Why we should NOT reach for a LB in the 1st round...

[VJCPatriot]

I had almost managed to bury this pick into my subconscious but here it comes again thanks to this article analyzing the last 10 years of the draft.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/jeffri_chadiha/03/29/drafts/1.html

The writer specifically names Andy Katzenmoyer at #28 as part of the worst bust classes of all time (1999, 12 busts).
The lesson here gents is pick the best talent, don't just draft for need if the talent isn't there. If you find yourself "reaching" for a pick it usually turns out to be a bad pick.

 

[Mix]

The writer specifically names Andy Katzenmoyer at #28 as part of the worst bust classes of all time (1999, 12 busts).
The lesson here gents is pick the best talent, don't just draft for need if the talent isn't there. If you find yourself "reaching" for a pick it usually turns out to be a bad pick.

Katzenmoyer wasn't a bust because of his talent so thats not exactly a good example. My memory isn't the greatest about this draft but Katzenmoyer wasn't even a reach was he?

 

[sebman2112]

I had almost managed to bury this pick into my subconscious but here it comes again thanks to this article analyzing the last 10 years of the draft.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/jeffri_chadiha/03/29/drafts/1.html

The writer specifically names Andy Katzenmoyer at #28 as part of the worst bust classes of all time (1999, 12 busts).
The lesson here gents is pick the best talent, don't just draft for need if the talent isn't there. If you find yourself "reaching" for a pick it usually turns out to be a bad pick.

That's a bad example and not entirely fair. Andy was a good player until his injury, which sidelined his career. I don't think he was a reach talent wise in the first round either. Again, he was talented but got hurt. Stuff like that happens and there's nothing you can do about.

 

[PATSNUTme]

When is picking a player a "reach'? There are certain players that may be rated high but are not a good fit for a certain team.

In the Patriots case, we don't have a pick after #28 until #91. If we can't trade down would taking Bradley,for example, at #28 be a "reach"? If he is the guy the Patriots think could be a good player and a good fit for the team, would it be a reach to take him at #28?

Another would be Tanard Jackson who is rated a 2nd or high 3rd rounder, would he be a "reach" at #28 if the Patriots know he will be gone way ahead of #91?

 

[VJCPatriot]

When is picking a player a "reach'? There are certain players that may be rated high but are not a good fit for a certain team.

In the Patriots case, we don't have a pick after #28 until #91. If we can't trade down would taking Bradley,for example, at #28 be a "reach"? If he is the guy the Patriots think could be a good player and a good fit for the team, would it be a reach to take him at #28?

Another would be Tanard Jackson who is rated a 2nd or high 3rd rounder, would he be a "reach" at #28 if the Patriots know he will be gone way ahead of #91?

If you take a 3rd round talent with a 1st round pick, that sounds like the classic example of a reach. In that situation you should try to move down, or trade that pick for a future pick. A 1st rounder in 2008 is likely to be more valuable than a 1st rounder in 2007 if you can't even find 1st round talent in 2007 with that pick, no?

Just because linebacker is a position of need, you shouldn't take a less talented player. IMO, if your choice is between Bradly or Jackson (a fit/need but a 2nd/3rd round talent) vs say Meachem or Lynch (a 1st round talent but not a need) you should go with the best player every time. Good players can always be moved later. Look at Branch and Lance Briggs. Bad picks will haunt you forever. Because you're unlikely to ever get that pick's value back. Well you could trade your failure for another team's failure but that didn't work out so great with Sullivan did it?

That's a bad example and not entirely fair. Andy was a good player until his injury, which sidelined his career. I don't think he was a reach talent wise in the first round either. Again, he was talented but got hurt. Stuff like that happens and there's nothing you can do about.

Please don't make Katzenmoyer out to be this sure thing stud. He wasn't. Lots of GMs had doubts about him because he had a very "ordinary" final season. It was a Grier pick and I wouldn't bother wasting my time defending Grier if I were you. Here's the relevant quote from an article written pre-draft.
"Now, after a strangely ordinary junior season at Ohio State, Katzenmoyer inspires loud hesitation among NFL general managers, personnel directors and scouts. They struggle to match his physical skills with the way he played in 1998."
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1208/is_12_223/ai_54245993

Fact is despite the doubts about Katzenmoyer, Grier decided to draft him based on need. We know what happened afterwards.
If you want to tack on more Grier gaffes, how did that tebuckey jones pick work out? He was a swell cornerback wasn't he? Oops, that's right he never did play corner, although we drafted him because we "needed" a corner and were convinced we could convert him.

