Michael Lombardi coming to New England?

[Rob0729]

Absolutely, tons of it. Of course, EVERY team wastes a huge amount of draft capital and always will, because the draft process is full of unknowns. If you actually tally it all up and compare to the rest of the league, the Pats are among the very best at wringing value from their picks.

The Pats' misses just stand out more because they make unconventional choices. People cut you a lot more slack for making the same mistakes they would have made, rather than new and original mistakes.

Back to Lombardi...he has always struck me as a smart guy who had Belichick's trust. And IMO building front-office depth has some of the same benefits as building depth on the roster.

Yeah, I think people overrate the wasted Patriots draft picks and how they trade down. You look around the league and most teams who draft high, are aggressive in the draft, or just use their picks as they lay have no better success in drafting than the Patriots. The Pats are not the best at drafting, but other than a streak in 2006-2008, they have been above average.

If SMY is right that Lombardi consulted with the Pats in 2010-2012 on the draft in an unofficial capacity, I agree he can only help the front office.

 

[ripatsfan91]

Lombardi is a great talent evaluator good hiring

 

[Sicilian]

Absolutely, tons of it. Of course, EVERY team wastes a huge amount of draft capital and always will, because the draft process is full of unknowns. If you actually tally it all up and compare to the rest of the league, the Pats are among the very best at wringing value from their picks.

The Pats' misses just stand out more because they make unconventional choices. People cut you a lot more slack for making the same mistakes they would have made, rather than new and original mistakes.

Back to Lombardi...he has always struck me as a smart guy who had Belichick's trust. And IMO building front-office depth has some of the same benefits as building depth on the roster.

Reminds me of a quote I heard, can't remember where... "I never make the same mistake twice. Unfortunately I'm creative enough to devise entirely new ones."

 

[DarrylS]

Despite the prevailing attitude that we waste draft picks, here is something from Mike Reiss... that disputes that contention... this team is being rebuilt on the fly.

New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

Gosselin then highlights some notable stats from 2013:
There were a record 1,030 games started by NFL rookies in 2013. The Patriots had a league runner-up 57. Despite all that youth on the field, New England still won 12 games, another AFC East title and reached the AFC title game.

The league is getting younger. The number of rookie starts has increased by the year from 650 in 2008 to 706 in 2009 to 763 in 2010 to 853 in 2011 to 1,000 in 2012 and now 1,030 in 2013.

The Patriots have kept pace. They have retained 43 rookies on their roster over the last four years -- 27 draft picks and 16 college free agents. Those rookies have combined to start 186 games for New England.

 

[ivanvamp]

Yeah, I think people overrate the wasted Patriots draft picks and how they trade down. You look around the league and most teams who draft high, are aggressive in the draft, or just use their picks as they lay have no better success in drafting than the Patriots. The Pats are not the best at drafting, but other than a streak in 2006-2008, they have been above average.

If SMY is right that Lombardi consulted with the Pats in 2010-2012 on the draft in an unofficial capacity, I agree he can only help the front office.

SMH at the bolded part. The Pats, under Belichick, have been incredibly good at drafting. Nobody has been better. We've discussed this time and again here. Studies have been done using objective analysis, including by people like CHFF. Starting with the worst average draft slot (because they're always really good), the Patriots have ended up drafting the best since 2000. Of course there are some bad years and plenty of swings and misses. But *EVERY* team has those. At worst, the Pats are a top 3 drafting team during the Belichick era, but really, given their starting position, they've been #1.

 

[PP2]

Back to Lombardi...he has always struck me as a smart guy who had Belichick's trust. And IMO building front-office depth has some of the same benefits as building depth on the roster.

Back when he was writing columns for NFP, I always enjoyed reading his columns. He always had a grasp of the big picture, and that was his mentality- always the big picture. He would invariably include a historical quote in nearly every column that had bearing on the meaning of life, and apply it to football.

 

[TonyTucker]

SMH at the bolded part. The Pats, under Belichick, have been incredibly good at drafting. Nobody has been better. We've discussed this time and again here. Studies have been done using objective analysis, including by people like CHFF. Starting with the worst average draft slot (because they're always really good), the Patriots have ended up drafting the best since 2000. Of course there are some bad years and plenty of swings and misses. But *EVERY* team has those. At worst, the Pats are a top 3 drafting team during the Belichick era, but really, given their starting position, they've been #1.

