Best article from Reiss in quite a while

tanked_as_usual · Mar 2, 2010

Sicilian said:
Having catching up to do in regards to developing talent is true... where opinions differ is some people want to ignore the following just to call the Patriots "bad" drafters and developers:

- When you have great teams, it becomes that much harder for rookies to stand out.
- We generally draft towards the end of every round, and had a first round pick taken away.
- We chose to trade picks away for Welker and Moss, which worked out well.

Always room for improvement, but some of you argue as though the Patriots continually blow top 15 picks. We're a good drafting team.

the pats have simply had too many players in round 2 and 3 that they got nothing out of......going back to 2003, (2003)bethel johnson, (2004)marquise hill, (2006)chad jackson....now you can see why the pats traded their 2nd rounder for wes welker.....as for round 3, nick kaczur and ellis hobbs (both in 2005) are the only 3rd rounders ever to amount to anything ... guss scott, kevin o'connell, dave thomas, shawn crable

well....it may not be bad drafting AND bad developing, but it there is alot to the possibility of it being bad drafting OR bad developing

look at it this way.....since 2004, the colts have gotten better players in the 4th round and later than the pats have gotten in the 2nd and 3rd rounds

RobertWeathers · Mar 2, 2010

tanked_as_usual said:
the pats have simply had too many players in round 2 and 3 that they got nothing out of......going back to 2003, (2003)bethel johnson, (2004)marquise hill, (2006)chad jackson....now you can see why the pats traded their 2nd rounder for wes welker.....as for round 3, nick kaczur and ellis hobbs (both in 2005) are the only 3rd rounders ever to amount to anything ... guss scott, kevin o'connell, dave thomas, shawn crable

well....it may not be bad drafting AND bad developing, but it there is alot to the possibility of it being bad drafting OR bad developing

look at it this way.....since 2004, the colts have gotten better players in the 4th round and later than the pats have gotten in the 2nd and 3rd rounds

Every NFL team misses on picks. Overall, I don't think the Pats have done as poorly as folks depict but in the names that you have highlighted, those are some pretty lousy misses.

tanked_as_usual · Mar 2, 2010

robertweathers said:
Every NFL team misses on picks. Overall, I don't think the Pats have done as poorly as folks depict but in the names that you have highlighted, those are some pretty lousy misses.

I don't know.....I believe there should be much better success in the 2nd and 3rd rounds........I believe what the pats got in 2009 is more what it is supposed to be like.....3 out of 4

some of it is bad drafting......the pats take chad jackson......the next couple of WR's taken were greg jennings and devin hester

in 2003, the pats take bethel johnson....who was the next WR taken? anquan boldin

DL - the pats take marquise hill instead of darnell dockett.......

there's just too much of it and it is too much of a consistent theme....so yeah, bad drafting is part of it.....

emoney_33 · Mar 2, 2010

tanked_as_usual said:
some of it is bad drafting......the pats take chad jackson......the next couple of WR's taken were greg jennings and devin hester

This is a load of crap. There were some bad picks but Chad Jackson was not one of them AT THE TIME. He had all the tools, and was rated high on EVERYONE's draft board. You have the benefit of hindsight, but at the time without a crystal ball that was a good decision. He's actually a perfect example of why it's so hard to draft.

there's just too much of it and it is too much of a consistent theme....so yeah, bad drafting is part of it.....

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. I'm sure you'd be the best draft expert in the universe if you had a time machine!

Deus Irae · Mar 2, 2010

robertweathers said:
Every NFL team misses on picks. Overall, I don't think the Pats have done as poorly as folks depict but in the names that you have highlighted, those are some pretty lousy misses.

It's been noted elsewhere on the site, but Casserly has broken all this down:

On the drop-off in success rates from rounds 1-2 to the rest of the draft...
Casserly: "If you define success rate as a 'starter after four years' to give the player time to develop ... in the first round we found it was 75 percent success -- this was all positions -- second round is 50, third round was 30, fourth round was 25, fifth round was 20 and the sixth and seventh were ... we'll call it 10 percent ... I think the key to success to those rounds: having good evaluators ... Take the best player on the board. You're guessing in the first round in the first place, you're definitely guessing in the sixth and seventh. Even though you've done all this work, you still realize there's an element of chance involved..."

Casserly, Billick Talk NFL Draft -- NFL FanHouse

unoriginal · Mar 2, 2010

The Dynasty said:
I noted in my post that it was a bad draft player selection wise. I noted that trading for Moss and Welker give the Pats kind of a pass for their terrible picks (the players they actually drafted). As a whole the draft was a success because of Moss and Welker, but what if they actually drafted players that had success in the league? Based on the players that they actually picked, it was a pretty bad draft.

