After 53 cutdown thoughts

[Ring 6]

Rumor has it that they want to activate another OL.

That would require cutting bolden to have an extra roster spot.

 

[TomPatriot]

That would require cutting bolden to have an extra roster spot.

Or cutting one of the two WRs.

 

[Ring 6]

Or cutting one of the two WRs.

Meant to say would NOT.
We were discussing why would you cut bolden intending to bring him back.
Once they claimed 2 WRs I saw a reason. Get 2 so they can compete for a week then cut one to activate bolden for gane 1.

 

[PatsFan2]

Am I the only one excited about Darboh and Hansen?? I liked them both the year they were drafted. Atleast they both have a year of NFL seasoning. Second year jump??

 

[ralmat55]

Rated by who?

You are aware that none of the mock stuff that the draft talking heads release has any significance whatsoever for the draft board of individual teams, right?

More likely the mock drafts and draft expert ratings are effected by the opinions of front office personnel around the league. The Mayocks and McShays spend as much time talking to personnel people as they do watching film and making their own evaluations. Thus, those mock drafts and rankings reflect the consensus of the league as much if not more than the evaluations of the draft “experts”.

I’ve been a draftnic since 1977. One observation I’ve reached over the years is conventional wisdom of a player’s draft ranking is usually pretty reliable. You usually don’t do yourself a favor by significantly “reaching” for a player.

 

[WaterfallJumper]

I’ve been a draftnic since 1977. One observation I’ve reached over the years is conventional wisdom of a player’s draft ranking is usually pretty reliable.

These two statements are mutually exclusive.

 

[rochrist]

Am I the only one excited about Darboh and Hansen?? I liked them both the year they were drafted. Atleast they both have a year of NFL seasoning. Second year jump??

I find it tough to get excited about ANY WR they bring in at the end of camp. If they do anything, it's more likely to be next year than this year.

 

[ivanvamp]

It shouldn't be a real shock: Vinnie was way, Way, WAY over-drafted, especially when one realizes that if the Emperor was looking at DTs at the end of the 3rd round, then the far superior Andrew Billings, Hassan Ridgeway & Willie Henry were all still available. Vinnie shouldn't have been drafted until the 7TH round, at the earliest. Yet Another waste of a top-100 pick that Nobody projected as a top-100 pick; but that's Little Billy for you, always trying to prove that he's the smartest guy in the room.

He is the smartest guy in the room.

That's a huge reason why they've been on the greatest run in NFL history.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

Meant to say would NOT.
We were discussing why would you cut bolden intending to bring him back.
Once they claimed 2 WRs I saw a reason. Get 2 so they can compete for a week then cut one to activate bolden for gane 1.

I'll take it a step further and predict that neither will be on the 53 by Sunday. What waiver-wire WR is going to learn the system by then and be worth that roster spot? Who's the punt returner? Neither of these guys do it.

McCarron was "inactive" for preseason week 4, but was the only one of that group (besides the punter who never played) who got cut. I think they cut McCarron being reasonably certain that no one would claim him. And that they used his and Bolden's roster spots as tryouts for the practice squad. I'm guessing Bolden and McCarron will be on the 53 by week's end, and these new WRs will be on the practice squad if they show anything (we already know that 30 other teams weren't interested in claiming them).

 

[Ring 6]

I'll take it a step further and predict that neither will be on the 53 by Sunday. What waiver-wire WR is going to learn the system by then and be worth that roster spot? Who's the punt returner? Neither of these guys do it.

McCarron was "inactive" for preseason week 4, but was the only one of that group (besides the punter who never played) who got cut. I think they cut McCarron being reasonably certain that no one would claim him. And that they used his and Bolden's roster spots as tryouts for the practice squad. I'm guessing Bolden and McCarron will be on the 53 by week's end, and these new WRs will be on the practice squad if they show anything (we already know that 30 other teams weren't interested in claiming them).

If you wanted McCarron on the 53 there is no way you expose him. Bolden can be cut because he is a veteran and can’t be claimed in waivers.
Look at it this way. If they kept McCarron on the 53, then were awarded these 2 guys they could still have cut McCarron. So there was no need for the spot to be open.
I’d bet the one that sticks will be inactive so there is no need to learn the offense in a week.

 

[Kasmir]

Yep.

The other thing the draft bashers on this board don't account is the draft is low percentage. I'll need to dig up the link but the article from 2016 tracked all players drafted in the last 30 years and tracked the % were on NFL rosters for 5 years

1st was 50%
2nd was 20%
3rd was 15%
4 thru 7th was single digits

No question BB has had it rough in the 2rd but it's not like all the other teams are kicking ass.

Can't vouch for your study -- although it's believable -- but I tallied up Patriots all 2nd round picks since 2000 (not including this year) and rated all 23, counting as successful only consistent starters or contributors. There were by my count 9: Garopollo, Jamie Collins, Vereen, Gronkowski, Volmer, Chung, E. Wilson, Branch, and Light. That's 9/23 or 39.1%, and includes 1 likely GOAT (Gronk) and a likely franchise QB (Garopollo).

Pretty good, I'd guess, especially since the average round position was probably below average.

