why you know that the Apocalypse is upon us.....

patchick said:

I'm surprised that's your takeaway from a year where they desperately needed a top WR, tried and failed to get pretty much every big-name veteran on the market, then broke with precedent to fill the glaring need with a first-round WR.

Click to expand...

Because I believe he was the highest rated person on their board. I don't believe the precedent was "never draft a WR in the first round". I don't think there even was a precedent just a statistically feasible scenario where they were never able to move up to a good position of value to draft a WR and the highest rated player at their first round spot wasn't a WR until now.

I'm sure it's more sophisticated than any of us could know but there's no way, in my mind, that Belichick ever goes into a draft thinking that they will pick a lower-rated player at a position of need.

fnordcircle said:

Because I believe he was the highest rated person on their board. I don't believe the precedent was "never draft a WR in the first round". I don't think there even was a precedent just a statistically feasible scenario where they were never able to move up to a good position of value to draft a WR and the highest rated player at their first round spot wasn't a WR until now.

I'm sure it's more sophisticated than any of us could know but there's no way, in my mind, that Belichick ever goes into a draft thinking that they will pick a lower-rated player at a position of need.

Click to expand...

So it's just coincidence that the first year a WR happened to be their top-rated player was the year when they desperately needed a WR who could contribute early? What luck!

Let's take the extreme case: was it just a lucky coincidence that their highest rated player in the 2006 4th round was a placekicker, right after Vinatieri walked? And that no placekicker has been their highest rated player in ANY round in the 13 years since? Or for that matter, that they haven't spent a first-round pick on a QB for two decades, even though QBs carry the highest draft value of any position?

If the goal of the draft is, as BB says, to "improve your team," then you have to assess the current strengths and weaknesses of your team and where upgrades will have the greatest impact. Which is all that drafting for need is about.

Draft strategy is obviously a balance between a lot of factors, but to me the one that trumps all of them is this: You want to add competition to as many position groups as you can. Need is a factor, but you're not going into the draft saying, "We need a WR to fill this specific role." That's when you reach. N'Keal adds competition to the WR group.

Any sure fire, can't miss, cracker-jack prospect who'll be ready to start and contribute on day one is going to be GONE in the top ten. By the time you reach 32, everyone from that point on has question marks, concerns, or flat out known flaws that are unlikely to change. That's why they're still on the board. You can't count on that player to fill a need, because you have no way of knowing if they're going to be ready to do that in year one. Again, need is a factor, but you can't be a slave to it, or you pass on a better player, which ends up creating MORE holes in future years.

Let's say they reached (based on their board) for a tight end in the second round instead of taking Williams. Then that pick doesn't work out, as many reaches tend not to do. Then, after his restructure, the Pats don't want to pay Gilmore 19m+ next year, cut him, and he walks. Instead of having a tall, talented CB with a year in the system, now you're looking to fill a "need" in next year's draft, and everyone is wondering why BB isn't prioritizing CB in the 2020 draft.

Add competition to as many groups as you can. Need is a factor in the opportunity for that competition certainly, but it is not the critical variable in that equation. Fill your roster with good football players that you believe you can coach effectively, and let the roster take care of itself. Then fill the remaining holes with trades or by tweaking your scheme to fit the strengths of those you have.

luuked said:

What makes you think that ?

Slater just got his option picked up. If they cut Ebner (only 600k in guarantees) during camp I might be inclined to think that you might be onto something but until then I am not sure anything changed in terms of ST philosophy.

Click to expand...

Some of the players drafted this year may be the ST'ers of next year....

patchick said:

So it's just coincidence that the first year a WR happened to be their top-rated player was the year when they desperately needed a WR who could contribute early? What luck!

Click to expand...

I don't think the timing is a coincidence. But I think you are attributing it to the wrong thing.