That's true, but you also noted the draft was "terrible," balanced analysis has been "over looked" and people just "give them a pass on it," etc:

The Dynasty said:
I wouldnt go that far...look at the players that they actually selected. It was terrible, if you go by the players that the Patriots actually drafted it was a bad draft. You could say the scouting for that draft was awful. As a draft as a whole it was a successful draft because of the additions of Moss and Welker, but it could have been much better if the players that the Patriots actually selected could have contributed.

Obviously you think other people don't frame it correctly. You want to go strictly on draftee value. So I think if a draft was terrible you could easily find 20 NFL teams that extracted better value. Really I'd call the slots from 28-32 "terrible" but lets go with 20.

Haven't done actually analysis but I'd be willing to bet the teams that got better players invested significantly more in this draft from a pick-value standpoint.

The Dynasty · Mar 2, 2010

unoriginal said:
That's true, but you also noted the draft was "terrible," balanced analysis has been "over looked" and people just "give them a pass on it," etc:

Obviously you think other people don't frame it correctly. You want to go strictly on draftee value. So I think if a draft was terrible you could easily find 20 NFL teams that extracted better value. Really I'd call the slots from 28-32 "terrible" but lets go with 20.

Haven't done actually analysis but I'd be willing to bet the teams that got better players invested significantly more in this draft from a pick-value standpoint.

I guess what I am trying to say is that the player evaluating for that draft was not at its best. I mean I guess you could say that the Pats didnt think there was much value in the middle of that draft and got out and got 2 outstanding players in Moss and Welker. But look at the players that the Pats actually drafted, besides Merriweather they have had very little or no impact in the NFL. That is where my statement that the draft was terrible comes from, the actual player selection and talent evaluating.

JoeSixPat · Mar 2, 2010

No doubt Reiss hits on a ton of valid points - but as deep as this draft is I'd never rule out Belichick using a pick on an RFA... rookies have upside but BB likes proven players in their prime.

I'm not expecting to see big names picked up among UFAs but I won't be surprised to see him bring a lot of middle class players in, moving quickly to do so.

Deus Irae · Mar 3, 2010

We covered the 2007 draft in another thread recently:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/323466-2007-draft-challenge.html

Patriots 'fans' who complain about that draft probably have never bothered to actually look at that draft.

captain stone · Mar 3, 2010

Deus Irae said:
We covered the 2007 draft in another thread recently:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/323466-2007-draft-challenge.html

Patriots 'fans' who complain about that draft probably have never bothered to actually look at that draft.

I am a Patriot 'fan' (whatever you're trying to imply) who has complained about that draft - and the 2004 draft, and 2006, and 2008 - and yes, I have actually looked at that draft; have you?

Bill's drafting in 2007, and '08, is Inexcusable. Period. And his veteran player acquisitions haven't been too hot lately, either.

unoriginal · Mar 3, 2010

So we're back. The following stats attempt to loosely quantify the efficiency of the 2007 Draft for the AFC:

Code:

Team		Draft Value	Player Value	Suckitude
[B]TERRIBLE	1747		1		1747[/B]
Denver		1582		1.0		1582
Oakland		4285		5.5		779
Cleveland	3408		4.5		757
Miami		2505		3.5		715
[B]POOR		1747		3		582[/B]
Tennessee	1613		3.0		538
Cincinnatti	1428		3.0		476
Kansas City	1377		3.0		459
[B]MEDIAN		1747		4		437[/B]
[COLOR="Red"]New England	0868		2.0		434[/COLOR]
Houston		1660		4.0		415
Buffalo		1988		5.0		398
San Diego	1334		3.5		381
Indianapolis	1426		4.0		357
[B]GOOD		1747		5		350[/B]
Jacksonville	1672		5.0		334
Baltimore	1129		4.5		251
[B]GREAT		1747		7		250[/B]
Pittsburgh	1862		7.5		248
New York Jets	1554		6.5		239

The draft value is simply the sum of the value of the draft picks according to the wizened old Jimmy Johnson draft value trade, which assigns value on a loose logarithmic scale.

The player value is the sum of the following arbitrary numbers and valuations, attempting to match JJ's logarithmic draft value chart:

0.5 points for a non-backend-of-the-roster reserve
1.0 for a starter
2.0 for a good starter
3.0 for an unusally productive starter
4.0 for Darrelle Revis

The draft value was then divided by the player value to achieve the Draft Suckitude Index, which like the Draft Value chart is loosely logarithmic, with a long tail. The difference is the tail is the high numbers.

