Just the worst ....

[smg93]

I'm also happy that we're a top SB contender and have two #1s, a #2 and two #3s lined up for next year.

Yes Yes Yes!!!! Thank you Belichick Fan!

I've said on other threads here:

BOTTOMLINE:

If you didn't like the talent in the draft this year, you would try and trade out of it to get a future #1 next year REGARDLESS of the talent pool that may be available next year.

Simple reason is: At least you give yourself a chance to look at players next year who might give the team the impact it wants rather than just pick a player who you know doesn't have "first round talent" in this years draft just for the sake of picking someone.

This is obviously not a novel idea on my part, but I guess I just wanted to point out that it doesn't really matter what the pool is like next year because if the same thing happened in 2008 and I realized I didn't see the value in picking someone next year, I'd trade that pick too for a first rounder in 2009 just to see if that would be the year that I could finally get my money's worth in terms of talent vs. first round money.

 

[PatsDeb]

I have to agree with those who are disappointed in what we've done so far, but I also have to think that there is something more going on. We just don't give away draft choices. My immediate thoughts were:

1. It's really true that there are not many talented players out there this year, especially (apparently) at linebacker, so we are going to stick with free agency to restock. We already have AD and Junior Seau must be in our plans.

2. There is some LB gem we can get in the later rounds that no one else is looking at.

3. We really are (gasp) going to get Randy Moss and the trade with Oakland was part of that, with the actual trade to be announced today when we give them several of our later picks (which are worthless if you believe no. 1).

4. We have more salary cap problems than we are letting on, and can't afford to sign several high picks (or perhaps a deal with Samuel is imminent, which contributes to this one too).

Who knows. It's been strangely disappointing so far, after all the free agency hoopla.

 

[upstater1]

I have to agree with everything Ken said. we got very poor value in return for our picks. Those of you defending the acutal trades in terms of return are way off in your assessment.

On the other hand, Ken, you draw no conclusions from the FO's decisions. I can only conclude one thing: the Patriots believe there aren't any players in this year's draft. They have to believe this is the WORST draft in recent NFL history.

In my mind, that would justify the bad trades they made yesterday.

That and the fact that there are barely any spots left on the team. Next year we'll be without Bruschi, Troy Brown, some of the vet DBs, and we'll have some openings.

 

[ctpatsfan1]

I have to agree with those who are disappointed in what we've done so far, but I also have to think that there is something more going on. We just don't give away draft choices. My immediate thoughts were:

1. It's really true that there are not many talented players out there this year, especially (apparently) at linebacker, so we are going to stick with free agency to restock. We already have AD and Junior Seau must be in our plans.

2. There is some LB gem we can get in the later rounds that no one else is looking at.

3. We really are (gasp) going to get Randy Moss and the trade with Oakland was part of that, with the actual trade to be announced today when we give them several of our later picks (which are worthless if you believe no. 1).

4. We have more salary cap problems than we are letting on, and can't afford to sign several high picks (or perhaps a deal with Samuel is imminent, which contributes to this one too).

Who knows. It's been strangely disappointing so far, after all the free agency hoopla.

a deal with Asante would actually create cap room not cause more cap problems. He is now 7.7MM against the cap. If they do a deal the SB gets spread out which most likely means a reduction in his cap hit this year, unless they front load the deal.

 

[jct]

Re: Just the worst ....quote from NFL.com

The Bills wanted linebacker Patrick Willis with their first choice (12th overall), but San Francisco selected him one spot earlier. After choosing Lynch, they made a strong effort to trade for a second first-round pick to use on a linebacker, but they were unable to find any takers. According to NFL sources, they were rejected by the Philadelphia Eagles (26th) and New England Patriots (28th). The Eagles ended up making a deal with Dallas that allowed the Cowboys to grab defensive end Anthony Spencer, while the Patriots wound up making a trade with San Francisco that allowed the 49ers to land offensive tackle Joe Staley.


So apparently we turned down the bills offer to trade up to 28 it must have been way worse than what the 49ers offerred....
(Do you really think a team motivated to move up could possibly have offerred less than what the 49ers paid???)

 

[PatsFanInVa]

I have to agree with those who are disappointed in what we've done so far, but I also have to think that there is something more going on. We just don't give away draft choices. My immediate thoughts were:

1. It's really true that there are not many talented players out there this year, especially (apparently) at linebacker, so we are going to stick with free agency to restock. We already have AD and Junior Seau must be in our plans.

2. There is some LB gem we can get in the later rounds that no one else is looking at.

3. We really are (gasp) going to get Randy Moss and the trade with Oakland was part of that, with the actual trade to be announced today when we give them several of our later picks (which are worthless if you believe no. 1).