Okay and just so people don't lose track here... I am NOT saying don't draft a linebacker. I'm saying don't REACH for a linebacker. There's a big difference.

 

[PATSNUTme]

If you take a 3rd round talent with a 1st round pick, that sounds like the classic example of a reach. In that situation you should try to move down, or trade that pick for a future pick. A 1st rounder in 2008 is likely to be more valuable than a 1st rounder in 2007 if you can't even find 1st round talent in 2007 with that pick, no?

Just because linebacker is a position of need, you shouldn't take a less talented player. IMO, if your choice is between Bradly or Jackson (a fit/need but a 2nd/3rd round talent) vs say Meachem or Lynch (a 1st round talent but not a need) you should go with the best player every time. Good players can always be moved later. Look at Branch and Lance Briggs. Bad picks will haunt you forever. Because you're unlikely to ever get that pick's value back. Well you could trade your failure for another team's failure but that didn't work out so great with Sullivan did it?


Please don't make Katzenmoyer out to be this sure thing stud. He wasn't. Lots of GMs had doubts about him because he had a very "ordinary" final season. It was a Grier pick and I wouldn't bother wasting my time defending Grier if I were you. Here's the relevant quote from an article written pre-draft.
"Now, after a strangely ordinary junior season at Ohio State, Katzenmoyer inspires loud hesitation among NFL general managers, personnel directors and scouts. They struggle to match his physical skills with the way he played in 1998."
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1208/is_12_223/ai_54245993

Fact is despite the doubts about Katzenmoyer, Grier decided to draft him based on need. We know what happened afterwards.
If you want to tack on more Grier gaffes, how did that tebuckey jones pick work out? He was a swell cornerback wasn't he? Oops, that's right he never did play corner, although we drafted him because we "needed" a corner and were convinced we could convert him.

Okay and just so people don't lose track here... I am NOT saying don't draft a linebacker. I'm saying don't REACH for a linebacker. There's a big difference.

So the question is this. You are sitting at #28 and the clock is ticking. No one whats to trade either for this year or next year.

Bradley is on your board as a player you want and would take at the end of the second round. But you don't have a second rounder and you don't pick again until the end of the thrid round. You know that some team will grab him before you have another shot at him

What do you do? We are drafting football players not ranking. What do you do? If you take him, is that a "reach". If he turns out to be a solid starter for you, is it still a "reach"?

 

[VJCPatriot]

So the question is this. You are sitting at #28 and the clock is ticking. No one whats to trade either for this year or next year.

Bradley is on your board as a player you want and would take at the end of the second round. But you don't have a second rounder and you don't pick again until the end of the thrid round. You know that some team will grab him before you have another shot at him

What do you do? We are drafting football players not ranking. What do you do? If you take him, is that a "reach". If he turns out to be a solid starter for you, is it still a "reach"?

Awful lot of conditions here aren't there? You are assuming that nobody is willing to trade and no trade can be made. You have not said whether or not there are more talented (1st round worthy) players on the board at a non-need position. I've been saying all along draft the best player left on the board. If that best player available is a tackle or god forbid a tight end, even though it's not a position of need I think BB will take him. I doubt we'll be sorely disappointed once we found out BB drafted the next Orlando Pace or Todd Heap. If in your hypothesis, there is no better player available AND there is no ability to trade, of course you would have to take the best player for your system, no? That really doesn't turn out to be a choice at all under those conditions.

To put it in other words, if you have only equally rated players available and one of those players fills a position of need then it becomes okay to pick the need player as that is only sensible. If you are unable to trade out of your position due to circumstance, then picking the best player for your system might be a reach "talentwise" but is forgiveable because it was the best move under the circumstances. If you net a solid starter out of any draft pick that's usually always a good deal unless you passed up on a "superb" player. Reggie Bush vs Mario Williams comes to mind there.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Awful lot of conditions here aren't there? You are assuming that nobody is willing to trade and no trade can be made. You have not said whether or not there are more talented (1st round worthy) players on the board at a non-need position. I've been saying all along draft the best player left on the board. If that best player is a tackle or tight end, even though it's not a position of need I think BB will take him. If in your hypothesis, there is no better player available, and there is no ability to trade, of course you would have to take the best player for your system, no? That really doesn't turn out to be a choice at all under those conditions.