If they're the best, where are all of their playmakers and game changers that they've drafted recently? They have one, Gronk, and he's always hurt. Mayo? He's allergic to making big plays, see SB46. Chandler Jones? Gets his one sack and checks out. McCourty? He reminds me of late to the play Willie Clay.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

If they're the best, where are all of their playmakers and game changers that they've drafted recently? They have one, Gronk, and he's always hurt. Mayo? He's allergic to making big plays, see SB46. Chandler Jones? Gets his one sack and checks out. McCourty? He reminds me of late to the play Willie Clay.

You nailed it. Your Jets have much better drafts.

 

[JackBauer]

If they're the best, where are all of their playmakers and game changers that they've drafted recently? They have one, Gronk, and he's always hurt. Mayo? He's allergic to making big plays, see SB46. Chandler Jones? Gets his one sack and checks out. McCourty? He reminds me of late to the play Willie Clay.

I wish I could give this post four thumbs down.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

I wish I could give this post four thumbs down.

I liked the old Thumbs Up and thumbs Down system much better
It might help modify some posters' appetite for creating mindless threads

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

If they're the best, where are all of their playmakers and game changers that they've drafted recently? They have one, Gronk, and he's always hurt. Mayo? He's allergic to making big plays, see SB46. Chandler Jones? Gets his one sack and checks out. McCourty? He reminds me of late to the play Willie Clay.

Well playmakers are hard to come by and the system the patriots employ doesn't allow freelancing. Plus, you'd have to note that what most people consider playmakers are really top 10 draft picks, maybe 15 in a good year.

Then there are the playmakers selected in the later rounds who just turn out to be better than anyone thought. the Patriots haven't had a whole lot of top 10/15 picks in quite some time. Yet, they are still well above the 50% mark for 1st round starters.

and for the record, Jerrod Mayo at 10 was a much better pick than Vernon Gholston at 6. :rocker:

 

[Danger Zone]

SMH at the bolded part. The Pats, under Belichick, have been incredibly good at drafting. Nobody has been better. We've discussed this time and again here. Studies have been done using objective analysis, including by people like CHFF. Starting with the worst average draft slot (because they're always really good), the Patriots have ended up drafting the best since 2000. Of course there are some bad years and plenty of swings and misses. But *EVERY* team has those. At worst, the Pats are a top 3 drafting team during the Belichick era, but really, given their starting position, they've been #1.

...AND the Patriots have drafted in the worst average position of any NFL team over the last 13 years. (Correct me if Im wrong)

Why everyone seems to dismiss the cumulative impact of this just boggles my mind.

 

[mayoclinic]

Pats officially announce Lombardi as an "assistant to the coaching staff":

Patriots announce they've hired Mike Lombardi as special assistant to coaching staff | National Football Post

 

[captain stone]

Pats officially announce Lombardi as an "assistant to the coaching staff":

Patriots announce they've hired Mike Lombardi as special assistant to coaching staff | National Football Post

Good; the more voices of successful experience Bill hears, the better-informed his opinion
should be, just so long as Lombardi didn't recommend Cunningham, Glas-IR, Tavon Wilson
& Bequette during his unofficial advisory position from 2010-2012.

 

[borg]

Pats officially announce Lombardi as an "assistant to the coaching staff":

Patriots announce they've hired Mike Lombardi as special assistant to coaching staff | National Football Post

BB's annual vet signing that washes out in training camp.

 

[Danger Zone]

BB's annual vet signing that washes out in training camp.

Patriots have had one of the most reliable, team-orientated, no-drama lockerooms in all the NFL for 13 years (on top of drafting in the worst over-all position )

A big part of that is veteran presence.

They also now have one of the youngest teams in the NFL and are what second in the number of snaps by the NFLs youngest players.

The track record of these vets, no matter those that dont make it, are still pretty damn good in my opinion. Many of these vets (probably) contribute in ways more than their stats or lack thereof on the field.