - for plenty of fans - is to root even harder for said underdog.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Just as a point of fact, Tavon Wilson was not on the first team all big ten team or even on the second all big ten.

He was put on honorable mention--by the media in big ten country. No one ever mentions that except for yours truly.

None of the opposing coaches respected him enough to vote him as the top player or two (or three or four) at his position, even though he a had been three year starter.

And considering Zook's penchant for being a great recruiter but a poor coach--FOUR freakin' guys taken from his team in the top 48 this year and they go 2-6 in the Big Ten--he has been fired. Zook's teams woefully underperformed. They had the talent, that's for sure.

Tavon Wilson's versatility is not in question here.

........and outside of the verdant need to post complete dribble, what exactly is the meaning of the post?

You are the only poster I have ever seen who doesn't prove the exact opposite of their point based on the sole fact that there is zero point to anything posted.

Before posting again, you need to sit down and figure out exactly why anyone who fancies they sport a clue would worry about the opinion of opposing Big Ten coaches on college play and what it means for scouting specific qualities deemed desireable for the Patriots secondary.

You make the clown who thinks 4th rounders can be "busts" look like Einstein.

 

[Username]

........and outside of the verdant need to post complete dribble, what exactly is the meaning of the post?

You are the only poster I have ever seen who doesn't prove the exact opposite of their point based on the sole fact that there is zero point to anything posted.

Before posting again, you need to sit down and figure out exactly why anyone who fancies they sport a clue would worry about the opinion of opposing Big Ten coaches on college play and what it means for scouting specific qualities deemed desireable for the Patriots secondary.

You make the clown who thinks 4th rounders can be "busts" look like Einstein.

Sorry to be a pedant, but the word is drivel not dribble. One of those common mistakes that people make that I find irrationally annoying.

Although oddly enough drivel can also mean dribble, but it's not commonly used in that sense.

 

[State]

Dribble's drivel, or drivel's dribble?

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Sorry to be a pedant, but the word is drivel not dribble. One of those common mistakes that people make that I find irrationally annoying.

Although oddly enough drivel can also mean dribble, but it's not commonly used in that sense.

I have seen both words used in this context.

Since he keeps posting the same stuff, it seemed more appropriate to use "dribble".

"Drivel" is also an excellent description.

Who knew a simple concept story could go like this?

 

[State]

One of those coaches who apparently didn't laud Tavon Wilson as much as the Patriots organization is Michigan State head coach Mark Dantonio. He served as secondary coach at the same school in the late 1990s under, ahem, Nick Lou Saban, who Belichick has claimed teaches him more X's and O's than the other way round when they get together.

There is some good coaching in the Big Ten--they sent nearly as many players as the SEC this year--and the opposition research by guys who do this for a living shouldn't be dismissed in casual fashion. That's all I'm saying.

No reason to go personal, Pittsburgh.

And, no, it's not dribble regardless of whether you've seen it that way. It's drivel.