No it doesn't. And I do agree, always draft the best player for your system.

As I go though the write up's on players, mostly on defense, I see a lot of high rated players who are not good fits for the Patriots style of 3-4. I see some who are not "patriot type players" at all.

The draft gurus rank them and then when a team picks a player who is ranked much lower than they have him, they call that pick a reach. But, that player could be just right for that teams system and what they are looking for in a player.

It's becoming more and more that way.

 

[Denism]

The lesson here gents is pick the best talent, don't just draft for need if the talent isn't there. If you find yourself "reaching" for a pick it usually turns out to be a bad pick.

Isn't this the way The Pats Always Draft, they draft the most talented players that would suit the Pats system and not by Need!

 

[VJCPatriot]

Isn't this the way The Pats Always Draft, they draft the most talented players that would suit the Pats system and not by Need!

You are right, this is the way the CURRENT Patriots have operated for a while now. I suppose this is more a reminder to the fervent posters who clamor for a linebacker at all costs. Don't be disappointed on draft day if we don't end up taking a linebacker in the 1st round.

The Patriots draft board will account for fit to system as well as for talent. I obviously have no problem with the way they stack their draft board. I'm saying if there is a player more highly ranked on their draft board they should take him regardless of whether he necessarily fits a need. I'm not saying go by the pundits draft boards by any means. Mel Kiper has nothing to do with how the Pats stack their draft board, nor should he.

What I'm trying to say here is that people should not become wed to a particular position, ie linebacker. Although I understand it is a position of need, so are CB and S. And really just about any position on this team could be improved except perhaps QB. The Pats have a golden opportunity in this draft holding two 1st round picks. I'd like to see them come out of it with at least two first round quality players. Because the Pats stack their board differently from other teams it is entirely possible that this could happen. Sadly though is the possibility that a linebacker won't be left on their top player list when it's their turn to pick. I'm fine with that. I'd rather they choose a good player than reach for a lesser one just to fill a need. Also don't forget that free agency is still another way to solve the depth issues at linebacker and June 1st cuts haven't happened yet either.

 

[Denism]

The Patriots draft board will account for fit to system as well as for talent. I obviously have no problem with the way they stack their draft board. I'm saying if there is a player more highly ranked on their draft board they should take him regardless of whether he necessarily fits a need. I'm not saying go by the pundits draft boards by any means. Mel Kiper has nothing to do with how the Pats stack their draft board, nor should he.

If i remember correctly from the book i've read, when NE wanted Brady, they left him go round after round after round till the 6th and then decided to picked him!

I think it was James Lavin's book i read about the Pats drafting system, i suppose nobody can say that it doesn't work for them

 

[VJCPatriot]

If i remember correctly from the book i've read, when NE wanted Brady, they left him go round after round after round till the 6th and then decided to picked him!

I think it was James Lavin's book i read about the Pats drafting system, i suppose nobody can say that it doesn't work for them

I also remember that the Pats had to keep 4 QBs that year although "common wisdom" said you only needed 3. Thank goodness they bucked the trend!
Heck, The Saints waited till the 7th to take Colston. They look like geniuses now.

 

[Denism]

I also remember that the Pats had to keep 4 QBs that year although "common wisdom" said you only needed 3. Thank goodness they bucked the trend!
Heck, The Saints waited till the 7th to take Colston. They look like geniuses now.

Ya, what a fabulous pick he turned out to be!

Wasn't Adalius Thomas a 6th round pick aswell & Wes Welker was undrafted!

On a side note, Where the "F" are The Pats gonna put these guys, isn't the roster full or nearly full already?

 

[DaBruinz]

I don't believe I can consider Andy Katzenmoyer a bust. He played pretty well when forced to start in place of an Injured Ted Johnson. And it was a severe neck injury that kept him from coming back and playing again.

Now, Katzenmoyer may have turned into a bust over the long haul if he hadn't been injured, but its stupid to call a guy a bust because he suffered a neck injury that could have killed him or paralyzed him for life it he'd gotten hurt again.