For the non-team values, I took the draft values at a median selection slot (#16) in all "eight" rounds. An imperfect estimation of the compensatory pick process but what can you do. Then I imagined a "good" draft for a team picking at the middle of every round: 1 good starter, 2 starters, 2 decent backups, 3 practice squaders/cuts, for a total of 5 player points. That and other estimated values are in the chart.

Some of the few players I rated as "unusally productive" were Dwayne Bowe and LaMarr Woodley.

Mossachusetts · Mar 3, 2010

Tim Tebow will be a Patriot, take that to the bank.

Bostonian1962 · Mar 3, 2010

Thanks for posting this. Belichick and the Patriots catch alot of heat for their poor drafting. However, a certain thought keeps popping into my head. I saw BB once say that the team takes a look at some of their poor draft picks, and figure out why they were bad, and how they can prevent recurrence.

Will that self evaluating pay dividends this year? PLEASE, let the answer to that be a resounding yes, because we need to hit big in this draft.

And, PLEASE not another year of trading down for a 5th and a 7th, and next years 4th. I'm tired of that, because we need talent NOW!

Wretch · Mar 3, 2010

unoriginal said:
So we're back. The following stats attempt to loosely quantify the efficiency of the 2007 Draft for the AFC:

Code:

Team Draft Value Player Value Suckitude [B]TERRIBLE 1747 1 1747[/B] Denver 1582 1.0 1582 Oakland 4285 5.5 779 Cleveland 3408 4.5 757 Miami 2505 3.5 715 [B]POOR 1747 3 582[/B] Tennessee 1613 3.0 538 Cincinnatti 1428 3.0 476 Kansas City 1377 3.0 459 [B]MEDIAN 1747 4 437[/B] [COLOR="Red"]New England 0868 2.0 434[/COLOR] Houston 1660 4.0 415 Buffalo 1988 5.0 398 San Diego 1334 3.5 381 Indianapolis 1426 4.0 357 [B]GOOD 1747 5 350[/B] Jacksonville 1672 5.0 334 Baltimore 1129 4.5 251 [B]GREAT 1747 7 250[/B] Pittsburgh 1862 7.5 248 New York Jets 1554 6.5 239

The draft value is simply the sum of the value of the draft picks according to the wizened old Jimmy Johnson draft value trade, which assigns value on a loose logarithmic scale.

The player value is the sum of the following arbitrary numbers and valuations, attempting to match JJ's logarithmic draft value chart:

0.5 points for a non-backend-of-the-roster reserve

1.0 for a starter

2.0 for a good starter

3.0 for an unusally productive starter

4.0 for Darrelle Revis

The draft value was then divided by the player value to achieve the Draft Suckitude Index, which like the Draft Value chart is loosely logarithmic, with a long tail. The difference is the tail is the high numbers.

For the non-team values, I took the draft values at a median selection slot (#16) in all "eight" rounds. An imperfect estimation of the compensatory pick process but what can you do. Then I imagined a "good" draft for a team picking at the middle of every round: 1 good starter, 2 starters, 2 decent backups, 3 practice squaders/cuts, for a total of 5 player points. That and other estimated values are in the chart.

Some of the few players I rated as "unusally productive" were Dwayne Bowe and LaMarr Woodley.

Great break down. I wonder how it would look if you added the draft values for the traded picks and the players. I would put both Moss and Welker as 3s in your rating scale. I would bet the Pats would end up in the good to great area.

dhamz · Mar 3, 2010

Re: the 2007 draft

If a team makes 1 pick in the top 125 of a draft, chances are they only draft 1 player who ever does anything in the NFL.

They chose Meriweather with one first round pick and chose to trade out of the first half of the 2007 draft with their other picks. They produced Welker, Moss, and Mayo from those trades. It is tough to for me to complain when they used their picks to produce 4 guys who are clearly among the best players on their roster.

Some of their other drafts in recent years haven't been up to the standards expected of the Pats FO but calling the 2007 draft bad because none of the long shot late rounders worked out isn't looking at the full use of their draft picks.

VJCPatriot · Mar 3, 2010

He makes some good points. Looking back at it, the 2003 draft was a monster haul.

"In 2003, the Pats were right on with defensive end Ty Warren in the first round and then found defensive back Eugene Wilson (second round), cornerback Asante Samuel (fourth round), center Dan Koppen (fifth round) and outside linebacker Tully Banta-Cain (seventh round)."

