Let's talk about current depth

[Deus Irae]

Since you didn't use any words, I'll go ahead and interpret this image to mean "A wise leader deep in thought." Gee, thanks!

Seriously, valuation of early-stage startups has been much on my mind in other contexts, and I think it's a relevant comparison. You have to look at factors like marketplace fit and timing, your faith in the principals' commitment, the robustness of the "technology," etc. etc. But you can't just declare the value unknowable, you have to come up with some working estimate.

The value IS unknowable. You could have a Clay Matthews. You could have a Verne Gholston.

There is no way to evaluate the performances of people who've not performed. This should be basic common sense. We're talking about players who've never taken an NFL snap, even in training camp, for crying out loud.

 

[Joker]

I have to disagree. I don't think that Koppen has many miles left on him at all. The few seasons, he's made some huge errors at critical times. The play-off game against Baltimore he missed the delayed blitz by Lewis that nearly got Brady killed. Koppen has had more than his fair share of issues against opposing DTs and not just NTs..

sorry I confused you a bit...what I mean by "miles on him" is that he's worn out like a bald tire.That is why I think center needs upgrading and soon.

 

[cstjohn17]

Really good question...and surprisingly hard to look past the starters and focus on depth!

Personally, depth begins with the starters. TBC and Ninko are all around good guys and if they were the 4th or 5th options and in a battle to make the roster things would be different. The problem at OLB is they have many C+ / B- type players but no A or even B+ players.

 

[patchick]

The value IS unknowable. You could have a Clay Matthews. You could have a Verne Gholston.

There is no way to evaluate the performances of people who've not performed. This should be basic common sense. We're talking about players who've never taken an NFL snap, even in training camp, for crying out loud.

OK, if you feel that it's basic common sense to give precisely the same weight to Nate Solder and Malcolm Williams in your roster evaluations, then we simply disagree. No problem, I'm sure it won't be the last time.

 

[IllegalContact]

The value IS unknowable. You could have a Clay Matthews. You could have a Verne Gholston.

There is no way to evaluate the performances of people who've not performed. This should be basic common sense. We're talking about players who've never taken an NFL snap, even in training camp, for crying out loud.

just because it is unkowable does not automatically set the value to zero.

your theory is more wrong than right

 

[IllegalContact]

Bottom line is that you didn't bother to read what I'd posted, because I didn't claim that no rookies are capable of providing depth. Bottom line is that you ignored the first round in 2009. Bottom line is you deliberately left out the players who didn't produce (see someone like Tony Fiammetta or Mike Goodson, for example) in the lower rounds.

Bottom line is you were talking out your backside from the start.

the bottom line is that what comes out of my backside sounds much like what comes out of your mouth.......

feel free to keep holding your breath until some 'real depth' shows up.......your theory has been proven ridiculous by several people.......

 

[Deus Irae]

OK, if you feel that it's basic common sense to give precisely the same weight to Nate Solder and Malcolm Williams in your roster evaluations, then we simply disagree. No problem, I'm sure it won't be the last time.

I'm not giving any rookies ANY weight, positive or negative, although I noted that people could reasonably expect something from Patriots first round picks because of the team's past history there. When you find me a round, besides the first, where every player taken has made the team and gotten to be a multiple year starter, we should start adding that round to the list. Hell, forget starter, let's accept multiple year legitimately helpful backup, as long as it begins with the rookie season. That still kills round 2 (Jackson), 3 (Crable), 4 (Brown), 5 (Price), 6 (Larsen), 7 (Welch). So, I guess we're left to hope the CBA brings back the 8th round.

Again, it's basic stuff. You can't evaluate performance without having performance.

 

[patchick]

I'm not giving any rookies ANY weight, positive or negative

Exactly. And last time I checked 0 = 0, so you're weighing them all the same, right?

I noted that people could reasonably expect something from Patriots first round picks because of the team's past history there.

Ah, wait, you're not weighing them all the same. You're considering the risks, taking into account factors which mitigate risk and making projections, just as I suggested! Awesome. So the real difference is which mitigating factors we consider. You prefer to look only at the team-side factors, i.e. past success rates of Patriot draft picks by round. I also consider player-side factors, such as position effects, health, etc.