4. We have more salary cap problems than we are letting on, and can't afford to sign several high picks (or perhaps a deal with Samuel is imminent, which contributes to this one too).

Who knows. It's been strangely disappointing so far, after all the free agency hoopla.

Re: your point #2:
Zak DeOssie comes to mind... of course, it's always anybody's guess. But if you think DeOssie (or _____________, for that matter,) is really the overlooked gem of this draft, of course you wait it out. It's also possible that they thought they'd have a shot at a better guy at 28, but it didn't pan out, and then another better guy flew off the board just prior to 91.

Any of this sort of speculation is definitely tempered by BB's read of this draft as one it's hard to trade down in... in other words, a draft where at least the top talent was thin.

Re: Point #3: I'll be the world's biggest fan of a Randy Moss trade the day it happens, and until then will consider it a buncha crap we're floating around the league. I just can't see it. But maybe I'm wrong.

Re: Point #4:
I don't think the salary cap picture is "worse" than we're letting on, but I do think a long term A.S. deal is a possibility. Again, that's pure speculation of course, but money would explain trading out of two first rounders... so would better value next year, of course, and just plain not seeing a guy worth a 1 at 28. Here's a parallel thought to the Randy Moss consideration though... other peoples 6/2 cuts might be our treasures. Heh? Heh? I mean, we are about to enter "round 2" of FA this summer... just because we made an early splash doesn't mean we're done.

PFnV

 

[lusdawg]

I've sitting back reading this thread and wondering why several posters believe we screwed ourselves in therms of value. As many have stated, this is a VERY weak draft, so why is it considered bad value to be trading up into next year's draft? The SF trade will gain us probably 10 spots higher next year in a probable stronger draft class, plus we got a 4th rounder this year. Would you all be complaining if we straight-up traded 1st round picks with SF for this year's picks? And the Oakland 3rd round trade will gain us about 20 picks higher in next year's draft in, once again, a probable DEEPER and STRONGER draft class. So, where's the problem? In my humble opinion, I feel that the probable 10 and 20 draft spot gains are actually better in value when you will have much better players next year (next year's 1st round #20 pick would probably value-wise be equivalent to a #15 this year due to the supposed talent level).

 

[Brady to Brown]

Everyone knows I love this team, its owner, its FO, and its coach. No one is more optimistic or willing to see the bright side of most issues, but as I type this, for the life of me, I cannot see ANY value that we got out of this draft so far.

As I see it we got a very athletic but undersized safety. Not a bad pick, decent value, but nothing to get excited about. He'll fit right in with the 5'10 limit we seem to put on DBs... Torry James being the exception that proves the rule.

After that NOTHING made sense.

1. BTW - Let me make it clear I am fine with trading some of our picks into next year. So,I was OK with trading down with SF, but getting back their first round pick next year is not nearly the value most people think it is. IMHO There is a much greater chance that that pick will be closer to 30 than 15. In other words, for the privelege of waiting ANOTHER year, we will most likely get the same value as what we had today...only a year later. Generally the thought is that a pick next year is worth a round lower in value THIS year. So using TODAY's value, we traded a first round pick, for a second round pick. It makes absolutely NO SENSE.

And getting their 4th round pick, just made it worse. A third would have been bad, but passible. Their 3rd and 5th would have been OK and fair. Or perhaps a conditional extra pick next year in case the pick is in the is higher than 20. But none of this happened. There really isn't any way to justify the LACK of value in this trade, we are taking the biggest risk that pick won't be high enough to justify the trade

2. Then there was the wait for the 91st pick, where as several people have mentioned there were several reasonable picks available at that spot. Though I was pissed that BOTH Waters the LB and Hughes the CB were picked just in front of them. Maybe they were too, and just said F**K it and literally gave Oakland their 3rd round pick for nothing.

Again using common value, in getting Oakland's 3rd NEXT year, they gave Oakland a third round pick, for a 4th round pick and a camp fodder 7th. So for the second time in the SAME draft we took LESS value for MORE value.

3. So at the end of the day we certainly seem set for a busy tomorrow. We now have 2 picks in the 4th, one pick in the 5th, 4 picks in the 6th, and NOW 2 picks in the 7th. That's NINE freaking picks in an area where you hope to find 2 to 3 guys who will likely make your team. Does THAT make any sense to anyone????

So on Sunday evening, they will trot out 9 guys we never heard of, or at least most of us. Most likely 5 or 6 of those picks WON'T make the team, and the bulK of this draft will end up being a huge waste of time energy and man power.

We will not be younger and more athletic, especially at LB. We still won't have solved depth issues at CB, and LB. The best I can hope for is that in all those 9 picks we will be able to find 2 guys who in THREE years will eventually develop into productive starters.