To me the loss of Gronk fundamentally changed the value proposition of picking a WR early. Rob was more or less always the focal point of the offense even if he didn't see the ball or stayed in to block. I say this because I honestly believe that 80% of plays are decided presnap. And Gronk always was the chess piece that opponents adjusted their personnel / coverages around.

Him being an elite threat in both receiving and run blocking was enabling McDaniels and Brady to construct mismatches and audible between runs/passes that in turn forced the opponents into making a suboptimal decision about personnel no matter what. Pick your poison kinda situation.

Now without him on the field the focal point of the offense and the way we are manipulating matchups will change. Adding a top tier talent to that situation creates a bigger ROI than throwing that player into the Gronk offense.

At least those are my two cents.

luuked said:

I don't think the timing is a coincidence. But I think you are attributing it to the wrong thing.

To me the loss of Gronk fundamentally changed the value proposition of picking a WR early.

Click to expand...

Just to be clear, I am not arguing that the Patriots have deliberately withheld resources from the WR position in the past and that Harry represents a new focus on receivers. (Quite the opposite, in fact. They've always allotted a league-typical amount of draft capital to WR, just weighted toward trades for vets.)

I'm just trying to show that at the end of the day, nobody actually believes in the myth of drafting BPA.

patchick said:

I'm just trying to show that at the end of the day, nobody actually believes in the myth of drafting BPA.

Click to expand...

Uh, I actually do. Unless you argument is that the projection whether a player will be a starter, backup or depth player (i.e. their projected impact) shouldn't play into the metric that is used to rank players I don't see any shred of reason to assume BPA is a myth.

J Williams might be the best example of that. My point is that with Gronk gone the potential impact a WR can have on the offense is much bigger than before which means that you get more value out of them. Thus there is a bigger ROI getting one early than before.

All of this influences BPA.

luuked said:

Uh, I actually do. Unless you argument is that the projection whether a player will be a starter, backup or depth player (i.e. their projected impact) shouldn't play into the metric that is used to rank players I don't see any shred of reason to assume BPA is a myth.

J Williams might be the best example of that. My point is that with Gronk gone the potential impact a WR can have on the offense is much bigger than before which means that you get more value out of them. Thus there is a bigger ROI getting one early than before.

All of this influences BPA.

Click to expand...

So your approach to "best player available" starts with a strategic need assessment? I'm with you then, but I don't think that's called BPA. That's just called drafting.

Kdo5 said:

I didn't mind the RB pick in the 3rd. They got a player that I think is going to be really good with the potential to be their best all around back even with guys like Michel and White in the mix.

Click to expand...

I think Harris is really going to surprise. This is the guy that Nick Saban gave many more carries and throws to over John Jacobs who Oakland drafted in the first round (deservedly so). Great blocker, does all of the little things right, super locker room presence. He can be a primary option on running plays, but you can also put him in the backfield on passing plays, feel completely comfortable that he will protect Brady against blitzes (he just doesn't make dumb mistakes), and still be an excellent option on short dump-off passes. Is he as dynamic of a pass catcher as White? No, but he is likely a better pass blocker and you can feel comfortable with him on either a run or a pass play, to improve deception.

The last time I felt so confident a player would hit the ground running as a rookie was Hightower (another polished Alabama product) but Harris might be even more mature and polished as a rookie, I think he will really surprise.

patchick said:

So your approach to "best player available" starts with a strategic need assessment? I'm with you then, but I don't think that's called BPA. That's just called drafting.

Click to expand...

Nope. And I never said anything even close to that. You don't draft for need. We have heard this dozens of times from Lombardi already and he knows certainly better than any armchair draft aficionado around here.

The assessment whether someone would be a) starter, b) eventual starter, c) developmental player, d) backup or e) can't make the team is what drives the draft in NE and that classification is nothing else than a BPA approach. Again, we have heard about this many, many times.

None of this has to do with needs. You can have someone graded as starter and if nobody else on the board is left in the tier you take that player even if it is not a position of need (i.e. J. Williams). Now if you have similarly graded players and one is in a position that has a lot of depth and the other in a position of need you go for the latter.

But in the end Harry was still considered to be a day-one starter given where he was drafted. If he was not they would have gotten a different player or traded down completely irrespective of our need at WR.

The murmurs were that the Pats considered a OL, Harry and Williams as their first pick. And if we assume that all three were in the same tier of evaluation then it makes sense that Harry was taken over Williams as the individual positional groups have a different level of depth. But fundamentally this is still a BPA approach.


After all those interviews, podcasts and now even books by Lombardi I am amazed that this is still a point of discussion. We already know how BB approaches the draft. What we don't know are the evaluations obviously.

luuked said:

Nope. And I never said anything even close to that. You don't draft for need. We have heard this dozens of times from Lombardi already and he knows certainly better than any armchair draft aficionado around here.

The assessment whether someone would be a) starter, b) eventual starter, c) developmental player, d) backup or e) can't make the team is what drives the draft in NE and that classification is nothing else than a BPA approach. Again, we have heard about this many, many times.

None of this has to do with needs. You can have someone graded as starter and if nobody else on the board is left in the tier you take that player even if it is not a position of need (i.e. J. Williams). Now if you have similarly graded players and one is in a position that has a lot of depth and the other in a position of need you go for the latter.

But in the end Harry was still considered to be a day-one starter given where he was drafted. If he was not they would have gotten a different player or traded down completely irrespective of our need at WR.

The murmurs were that the Pats considered a OL, Harry and Williams as their first pick. And if we assume that all three were in the same tier of evaluation then it makes sense that Harry was taken over Williams as the individual positional groups have a different level of depth. But fundamentally this is still a BPA approach.


After all those interviews, podcasts and now even books by Lombardi I am amazed that this is still a point of discussion. We already know how BB approaches the draft. What we don't know are the evaluations obviously.

Click to expand...

You mean the guy who drafted Jamarcus Russell, Manziel, Mingo, Gilbert, Trent Richardson all in the top 25??

The same guy who said he wished he could have drafted Blaine Gabbert?

Lol 30 yo Brandon Weeden Rd1.

Marques Tuiasosopo & Koy Detemer.

Leon McFadden.

Holy st it these guys must have 8 combined games played.

BaconGrundleCandy said:

You mean the guy who drafted Jamarcus Russell, Manziel, Mingo, Gilbert, Trent Richardson all in the top 25??

The same guy who said he wished he could have drafted Blaine Gabbert?

Click to expand...

Everyone who actually gets to draft has a list like this though..

DaBruinz said:

Ken - I love you man, but when you go off like this it's a real head scratcher. The Patriots didn't draft 2 Centers on day 3. In fact, they only drafted 2 O-linemen in total.

They drafted a C/G in Froholdt. That's it. Yodny is a Tackle. He's played both OT positions, though he feel most comfortable at LT.

And you're over-looking the fact that Karra, Thuney, Ferentz, and Schwenke are all free agents after this season. So, it makes sense that BB would bring in at least ONE guy who could make the roster as an interior back-up.

The Patriots DID sign a priority UDFA in Tyler Gauthier who is also a C/G, but he's going to need to have an outstanding camp to supplant Karras or Schwenke.

As for DT. Yes, the Patriots DID draft one. Byron Cowart. He's a DT out of Maryland.

Did you get Cowart's position confused somehow???

Click to expand...

Agreed, O line was definitely a need. Especially tackle. It's just smart business to always take an o-linemen or two anyways. With Scar coaching, OL is always a safe pick, and quality depth at the offensive line is arguably the most important area to have depth. Very fortunate Waddle never had to play in the playoffs..

All the best TE’s and pass rushers we’re flying off the shelves. We got a top tier WR and CB

NashuaPats said:

I don't hear as many people calling the Pats cheaters lately which is great. It seems they're finally getting their due credit.

I don't agree with us not needing a RB. We had Patterson playing as the main RB in a couple of games last year. It was definitely a position of need.

Click to expand...

RB pick was definitely surprising, makes sense but would have thought he'd grab a back later in the draft if he did. Seem seems like a talented player tho, I like it. Really don't have any complaints. I just hope they finally hit on a receiver.

long distance said:

Everyone who actually gets to draft has a list like this though..

Click to expand...

Respect you too much to hit disagree but this isn't even close.

Add up every one of Bill's bust & its not even close to that list & Bill is drafting much, much later. Not even on the same planet.

Half of that list was top 5-10 picks. That's absolutely putrid for a professional.

I've graded over 1,000 players & have exactly 1 in that tier.

BaconGrundleCandy said:

You mean the guy who drafted Jamarcus Russell, Manziel, Mingo, Gilbert, Trent Richardson all in the top 25??

The same guy who said he wished he could have drafted Blaine Gabbert?

Lol 30 yo Brandon Weeden Rd1.

Marques Tuiasosopo & Koy Detemer.

Leon McFadden.

Holy st it these guys must have 8 combined games played.

Click to expand...

Yep. The guy who actually spent time with the greatest coaches of all time, did more scouting for them than most of the modern armchair internet draftniks ever did on their cute little podcasts/twitter accounts and was an instrumental part of coming up with the general philosophy that BB still follows when it comes to drafting.

You can make fun of the guy all you want but he has the respect of the greatest coach and team builder of all time to the point where he made him a consultant in 2014/2015 and wrote a foreword for his book. But then again what does Belichick know about scouting it is not like his father wrote a book on that or anything.

But please if your scouting is so amazingly accurate that you feel like you can make fun of people with a rich history in the league like Lombardi then maybe you should stop doing it from the comfort of your home, go out and try to be a professional scout. If you truly have such an amazing success rate then you should not have any problems running a draft room in the next 10 years.

But then again you were claiming he drafted Manziel even though he was working for the Pats by then so maybe get a bit more informed before you try to find a job in that area.

BaconGrundleCandy said:

Respect you too much to hit disagree but this isn't even close.

Add up every one of Bill's bust & its not even close to that list & Bill is drafting much, much later. Not even on the same planet.

Half of that list was top 5-10 picks. That's absolutely putrid for a professional.

I've graded over 1,000 players & have exactly 1 in that tier.

Click to expand...

Thanks BGC. BB is always excluded from the mere mortals..

They did have some misses together though (incl missing to take some when they could acc to both)

To be fair, Lombardi often makes fun of himself re. some of those top blackouts.. doesn't make it better of course but shows a good sport..

It is much harder game when you have to pull the plug id guess . Mayock was next in line to have a taste of that..


ps
missing your comments on post mortem over at Draft Board (@reamers thread) . hope you find time..

I'm sure BPA is a significant factor in the Pats' draft decisions. But c'mon, in this draft, if a WR was #2 and another player in a position that was well stocked on the roster was #1, I have to think they would have drafted the #2 player.

fnordcircle said:

Because I believe he was the highest rated person on their board. I don't believe the precedent was "never draft a WR in the first round". I don't think there even was a precedent just a statistically feasible scenario where they were never able to move up to a good position of value to draft a WR and the highest rated player at their first round spot wasn't a WR until now.

I'm sure it's more sophisticated than any of us could know but there's no way, in my mind, that Belichick ever goes into a draft thinking that they will pick a lower-rated player at a position of need.

Click to expand...

I agree with your premise but I don’t know how they actually stack their board. I have always believed that Belichick didn’t draft WR’s in the first because he saw the position as contributing less than others. Special athletes at positions that are involved heavily in total plays seemed to me to be his strategy overall. DL, OL, TE, and DB are his most frequent choices because they contribute on pretty much every play. And in this case I think he saw the ability for Harry to contribute immediately, and while he’s never going to block like Gronk, he could actually give Brady all those routes he looked to Gronk for, That’s big value and well worth the first.