Duke traded to Broncos

[Wheelman]

Crossen a better corner & better STer. Obvious move

Better STer. I'm on the fence who's the better corner. Crossen gave up another big play last night. Every time there's a big play it's on Crossen! I don't know maybe Dawson would do the same and I'd hate him instead if he made the 46 last season. But I can't tell so I stay on the fence. That one 3rd down play Dawson gave up he complained about a push off. Replay was never shown.

 

[LJRomanoff]

Different but both true.

The relevant point though is that the second is not evidence of the first.

 

[catent]

"Duke Dawson was a bad pick" and "Duke Dawson didn't contribute to the team" are also different claims.

This is the most concise presentation of the issue I've seen in this thread, and you basically captured my thoughts in a much more clear and poignant way than I could.

If you have a thorough and competent evaluation process for prospective draft picks and based on that process and the resulting analysis, you feel a given player should be drafted at 'x' spot in the draft, then the draft pick (at the time it was made) was a "good" draft pick, regardless of outcome, insofar as it aligns with your objective evaluation process (which has previously resulted in contributing draftees).

 

[203Pat]

The relevant point though is that the second is not evidence of the first.

Ahh yes he was a bad pick because the team didn't clear everyone else in the defensive back room out of his way.

 

[Wheelman]

I meant "locked in" as in he won't be traded.

I understand, I remember you speculating about that but while watching ST(what I'm able to see) during the preseason I knew there was no way he'd get traded.

 

[FreeTedWilliams]

For the first time, ever, I think everyone here was universal in their praise of this years draft picks. In the one quarter he played Harry looked like the real deal. Williams looks like he is going to break the 2nd rd DB bust mold. Winovich looks great. I think once he gets healthy Cajuste is going to be a steal. So let’s wait a few years and see if we are as smart as we think we are.

 

[BradyFTW!]

This may be arguing semantics but I don't agree. A pick is good or bad based on the information available at the time of the draft. If you draft the best player in college and he has a car accident a week later and never plays, that's not a bad pick: you made the most reasonable choice with the information available.

I strongly agree with this sentiment when it comes to guys whose careers are derailed by injury, in particular. Like I still don't hate that Ras-I Dowling pick for what it was. They picked an injury-prone player who had the potential to far outperform his draft spot, and I suspect he might have if he'd held up. But injuries wrecked his career and that was that; can't blame the team for not having a crystal ball and seeing his hip would get messed up. The Pats have taken a lot of these types of injury fliers over the year. Sometimes it works out and you get Marcus Cannon. Sometimes it really works out and you get Rob Gronkowski. Sometimes it doesn't work out and you get Ras-I Dowling. On the net, I think it's fair to say they identified a market inefficiency and a great return on injury-prone guys overall for what they invested.

But for other picks, like Jordan Richards for example, I think it's factor what they ended up being into whether the selection was good. Dawson, IMO, falls between these two examples. Maybe his time with the Pats would've amounted to more if he hadn't spent his rookie season on IR, but given how quick the Pats were to move on from him I suspect most of it was that he just wasn't performing to a level that warranted his inclusion on the roster and they didn't have a ton of hope that he was going to get a lot better anytime soon, even with health on his side.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I understand, I remember you speculating about that but while watching ST during the preseason I knew there was no way he'd get traded.

Yep. I really thought it was a possibility if Dawson played lights out.

....but he sucked so thats that.

 

[Wheelman]

Yep. I really thought it was a possibility if Dawson played lights out.

....but he sucked so thats that.

I did call it before preseason that he needed to show something on ST if he wanted to stay on the team.

 

[realtime]

Whenever I start to feel upset about the Dawson pick, I just pretend that JC Jackson was our second round pick last year and Dawson was the UDFA. Problem solved.

 

[Deus Irae]

The issue with the "bad draft pick" take is that it implies that drafting is a perfectly objective process,

No, it doesn't.

and that if one had simply done better research/gathered better evidence the situation could've been avoided, which obviously isn't entirely true.

There are any number of reasons why a team might make a bad pick. Poor research is one of them.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Dawson spotted at Logan Int’l...outgoing flight...

I think that’s Luke Willson dude.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

Dawson was a good college player. Tough/physical, versatile. Dawson showed a lot of confidence in the slot & anything ran underneath. He knew his skill set & just shut most of it down. I had him as a 2nd, obviously pick in 2nd but wouldn't have been surprised if he went 2-4 range. That's where most had him I think 3-4.

Once he got here he was hurt, on the best team in the league & buried in the depth chart. That's a ton to overcome for any rookie. Idc if you're tye #1 overall pick.

Also ... Yes getting drafted by NE is a dream come true for most but not all. I can't imagine a bigger jump.