Warren - starter
Wilson - starter
Samuel - pro bowl quality starter
Koppen - starter
TBC - situational player who returned to us and played big minutes at OLB last season

If the Pats can get another draft like 2003 in 2010, we'll be talking about the Next Pats Dynasty. If the Pats strike out and end up with guys like Wheatley, Crable, Jackson, Maroney, well it could be a while before we recover.

The Dynasty · Mar 3, 2010

What I am trying to say about the 2007 draft was the players that the Patriots actually selected have not had any impact in the NFL. You cannot take away the fact that the Patriots picked 9 players in that draft and the only one that has had an impact in the NFL has been Merriweather. These 8 players that the Pats selected have had no impact at all. Why should the Pats staff get a free pass just because we traded for Moss and Welker?

4th round Kareem Brown: 1 game played in 3 years
5th round Clint Oldenburg: 2 games played in 3 years
6th round Justin Rogers: 32 games in 3 years, 24 tackles
6th round Mike Richardson: 17 games in 3 years, 13 tackles
6th round Justise Hairston: 0 games in 3 years, PS player
6th round Corey Hilliard: 5 games in 3 years
7th round Oscar Lua: 0 games, out of football now
7th round Mike Elgin: 0 games in 3 years, PS player

I am not saying that it was a bad draft as a whole because we greatly improved our team with Moss and Welker, but the players that we actually drafted have not been very good and the team does deserve some scruitiny for it.

tanked_as_usual · Mar 3, 2010

all you have to do is look at the solid contributors on the pats now who are late draft picks:

brady (2000)
koppen (2003)
TBC (2003)

the ray of hope is this season's solid performances by pryor and edelman. maybe the new personnel people will start a new trend

I'm not hoping for perennial probowlers, but you can't go 5 years without a single decent contributor, otherwise, why the hell does the FO bother trading down?

4th round and later contributors:

colts - collie, garcon, session, bethea, keiaho, johnson......some was good drafting some was development, but you have to get something out of your later picks in order to have a complete roster

chargers - siler, ellison, sproles, dobbins, shaun phillips, micheal turner.....

saints - nicks, colston, jahri evans, bushrod

The Dynasty · Mar 3, 2010

tanked_as_usual said:
all you have to do is look at the solid contributors on the pats now who are late draft picks:

brady (2000)
koppen (2003)
TBC (2003)

the ray of hope is this season's solid performances by pryor and edelman. maybe the new personnel people will start a new trend

I'm not hoping for perennial probowlers, but you can't go 5 years without a single decent contributor, otherwise, why the hell does the FO bother trading down?

4th round and later contributors:

colts - collie, garcon, session, bethea, keiaho, johnson......some was good drafting some was development, but you have to get something out of your later picks in order to have a complete roster

chargers - siler, ellison, sproles, dobbins, shaun phillips, micheal turner.....

saints - nicks, colston, jahri evans, bushrod

I completely agree about what you're saying with how poor our drafts have been. I think they have got a lot better in the past 2 years, but the drafting as a whole the past 5 years has not been the Patriots strong point.

Also, I agree with what you are saying about getting use out of your late round picks. As you pointed out look what the Colts, Saints and Chargers have got out of their late round picks. In order to be an elite team you need to find ways to get impact from your later round picks and that is something the Patriots have not done enough of and a perfect example of that is in 2007.

tanked_as_usual · Mar 3, 2010

The Dynasty said:
I completely agree about what you're saying with how poor our drafts have been. I think they have got a lot better in the past 2 years, but the drafting as a whole the past 5 years has not been the Patriots strong point.

Also, I agree with what you are saying about getting use out of your late round picks. As you pointed out look what the Colts, Saints and Chargers have got out of their late round picks. In order to be an elite team you need to find ways to get impact from your later round picks and that is something the Patriots have not done enough of and a perfect example of that is in 2007.

each team has 4-6 starters out of late picks.....this help because none of these players count for beans against the cap, which allows you to focus on specific needs in free agency. I can't believe 3 ot of 5 starters on the saint OL are 4th rounders or later

Best article from Reiss in quite a while

Banned

Member of the Seattle 7 & Roadie for Metallica

Banned

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

In the Starting Line-Up

In the Starting Line-Up

Pro Bowl Player

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

In the Starting Line-Up

Practice Squad Player

In the Starting Line-Up

On the Game Day Roster

In the Starting Line-Up

Pro Bowl Player

In the Starting Line-Up

Banned

In the Starting Line-Up

Banned

Similar threads