New England Patriots All-Time Draft History | Pro-Football-Reference.comNew England Patriots All-Time Draft History | Pro-Football-Reference.com

 

[PatsFan2]

I find it tough to get excited about ANY WR they bring in at the end of camp. If they do anything, it's more likely to be next year than this year.

I think Hansen will surprise.

 

[luuked]

More likely the mock drafts and draft expert ratings are effected by the opinions of front office personnel around the league. The Mayocks and McShays spend as much time talking to personnel people as they do watching film and making their own evaluations. Thus, those mock drafts and rankings reflect the consensus of the league as much if not more than the evaluations of the draft “experts”.

I’ve been a draftnic since 1977. One observation I’ve reached over the years is conventional wisdom of a player’s draft ranking is usually pretty reliable. You usually don’t do yourself a favor by significantly “reaching” for a player.

After the first three rounds the draft becomes a free for all. The consensus really only matches up with the first round.

And conventional wisdom provided by Kiper et al is as open to busts as every teams individual draft is.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

If you wanted McCarron on the 53 there is no way you expose him. Bolden can be cut because he is a veteran and can’t be claimed in waivers.
Look at it this way. If they kept McCarron on the 53, then were awarded these 2 guys they could still have cut McCarron. So there was no need for the spot to be open.
I’d bet the one that sticks will be inactive so there is no need to learn the offense in a week.

I'll amend my theory a little bit then. We don't know who else they put a waiver claim on; certainly someone with punt return experience could have been on the list. I'd say their intended role for McCarron is solely as a punt returner at this point. But he wasn't exceptional enough in that role that they felt he was indispensable. They were willing to risk him to waivers in exchange for the temporary roster space. And that if he was claimed, well, maybe one of the PR guys the Pats tried to claim would make it, and if not, they felt comfortable enough they could find a free agent that could do it. As is, McCarron cleared waivers and no one with punt return experience was awarded to the Pats, so the plan going forward is the one I posted earlier. We'll see what happens.

 

[PatsFan2]

I find it tough to get excited about ANY WR they bring in at the end of camp. If they do anything, it's more likely to be next year than this year.

Our WR group gets historically banged up guys will be forced to play out of necessity.

 

[PatsFan2]

Is A. Darboh hurt??

 

[Kasmir]

More likely the mock drafts and draft expert ratings are effected by the opinions of front office personnel around the league. The Mayocks and McShays spend as much time talking to personnel people as they do watching film and making their own evaluations. Thus, those mock drafts and rankings reflect the consensus of the league as much if not more than the evaluations of the draft “experts”.

I’ve been a draftnic since 1977. One observation I’ve reached over the years is conventional wisdom of a player’s draft ranking is usually pretty reliable. You usually don’t do yourself a favor by significantly “reaching” for a player.

Belichick is nothing if he's not systematic. My guess is that his system is skewed towards minimizing false negatives rather than fearing false positives. That's a fundamental trade off -- equivalent to prioritizing recall over precision for those of you with data science backgrounds.

Most fans care about the opposite, i.e. they get worked up when Belichick drafts a bust instead of a binky. Most GM's are afraid of public ridicule, so are likely fearful of false positives when drafting.

Not Belichick, IMO. He's unafraid, understands the numbers game, and prioritizes potential greatness over sure mediocrity.

 

[PatsFan2]

I'll amend my theory a little bit then. We don't know who else they put a waiver claim on; certainly someone with punt return experience could have been on the list. I'd say their intended role for McCarron is solely as a punt returner at this point. But he wasn't exceptional enough in that role that they felt he was indispensable. They were willing to risk him to waivers in exchange for the temporary roster space. And that if he was claimed, well, maybe one of the PR guys the Pats tried to claim would make it, and if not, they felt comfortable enough they could find a free agent that could do it. As is, McCarron cleared waivers and no one with punt return experience was awarded to the Pats, so the plan going forward is the one I posted earlier. We'll see what happens.

Too much ink on the useless Riley McCarron here... I can fair catch a punt for the Team if they want.

 

[Adam Seward]

Don't have one but it will be better this year because in obvious situations a db will be used instead of a lb and it will not be Jordan Richards.

Grisby fills the role. Hybrid LB/S.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Can't vouch for your study -- although it's believable -- but I tallied up Patriots all 2nd round picks since 2000 (not including this year) and rated all 23, counting as successful only consistent starters or contributors. There were by my count 9: Garopollo, Jamie Collins, Vereen, Gronkowski, Volmer, Chung, E. Wilson, Branch, and Light. That's 9/23 or 39.1%, and includes 1 likely GOAT (Gronk) and a likely franchise QB (Garopollo).

Pretty good, I'd guess, especially since the average round position was probably below average.

New England Patriots All-Time Draft History | Pro-Football-Reference.comNew England Patriots All-Time Draft History | Pro-Football-Reference.com

Ok so here is an article and as usual, my crappy memory had it wrong.

This is the 5 year study based on draft status and career length. I think I confused this article to thinkin players actually becoming starters for 5 years of their career.

How long does the average draft pick stick around?

Round And Longevity: Another Look At NFL Career Length | mgoblog