In the mean time, after 11 picks, we most likely have gotten ONE player who has the POTENTIAL to make a significant contribution THIS SEASON. That is NOT what I expected out of this draft, or any draft.

Sure we seem to be well set up next year with 5 first day picks, much like we were in 2003, however we paid WAY TO HIGH a price for that privelege.

This draft is looking like a whiff of Grierian proportions. Its almost like we are giving the rest of the league a mulligan. The Patriots are so good we can take a draft off and still be better than most of the teams in the league.

IT was frustrating to see other teams like the Jets, Jacksonville and Dallas move up and down in the draft getting value AND the men they wanted, while my team's well respected FO basically gave picks away. I can't make any other explaination for the actions I saw today.

I really looked forward to this draft, and now I can hardly wait until it is over. My only interest now is to see if they get a chance to draft DeOssi with the SF pick, after that Julian Tavares hold more interest for me than the Patriots. Today will make the long period between now and the start of the season even longer for me.

I agree with everything you said here. They may get lucky in the lower half of a weak draft. At this point its all we can hope for.

 

[Brady to Brown]

BTW, SF had something like the 5th worst point differential in the league last year. They are NOT a good team.

So you like the Patriots 1st day?

 

[dtbrks]

Well, this wasn't a sexy draft and as a PATS FAN, I am a bit disapointed that more players weren't picked. But, I wouldn't have picked Mankins in the first round 2 years ago, so the FO knows more than I do.

 

[Major **********]

I don't get it why people say that a first rounder next year is a 2nd this year? Why? Because this years draft is so damn deep and next years is so crapy? Because you don't get instant satisfaction? On draft day next year does it mean that the pats can't use that pick until the second round?
So did the pats get screwd with the Drew Bledsoe deal? We only got a first rounders in the next years draft for him. That mean we really got a second rounder right? Good thing BB and SP can really draft in the second then. I can't belive that Ty Warren slid all the way to round 2. Can you? And what about the Kyle boller trade? We only got 2 second rounders and a second day pick in that trade. Good thing Wilfork fell all the way to the second round.
People take themselves way too seriously in this board. I got news for you guys. You might be smart and intelligent people but until you run a NFL front office please tone it down with the boombastick posts.

 

[jct]

Does anyone recall last years draft?
I do.
We didn't pick up a LB and guess what we fell short in the AFC championship game.
If the second trade was to cumulate a trade for Randy Moss then that could have a lot of merit.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Does anyone recall last years draft?
I do.
We didn't pick up a LB and guess what we fell short in the AFC championship game.
If the second trade was to cumulate a trade for Randy Moss then that could have a lot of merit.

Ah, yeah. And there weren't contributing factors, like maybe long coast to coast trips, flu epidemics, a brutal game the previous week, yadda yadda yadda excuses excuses, yeah. But you really think a rook woulda done better than Alexander? Maybe, maybe not. I also remember Tom Brady throwing an interception that ended our final drive (the standard "Brady Magic" way to make or win a SB...) so was a LB supposed to get in there and play QB too?

What you're saying is regardless of VALUE, the NEED was for a linebacker, RIGHT THEN. (By the way, I also heard we NEEDED a receiver... oh that's right, we DRAFTED one in the second...)

And obviously we haven't done a goll darn thing to address the linebacker position, oh except that pro bowl guy. Well, who cares about that.

Look, we still need help at ILB, we're still thin at LB in general. Granted. But I'll take our starters, as is. Our depth isn't ideal - what is, except having two teams worth of starters? - but an issue with depth does not a failed season make.

Still a lot of talented 'backers on the board, including Zak Deossie, Brown alum, Pats kinda guy, etc. etc. etc. The Pats might have seen some of these guys as just a hair less appealing than the bonus babies who went in 1, and not more. If that's the case, how does their strategy look? Different, no?

Once again, all I am saying is, deal w/the fact that the Pats brain trust is good at this.

ON TO 4-7!

PFnV

 

[Return of the Nizz]

Does anyone recall last years draft?
I do.
We didn't pick up a LB and guess what we fell short in the AFC championship game.
If the second trade was to cumulate a trade for Randy Moss then that could have a lot of merit.

Which friggin rookie linebacker was so great that he would have catapulted us to a SB? Nobody.

And for the thread starter, Ken should be embarrased with this common value junk. All I heard leading up is that there were only about 16 guys with a legit 1st round grade. So we trade the 28th pick (a guy with a de facto 2nd round grade going to get paid first round money) and get a 1st next year. As for the 91st pick, I'm sure if there was somebody they wanted they would have grabbed him. Instead they get a day 1 pick next year from the worst team in the league (a team I might add that plays one of the toughest schedules next year).