 

[DaBruinz]

Ya, what a fabulous pick he turned out to be!

Wasn't Adalius Thomas a 6th round pick aswell & Wes Welker was undrafted!

On a side note, Where the "F" are The Pats gonna put these guys, isn't the roster full or nearly full already?

Its called competition. That way, the best players make the team. While the Patriots have 68 players tendered or under contract, there are quite a few who aren't guaranteed spots.

I would expect the Patriots to trade down into the 2nd and get picks for next year. Personally, if the Pats traded down out of 24 and picked up a late 2nd and an early 4th this year and a 3rd next year, I'd be happy. If they traded down and got 2 2nd round picks this year, I'd be happy. I'd be happy with a 2nd pick this year and next year.

I think that the Pats WILL trade down and I think that they will get a LB when they get them. I think that getting Bradley and DeOssie would represent the best additions, in terms of value, for the LB positions. They are versatile and have the ability to cover TEs as well as play on special teams. And its special teams contributions that I think will assure them spots on the team.

I would love to see Sabby Piscatelli, John Wendling, or Eric Weddle on this team as well. I think any one of the three (preferrably, 2 of the three) would be a huge help in the secondary.

I am planning on putting up my "big board" here in the next couple weeks as well as my pre-draft review of the Patriots.

 

[TruthSeeker]

I don't believe I can consider Andy Katzenmoyer a bust. He played pretty well when forced to start in place of an Injured Ted Johnson. And it was a severe neck injury that kept him from coming back and playing again.

Now, Katzenmoyer may have turned into a bust over the long haul if he hadn't been injured, but its stupid to call a guy a bust because he suffered a neck injury that could have killed him or paralyzed him for life it he'd gotten hurt again.

Andy Katzenmoyer was another sad #1 Pats draft pick story, the other was Hart Lee Dykes. I was thrilled to get both of them, and sad when both wound up not playing much after their rookie seasons. Many people thought Katzenmoyer was going to be the next great linebacker, people (scouts & fans) thought he was going to be what Urlacher wound up being. Very sad. HL Dykes was the same thing, people were comparing him to Al Toon, especially after catching 89 passes his last year at Oklahoma State, despite Barry Sanders running for 2100+ yards the same year (that's amazing if you ask me, 89 catches despite a guy running for 2100+ yards). HL Dykes caught 49 passes his rookie year if I remember correctly. What a shame, but injuries are a part of football.

 

[patriotsdynasty12189]

Funny it says 03 was one of the worst draft classes but was one of our best. Warren, Samuel, Wilson, Koppen. All came from 03.

 

[sebman2112]

Please don't make Katzenmoyer out to be this sure thing stud. He wasn't. Lots of GMs had doubts about him because he had a very "ordinary" final season.

The point was that he played good until his injury. I didn't make him out to be a "sure thing stud". Also, I don't really care about his pre-draft write-up's, considering he did play well until his injury. No matter if you take the safest player on the board, they could still have a career ending injury.

 

[spacecrime]

Please don't make Katzenmoyer out to be this sure thing stud. He wasn't. Lots of GMs had doubts about him because he had a very "ordinary" final season. It was a Grier pick and I wouldn't bother wasting my time defending Grier if I were you.

The guy played fine until he broke his friggin' neck. By your definition Robert Edwards was a bust.

 

[VJCPatriot]

The guy played fine until he broke his friggin' neck. By your definition Robert Edwards was a bust.

By the sportswriter's definition of the article mentioned in the very first post Katzenmoyer was a bust. And in terms of what we got out of him, I can't say I disagree.

I think that getting Bradley and DeOssie would represent the best additions, in terms of value, for the LB positions. They are versatile and have the ability to cover TEs as well as play on special teams. And its special teams contributions that I think will assure them spots on the team.

I would love to see Sabby Piscatelli, John Wendling, or Eric Weddle on this team as well. I think any one of the three (preferrably, 2 of the three) would be a huge help in the secondary.

I am planning on putting up my "big board" here in the next couple weeks as well as my pre-draft review of the Patriots.

If you like those players then chances are you'd probably love the mock draft I put up. No telling what BB does though.
http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?t=52975&page=4