 

[IllegalContact]

I'm not giving any rookies ANY weight, positive or negative, although I noted that people could reasonably expect something from Patriots first round picks because of the team's past history there. When you find me a round, besides the first, where every player taken has made the team and gotten to be a multiple year starter, we should start adding that round to the list. Hell, forget starter, let's accept multiple year legitimately helpful backup, as long as it begins with the rookie season. That still kills round 2 (Jackson), 3 (Crable), 4 (Brown), 5 (Price), 6 (Larsen), 7 (Welch). So, I guess we're left to hope the CBA brings back the 8th round.

Again, it's basic stuff. You can't evaluate performance without having performance.

LOL....

2 - wilson, vollmer, chung, gronkowski, spikes, cunningham, branch, light
3 - hobbs, kaczur, thomas, redmond
4 - hernandez, wilhite, sanders, samuel, green, robinson-randall
5 - mesko, slater, koppen
6 - pryor, smith
7 - deaderick, edelman


fact is, expecting something out of 2nd and 3rd picks is not unreasonable.....especially in a back up role......who cares if they haven't played a down in the NFL yet......at one time, every player in the NFL had never played a down......

 

[JoeSixPat]

That's all this "rivalry" needs. More fuel to the fire.

I corrected that for you... I think the Jets actually need to win something before it can be a rivalry

 

[JoeSixPat]

LOL....

2 - wilson, vollmer, chung, gronkowski, spikes, cunningham, branch, light
3 - hobbs, kaczur, thomas, redmond
4 - hernandez, wilhite, sanders, samuel, green, robinson-randall
5 - mesko, slater, koppen
6 - pryor, smith
7 - deaderick, edelman


fact is, expecting something out of 2nd and 3rd picks is not unreasonable.....especially in a back up role......who cares if they haven't played a down in the NFL yet......at one time, every player in the NFL had never played a down......

Eh - gotta go with Deus on this one - expect nothing from the rookies and you'll wind up happily surprised...

the fact is every draft is a crap shoot - sometimes they hit a lot, sometimes they miss badly - I think Belichick tends not to ask rookies to do too much if he can help it in any case

None of us have seen these guys take a snap in practice yet, including the coaches, who likely wont before free agency starts either

I'm confident we've got some good players in this draft though - some we currently think will be great, might be mediocre and the opposite will be true of other draftees - some could be great, some might be very bad

time will tell but no one knows for now

 

[Ring 6]

Eh - gotta go with Deus on this one - expect nothing from the rookies and you'll wind up happily surprised...

the fact is every draft is a crap shoot - sometimes they hit a lot, sometimes they miss badly - I think Belichick tends not to ask rookies to do too much if he can help it in any case

None of us have seen these guys take a snap in practice yet, including the coaches, who likely wont before free agency starts either

I'm confident we've got some good players in this draft though - some we currently think will be great, might be mediocre and the opposite will be true of other draftees - some could be great, some might be very bad

time will tell but no one knows for now

I think the point of this conversation though, is that we are trying to discuss the quality of the teams depth. Expecting nothing and being surprised may be a good approach to how high to set your expectations but that doesnt seem to be the point of the thread.
I'm right down the middle on this.
You can't dismiss the rookies because it looks very likely they ARE the depth.
It certainly is harder to evaluate them but to say you have to find a perfect drafting record to evaluate a rookie or group or rookies is silly.
At this point, the depth at running back, IMO, appears to be:

-With BJGE and Woodhead, we saw last year that the NEED for depth behind them is small but the opportunity should be large (neither had a role before the season started last year)
-The quality of their play is a question mark. Rookie RBs drafted in the 1st 3 rounds have a tendancy to be productive if called upon, and also, like all rookies are injury prone. Both appear capable of filling backup and fillin roles if they progress well through camp. Both have the risk of struggling to catch on. The talent is there, the implentation of it is unknown.
-We better have some JAG veteran alternatives ready if they aren't prepared to contribute right away.
-Frankly the chance of both rookies flaming out is no greater than the chance of a JAG veteran FA flaming out.

 

[Professor Frink]

I think it's an interesting discussion to have, how to project rookies.

I think it's perfectly reasonable to say a team that drafts 9 rookies (5 in the first 75 picks) is gonna have some contributions from them. Obviously from who and how much is an unknown, but there are a variety of factors you can look at to attempt predicting the outcome.