These stupid draft value charts make everybody think they know what every pick is worth. It's garbage. The pick is worth the value of the player available when the pick is made. Everybody can spit out the "values" of a certain number pick according to the chart, but when it comes to evaluating the PLAYERS available at that time I'll take BB and Pioli's word over yours whether than was anybody worth picking.

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

I don't get it why people say that a first rounder next year is a 2nd this year? Why? Because this years draft is so damn deep and next years is so crapy? Because you don't get instant satisfaction? On draft day next year does it mean that the pats can't use that pick until the second round?
So did the pats get screwd with the Drew Bledsoe deal? We only got a first rounders in the next years draft for him. That mean we really got a second rounder right? Good thing BB and SP can really draft in the second then. I can't belive that Ty Warren slid all the way to round 2. Can you? And what about the Kyle boller trade? We only got 2 second rounders and a second day pick in that trade. Good thing Wilfork fell all the way to the second round.
People take themselves way too seriously in this board. I got news for you guys. You might be smart and intelligent people but until you run a NFL front office please tone it down with the boombastick posts.

Thank you.

I've seen this idea that a #1 next year = a #2 this year repeatedly stated and it still doesn't make sense to me. It's like the draft value chart, people get married to hard and fast rules without thought of circumstance.

If BB and Pioli don't feel like anyone they could use the #28 pick on was worthy of a first round pick then they might as well use the pick on someone next year (and I would wager a thousand dollars it will be better than a 28 next year).

First round picks get a lot of their value based on the fact you can sign them for 5 years, rather than the 4 years you can sign lesser picks to. So if you're going to use up an asset (the ability to sign a guy to a 5 year rookie deal) you should use it on a guy you want to, not simply the best you can find.

Besides, I don't buy this "present day value" crap. inflation doesn't exist in the nfl draft so comparing draft picks to money is silly.

Interestingly enough, these 5 years/4 years limits weren't instituted until recently, yet people still use the old Cowboys method of evaluating draft picks. Do we really think nothing has changed in the last 10-15 years since the draft value chart was created? The salary cap has changed. Free agency has changed, in that fewer quality free agents hit the market. Rules surrounding the draft have changed, yet we think that the best way to evaluate the value of draft picks hasn't? Any team with half a brain has developed their own valuation system, and probably views the old chart as obsolete.

 

[patfanken]

Well, after a days sleep to help me gain some perspective to my original post I have these comments for all who were nice enough to respond.

1. To all those pointed out that there weren't any more guys in the draft at 28 worth with a true first round grade, so we were right to trade down to next year; I couldn't agree more. I thought I made it perfectly clear that my problem WASN'T with THAT they made the trade, it was with WHAT they got for it.

Sure the values are subjective, but the fact remains that many teams traded up and down and got BETTER value that we did. If you didn't believe Harris was worth a first round grade, trade down. We could have done that and STILL have gotten Harris with the 11th pick of the second round, PLUS get a future first day pick.

2. Why is it that TODAY we all suddenly agree that this is a bad draft than there weren't any good football players in the draft. IIRC, while most agreed that the draft was weaker at the top this year (supposedly there were only about 16 guys who had true first round grade, where there are usually around 22); they also agreed that the draft was fairly DEEP for the first day. Did that suddenly change?

3. We now have 9 picks for the second day. My problem ISN'T with the fact that we probably will find 2-3 guys who will EVENTUALLY turn out to be contributors or even starters from that group. My problem that it VERY UNLIKELY that we will get any help from those players THIS COMING SEASON.
THOSE players usually come from first day picks.

In summary there are really 3 inconvertable facts. First we DID NOT get true value from the trades. Secondly we did not get younger and more athletic at a position of need. And finally, we will draft 9 guys today who will mostly be camp fodder, with only 2 or 3 actually having the potential to EVENTUALLY become significant contributors. Like I have said before, we essentially took this draft off.

 

[Return of the Nizz]

2. Why is it that TODAY we all suddenly agree that this is a bad draft than there weren't any good football players in the draft. IIRC, while most agreed that the draft was weaker at the top this year (supposedly there were only about 16 guys who had true first round grade, where there are usually around 22); they also agreed that the draft was fairly DEEP for the first day. Did that suddenly change?

Maybe because everybody realizes that message board draft experts are the equivalent of somebody being a surgeon because they stayed at Holiday Inn last night.

It's great to speculate, but until you find out what the professionals think of guys it doesn't mean anything. Us agreeing that it's deep and the Pats FO opinion of guys are a million miles apart.

As for that value word again, what good is it to trade back this year if there's nobody they really want? How is that value? They have traded out of three straight picks to get Moss and two 1st day picks next year. Does that give you a little hint about what the experts think about the presence of guys who can help this specific team?