 

[Ring 6]

Sure, but "Duke Dawson was a bad pick" and "Belichick is subpar at evaluating and drafting secondary players" are two related but wildly different claims. If someone's unwilling to acknowledge that the first is true, then I agree that's their problem. But I think most of us, at least, are acknowledging the first is true while pushing back against people making the second claim. And if someone does make that second claim, a valid counter is to point out how many young, talented secondary players are currently on the roster and played valuable roles in holding the Rams to 3 points in the Super Bowl.

The real difference is the implication that a “bad pick” is out of the ordinary, and the griping about it.

 

[patfanken]

This is insane. Cyrus Jones is a bad player. He was given every opportunity at both punt return and corner. He failed miserably at corner and couldn't beat Justin Coleman who came into the year having been a healthy scratch multiple times the prior season. He couldn't beat out an undrafted free agent in Johnathan Jones and I cant imagine the trade for Eric Rowe had nothing to do with out Cyrus looked. In addition to being a terrible corner he was an equally terrible punt returner fumbling five times. Then he tore his ACL and that was that.

And yet he is now a starter for a team that many pick for the playoffs (Yawn)

As for Wilson he's a role player and he's a role player for a team that didn't draft him. This isn't a farm system where we bring guys up and let them walk to a new team where they produce there. He was a bad pick for the New England Patriots.

And what are YOUR credentials to categorize him as a "role player". I can remember a year or two ago when I commented in a thread about Mr February, how Hightower had 25 tackle FEWER than Tavon Wilson. (In fairness, this was a year before he became "Mr February" )

Take your outrage elsewhere, son, or do a better job backing up your remarks

 

[captain stone]

...If you draft the best player in college and he has a car accident a week later and never plays, that's not a bad pick: you made the most reasonable choice with the information available.

In that situation, you are correct...

...but the Dawson situation - and the situations of ALL of the other predictable bust picks - are different from it.

 

[Ring 6]

And yet he is now a starter for a team that many pick for the playoffs (Yawn)

And what are YOUR credentials to categorize him as a "role player". I can remember a year or two ago when I commented in a thread about Mr February, how Hightower had 25 tackle FEWER than Tavon Wilson. (In fairness, this was a year before he became "Mr February" )

Take your outrage elsewhere, son, or do a better job backing up your remarks

Wilson played on 31% of the snaps last year while missing 1 game
The prior year he played 50% while playing 63% of the games so about 80% in the games he was healthy and 68% the year before that while missing 1 game.
That’s more than Harmon or any of our nickels who we consider starters.

 

[Wheelman]

I absolutely despise this type of crap. We do a lot well so who cares what we don't do well. Absolute loser mentality. Good enough.

Do you think Kraft would say to Bill what happened with Dawson and he would just flash his rings smugly and walk away? Do you think Brady would throw a pick and just say "oh well I have 6 rings"? Of course not. Just because you are good does not mean there is no room for improvement.

Ok, listen. You made your point. Gotta still work on what we don't do well. It's fair. Here's the thing though, we had a logjam at corner. That's why he was traded. We don't know how good he'll be. You can't call him a bust without actually seeing him really play.

You want to call Jordan Richards a bust, by all means go right ahead. We've seen him play. We've seen Tavon Wilson play. We've seen the other "busts" play. But we haven't seen Duke Dawson really play. He may turn out to be a decent player.

Just look at some of the corners we have cut in these past 5 years that have made it on other teams. Cre'von Leblanc, Kenny Moore, etc.

 

[Ring 6]

In that situation, you are correct...

...but the Dawson situation - and the situations of ALL of the other predictable bust picks - are different from it.

Bust aren’t predictable because you bltch about every pick and therefore turn out right sometimes.

 

[patfanken]

Basically, the Pats secondary depth chart can be summed up as "they're knocking UDFA signings out of the park at such a ridiculous rate that it's forcing second rounders off the roster". Really not the worst problem to have: if the end result is a kickass secondary, I'm not going to complain about how they got there.

Between JC Jackson and Duke Dawson, I don't care which one was an UDFA and which was a 2nd rounder. We invested a 2nd round pick and an UDFA signing in the position, and we got a starter-caliber corner and a bad player who wasn't worth a roster spot for that investment. A ****tier FO that cared more about 'looking good' than building the best roster possible might have kept Dawson around hoping he'd justify his draft spot one day, but I'm glad Belichick isn't thinking like that.

I know that every team can point out their UDFA stories, but what the Pats have done in developing UDFA's over the years has nothing short of mind blowing, especially when you consider the fact that they were always in contention and never had any "rebuilding" years. Butler became an 8 figure CB, and Jones and Jackson will likely join him soon. That is truly remarkable. It's like in every year they find at LEAST someone.

This year they found 2 NFL quality players in Meyers and Gunner. Gunner might not be able to crack a loaded roster like the Pats, but if the Pats get to keep him on the PS, he'll be a lock for me on the 2020 team. OR as I sadly suspect, some other team will grab him for this season.