Where they were drafted is certainly relevant, you would obviously consider it more likely for a team's first or second rounder to contribute than a seventh rounder. What the team has at the same position is also important, I don't think it's unreasonable to project a larger contribution from Shane Vereen than Ryan Mallet.

There are plenty more (the players around him makes a huge difference) but I think as long as you admit you have an imperfect system, there is nothing wrong with make an educated guess.

 

[ausbacker]

I'm not giving any rookies ANY weight, positive or negative, although I noted that people could reasonably expect something from Patriots first round picks because of the team's past history there. When you find me a round, besides the first, where every player taken has made the team and gotten to be a multiple year starter, we should start adding that round to the list. Hell, forget starter, let's accept multiple year legitimately helpful backup, as long as it begins with the rookie season. That still kills round 2 (Jackson), 3 (Crable), 4 (Brown), 5 (Price), 6 (Larsen), 7 (Welch). So, I guess we're left to hope the CBA brings back the 8th round.

Again, it's basic stuff. You can't evaluate performance without having performance.

Spot on Deus.

 

[Ring 6]

Spot on Deus.

If you are evaluating the depth of the team, and rookies figure to be in those spots, you have to consider the rookies, even if it makes the evaluation more difficult.
I would assume we are looking for a complete evaluation that is as accurate as possible rather than an incomplete one that is accurate only for the limited analysis that leaves out many players. Right?
Is evaluating depth at RB by saying we cant because they are rookie a better evaluation than evaluating the rookies the best that you can even though the evaluation is difficult?
Isnt I think better than I wont say?

 

[ausbacker]

If you are evaluating the depth of the team, and rookies figure to be in those spots, you have to consider the rookies, even if it makes the evaluation more difficult.
I would assume we are looking for a complete evaluation that is as accurate as possible rather than an incomplete one that is accurate only for the limited analysis that leaves out many players. Right?
Is evaluating depth at RB by saying we cant because they are rookie a better evaluation than evaluating the rookies the best that you can even though the evaluation is difficult?
Isnt I think better than I wont say?

The rookie performance you're considering is based on speculation not actual performance. Why do you think I'm waiting to see Devin McCourty's progress in 2011 hoping he's not a one hit wonder in 2010? You can't make an accurate statement about something if there's no data that exists to support it. I try not to extrapolate college to NFL because they are different beasts.

It's been mentioned already. Expect little from rookies and you'll be pleasantly surprised.

 

[Joker]

Expect little from rookies and you'll be pleasantly surprised.


not if you are Vernot Goatston.....:woohoo:

 

[IllegalContact]

The rookie performance you're considering is based on speculation not actual performance. Why do you think I'm waiting to see Devin McCourty's progress in 2011 hoping he's not a one hit wonder in 2010? You can't make an accurate statement about something if there's no data that exists to support it. I try not to extrapolate college to NFL because they are different beasts.

It's been mentioned already. Expect little from rookies and you'll be pleasantly surprised.

Why? Have you ever needed therapy or something because a rookie did not pan out? Go on a hunger strike?

What are talking about here? 'be careful what you think.....if you expect anything from rookies, you could be hurt......badly'

If a rookie RB has 300 yards and a 4.1ypc.....is that good depth? Is it unreasonable to hope/expect that.

And then mccourty......even though he excelled, 'oh got to make sure he's not a 1 year wonder' LMFAO at this one......'we just don't know because it like only one year'

Dude......it's time for you to exhale and enjoy life

 

[Ring 6]

The rookie performance you're considering is based on speculation not actual performance. Why do you think I'm waiting to see Devin McCourty's progress in 2011 hoping he's not a one hit wonder in 2010? You can't make an accurate statement about something if there's no data that exists to support it. I try not to extrapolate college to NFL because they are different beasts.

It's been mentioned already. Expect little from rookies and you'll be pleasantly surprised.

But the point is to evaluate the depth. They are part of the depth. You act as if your life is on the line in making an assessment. The discussion is happening today, not after you have seen them play. Obvioulsy they are harded to evaluate, but that doesn't mean ignoring them is any better.
I recognize that you don't want to get your hopes up, but how do you have a discussion about depth by ignoring as many as 10 players who will be part of it?
The entire thread is based on speculation. Hell, the entire board is based on speculation

 

[Off The Grid]

You keep expressing frustration because no one understands your genius ideas.

Maybe, just maybe, your ideas are not genius ideas...

For The Win!! :rocker: