I assume that like most fans you are functionally ignorant of probability and statistics, which makes this kind of discussion difficult to the point of futility. Probability and Statistics is not intuitive, which is why so many of us struggle with it. We are actually all too good at pattern matching, and can't easily tell when we're actually seeing pictures in the clouds of data versus when we are imagining patterns that aren't there.
There are two big problems the many fans like you who agree with your claim of a 2nd round pattern have:
First, you don't have any idea of what good performance in drafting actually is. That's sort of the whole point the OP of this thread.
I think this goes for
a lot of people tbh. Most have no idea what to look for it's not funny.
Take 2017 for example. Imo a combo of bad luck and evaluation but it wasn't a
bad draft at all. We had 4 picks starting in the 3rd RD. You shouldn't expect "all-pro" returns when you start shopping in the "chance to start/impact depth" section of the draft.
Bad luck bc that 3rd RD was stacked like no other 3rd RD but overall we hit on 1/4. Wise is a versatile, solid player. So good value with him. Again not the draft you'd hope for. Especially looking back on paper but it wasn't
bad.
Not all drafts are created equal, there's tiers. Some are top heavy, some are thin up front but deep. Positions come in waves so you won't have a good overall class everywhere.
How many picks do you have and where are they? And I about 5 other things but I'm in work plowing the fields.
You're trying to match talent & value. So that context is pretty crucial.
Second, you make no allowance for luck, and indulge in the sin of cherry picking while you're at it.
Let me use as baseball analogy because fans have a much better history of interaction with statistical anomalies with that sport.
Let's say a batter new to baseball is up 10 times and gets 4 hits. What can you conclude about his (or her) performance? A completely ignorant fan might say, "that's terrible, he fails to get a hit 6 times out of 10!". That's the first point, you need to know how to measure performance and you can't say anything intelligent without addressing that. So what is the standard to address draft pick performance?
The second and even more important point is about sample size. Everyone knows you can't judge a baseball player hitting performance by using only 10 at bats, because we've all seen how streaky baseball performance can be. So why do you think 9 draft picks allows you to judge BB's performance versus a performance standard you can't even articulate? How do you know you're not seeing patterns in clouds?
If you're hitting 40%, you're doing
very well. Especially over the long haul.
Your obviously aware that you are cherry picking by downgrading Chung (a 10 year starter) and preemptively scorning Dugger. But the more important cherry picking mistake you and your brethren are making is excluding all the other DB draft picks BB has been responsible for. You need as many "at bats" as you can get! That's why excluding UDFA success is also a mistake, because it hides more samples of possibly demonstrated skill at picking and developing DB's.
Tracking UDFA history is hard so I haven't done it, but I have pulled BB's entire Patriots DB draft history for your bemusement:
| Year | Rnd | Player | Pick |
| 2022 | 3 | Marcus Jones | 85 |
| 2022 | 4 | Jack Jones | 121 |
| 2021 | 6 | Joshuah Bledsoe | 188 |
| 2020 | 2 | Kyle Dugger | 37 |
| 2019 | 2 | Joejuan Williams | 45 |
| 2019 | 7 | Ken Webster | 252 |
| 2018 | 2 | Duke Dawson | 56 |
| 2018 | 7 | Keion Crossen | 243 |
| 2016 | 2 | Cyrus Jones | 60 |
| 2015 | 7 | Darryl Roberts | 247 |
| 2015 | 2 | Jordan Richards | 64 |
| 2014 | 6 | Jemea Thomas | 206 |
| 2013 | 3 | Logan Ryan | 83 |
| 2013 | 3 | Duron Harmon | 91 |
| 2012 | 2 | Tavon Wilson | 48 |
| 2012 | 6 | Nate Ebner | 197 |
| 2012 | 7 | Alfonzo Dennard | 224 |
| 2011 | 2 | Ras-I Dowling | 33 |
| 2011 | 7 | Malcolm Williams | 219 |
| 2010 | 1 | Devin McCourty | 27 |
| 2009 | 2 | Patrick Chung | 34 |
| 2009 | 2 | Darius Butler | 41 |
| 2008 | 2 | Terrence Wheatley | 62 |
| 2008 | 4 | Jonathan Wilhite | 129 |
| 2007 | 1 | Brandon Meriweather | 24 |
| 2007 | 6 | Mike Richardson | 202 |
| 2006 | 7 | Willie Andrews | 229 |
| 2005 | 3 | Ellis Hobbs | 84 |
| 2005 | 4 | James Sanders | 133 |
| 2004 | 3 | Guss Scott | 95 |
| 2004 | 4 | Dexter Reid | 113 |
| 2004 | 7 | Christian Morton | 233 |
| 2003 | 2 | Eugene Wilson | 36 |
| 2003 | 4 | Asante Samuel | 120 |
| 2001 | 3 | Brock Williams | 86 |
| 2001 | 6 | Leonard Myers | 200 |
| 2000 | 6 | Antwan Harris | 187 |
I'll let you all to opine as to whether that is a good or bad history. It includes 1 first team all-pro year, 8 pro-bowl years, and 64 player years of primary starter for the Pats.
Stats thanks to
New England Patriots All-Time Draft History | Pro-Football-Reference.com
I'm sure a few posters here were mad at this pick when
@BaconGrundleCandy had Dugger near the top of his PTP list. Second Saf behind Chinn. I don't expect people to be as good as me but
@cupofjoe1962 please be better. Or at least just sit back and watch
@BaconGrundleCandy work and maybe learn a thing or two.
I think Bill has done a very good job
overall when you factor in complete team building. FA, trades, the draft, contracts ... recently some of the contracts aren't looking great but the drafts have been better. I try to look at recent events as well as the long term.
Tough to complain as a Pats fan but the glory days are behind us. We need to keep up with everyone else now. Still we could do a lot worse than Bill for the short term (2-5 years)
