Do the Patriots Suck at Drafting? (Data From 2012-2017)

[primetime]

Brady is the statistical outlier, the mega millions lottery pick.

Richard Seymour was drafted with the 6th pick of the 2001 draft when the Patriots had gone 5-11 in the 2000 season.

Ty Warren was drafted at the 13th spot of the 2003 draft (after a trade up) when the Patriots had gone 9-7 in 2002.

Vince Wilfork was drafted at the 21st spot of the 2004 draft from a pick I believe was from the 2003 season.

For reference: from 2012 to 2017, the Patriots drafted at an average position of 30th in each round (based on end-of-the-year record, not including the 2016 first round forfeiture or for trades).

Not that NFL GMs are infallible, far from it, but there is a reason that certain players fall to where the Patriots actually have a shot at drafting them.

As we all know, there is a definite risk to drafting a player with a Round One talent but with Round Four knees.

Yeah, I'm well aware. I wasn't trying to be harsh on Belichick. The draft is a crapshoot, I legitimately think it's 98% luck. The Patriots simply haven't gotten lucky since 2012 except arguably with White, Flowers, and Butler in the way they did much more often from 2000-2012, though it's still too early to tell on some of these picks. To say they've drafted worse is simply to explain the generally lower level of talent on today's team, which is still buoyed in a very real way by Brady, not contend that someone is remiss in their duties.

 

[maineman209]

All of those players I listed were at one time top-5 at least, most in the top-3, in their respective positions.

By what criteria (and whose criteria), specifically? PFF has had Andrews ranked as a "Top-5" Center for awhile. Are their criteria any less valid than whatever it is you're using?

Butler was at least "famous" and got a top-end second contract in free agency. Why doesn't that qualify him as a "star"? The market appeared to think he was.

Mahomes has far less NFL experience than Garoppolo and hasn't had as many "good" games yet, but people already consider him to be a "star". In any case, again, Garoppolo is certainly being paid as if he was a "star" (as is Chandler Jones).

So, I'm still confused about what criteria are used to make the bold line separating a "star" player from everybody else.

 

[primetime]

By what criteria (and whose criteria), specifically? PFF has had Andrews ranked as a "Top-5" Center for awhile. Are their criteria any less valid than whatever it is you're using?

Butler was at least "famous" and got a top-end second contract in free agency. Why doesn't that qualify him as a "star"? The market appeared to think he was.

Mahomes has far less NFL experience than Garoppolo and hasn't had as many "good" games yet, but people already consider him to be a "star". In any case, again, Garoppolo is certainly being paid as if he was a "star" (as is Chandler Jones).

So, I'm still confused about what criteria are used to make the bold line separating a "star" player from everybody else.

If I had asked you yesterday if you thought David Andrews was an impact player, a real difference maker, would you have answered yes?

 

[BTTA]

I appreciate all attempts to bring actual data to this topic. It will always be incomplete and imperfect; that's just the nature of the issue.

 

[BTTA]

...The draft is a crapshoot, I legitimately think it's 98% luck.

This is the great unexplored and unspeakable issue in pro football. If it is true, it threatens so much of the economics surrounding the game.

 

[maineman209]

If I had asked you yesterday if you thought David Andrews was an impact player, a real difference maker, would you have answered yes?

In the context of what O-linemen do, sure! But then, OL, individually, don't have any opportunity to produce positive stats the way WRs and DEs do. In fact, the only "stats" they have an opportunity to produce are negative.

So, is that the criteria? Statistical production? If so, that pretty much rules out any drafted OL from the "star" competition - unless, of course, they live up to some pre-set "draft pedigree" and/or become famous among the media talking heads.

Perhaps fame is part of the criteria then? Or maybe longevity as a starter for O-linemen?

 

[edkk323]

If I had asked you yesterday if you thought David Andrews was an impact player, a real difference maker, would you have answered yes?

You rarely heard Thuney and Shaq because they are good. Of course Andrew is a top center. He is the starter since his 10th game in rookie year.

Your standard of star player is deeply flawed if you think James White\Andrew are not "star players“

 

[bruce_w]

So this system has the Rams and Seahawks at the top? Texans Jags Vikings? Perennial doormats. Except for the Seahawks whose talent has fallen way off the last 5 years. This system has the Colts right behind the Pats lol. It gives zero consideration that the players the Pats drafted have had to join the best team in the NFL. I could go on and on.

 

[edkk323]

So this system has the Rams and Seahawks at the top? Texans Jags Vikings? Perennial doormats. Except for the Seahawks whose talent has fallen way off the last 5 years. This system has the Colts right behind the Pats lol. It gives zero consideration that the players the Pats drafted have had to join the best team in the NFL. I could go on and on.

I did not do a ranking but show some good team.
I never said this method is perfect but just to prove the Pats is above average.
The Colts did draft Andrew Luck and I said QBs produce way too much AV point.

 

[Kasmir]

If I had asked you yesterday if you thought David Andrews was an impact player, a real difference maker, would you have answered yes?

How many fans here actually grade line play for the Pats, let alone across the league?

According to Football Outsiders, the pats oline is currently #5 in rushing and #1 in pass protection.