New England acquires New Orleans' 2012 first round pick!!!

[furley]

Biggest winners: New England, New Orleans and Mark Ingram

Biggest losers: Reggie Bush


Note: New Orleans re-signed Pierre Thomas to a four-year contract. Although Chris Ivory is still recovering from Lisfranc surgery, the drafting of Mark Ingram can't please Reggie Bush. Nonetheless, you've to like their potential depth at running back.

"It's been fun New Orleans," Bush said on Twitter.

And here's where it gets even more interesting. Both Bush and Ingram are represented by the same agent, Joel Segal.

Reggie Bush says, “It’s been fun New Orleans” | ProFootballTalk

 

[mpabull]

At the end of the day i think u cant talk yourself into a player, if u like a guy and think he's worth trading up for then i'm all for it... But if u have doubts and ur sitting there at 28 i think u have to move down rather than reaching for a player

they have not won since 04 and although great record over last two years during reg. season. 0-2 in playoffs. They give up way to many 3rd and longs.

 

[jukes]

We should have won in 07, but not even a pass rush which we had helped.

 

[dryheat44]

they have not won since 04 and although great record over last two years during reg. season. 0-2 in playoffs. They give up way to many 3rd and longs.

This kind of talk, from the New England media more than fans, frustrates me to no end. Do people realize how hard it is to win the Super Bowl? You have to be very good and very lucky. Green Bay snuck into the #6 NFC seed on the last weekend last year. From 2006-2008 we had a referee-and-Reche-aided choke job in the AFCC, A dropped interception/greatest catch in history Super Bowl loss, and a devastating injury to the league MVP eight minutes into the season. Those three Patriots teams were loaded -- it just wasn't enough. Would we have won the Super Bowl if we had drafted a Cornerback to play instead of Asante? Drafted a safety and benched Rodney? Unless you're talking a quarterback, one player will never make the difference between winning and losing any given game. Now the rage is that we need to upgrade our WR corps, because we have no deep threat. Our WR corps was good enough to lose only two games after Branch's arrival, and beat some pretty good defenses. Our passing game actually improved after we traded the top-taker-offer, but lose one game in the playoffs, and somehow this becomes a weakness.

So we haven't won a championship since 04. By my count, only five teams have. How many teams would give their left nut to have won since 01? How many would give both to win 3 + another appearance?

So we're 0-2 the last two playoff years. How come nobody seems to remember that Baltimore was better than we were in '09? I don't call that season disappointing. The Jets game in January, sure, I thought we'd win. Obviously the Jets are also a very good team, as good as the Patriots. We happened to lose that one. If we played 10 games against them in Foxboro, maybe we'd win 6. Part of what makes football great, to me, is that playoffs aren't based on a 7 game series. One shot to advance, better make it.

I'm sorry that I used your post to jump into my rant. That's bad luck, because there's literally hundreds of similar posts throughout this forum, and [email protected] in the local and national media parrot the same talking points. So it's not personal....I just happened to be reading this thread during annual "Belichick Sucks and Clearly Doesn't Know How to Properly Manage a Team Day" when I felt the urge to respond. It's been building for a while (You're right on the money on the 3rd and long thing).

I'm willing to bet there are 31 other team owners that would jump at the chance to hire Belichick as GM. He knows what he knows, and the rest of us get to vainly try to tap into his mind.

 

[lostjumper]

We should have won in 07, but not even a pass rush which we had helped.

If our 0-line didn't get abused, we would have won...

I love how every year people seem surprised when Bill trades around for big gains in the next years draft. It works out, like last year trading the #96 for the #33. I don't get the outrage.

 

[jukes]

our oline got abused in the jets game as well

 

[SONS_OF_BELICHICK]

this is why BB is the coach and you are not.....

its not like he fell off the turnip truck and just decided to trade a pick......

The pats do extensive scouting and have a system in place....that works...so that is why we are so successful.....

people need to trust Bill....unless you want to be like washington ....and be mediocre and sux all of time...

Round 2 and 3 is where we do our damage....

IN BILL WE TRUST

 

[Peachhead]

I'm willing to bet there are 31 other team owners that would jump at the chance to hire Belichick as GM. He knows what he knows, and the rest of us get to vainly try to tap into his mind.

Personally, I think "BB the coach" bails out "BB the GM" far too much. And even his HOF coaching can't even help some guys enough some times.

 

[Don Kipines]

The poor math skills of some posters are also amazing. People say: "We never make those first-round picks." Actually we do, typically, make at least one first-round pick, whether it's our own or one we traded into the future for. This relentless trading back and banking of future first-round picks accomplishes two things:

1) It automatically increases your draft position every year, since if you have two picks every year, one is always going to be higher and you can always pick at the higher slot. Let's say the Pats pick at 28 again next year and New Orleans finishes 24th again. Those four slots are a free jump up in the first-round. Sometimes the jump is dramatic, like the San Francisco pick that turned into Mayo, and sometimes it's modest, like the Baltimore pick that turned into Wilfork. We picked at 17 this year instead of 28. This trading back technique is actually predicated on the assumption that the team will, in fact, be making first-round picks every year. It just works best when you choose the higher pick and cash the other one in.

2) As the other poster pointed out, you're now getting a free second-rounder every year. You DO make one first-round choice, bank the other, and then choose twice in the second every year. If you do this every year for five years, even assuming zero first-rounders the first time (because you make the one initial sacrifice of a trade-back), you end up with four first-round picks and ten second-rounders. That's as opposed to five first-rounders and five second-rounders if you stand pat, and five first-rounders and FOUR second-rounders if you do what New Orleans did, and trade up. So just to add it up:

5 YEAR HAUL

Patriot method: 4 first-round picks + 10 second-round picks = 14 players.
No-trade method: 5 first-rounders and 5 second-rounders = 10 players.
Trade-up method: 5 first-rounders and 4 second-rounders = 9 players.

This stuff really isn't that hard.

 

[Haley]

The poor math skills of some posters are also amazing. People say: "We never make those first-round picks." Actually we do, typically, make at least one first-round pick, whether it's our own or one we traded into the future for. This relentless trading back and banking of future first-round picks accomplishes two things:

1) It automatically increases your draft position every year, since if you have two picks every year, one is always going to be higher and you can always pick at the higher slot. Let's say the Pats pick at 28 again next year and New Orleans finishes 24th again. Those four slots are a free jump up in the first-round. Sometimes the jump is dramatic, like the San Francisco pick that turned into Mayo, and sometimes it's modest, like the Baltimore pick that turned into Wilfork. We picked at 17 this year instead of 28. This trading back technique is actually predicated on the assumption that the team will, in fact, be making first-round picks every year. It just works best when you choose the higher pick and cash the other one in.

2) As the other poster pointed out, you're now getting a free second-rounder every year. You DO make one first-round choice, bank the other, and then choose twice in the second every year. If you do this every year for five years, even assuming zero first-rounders the first time (because you make the one initial sacrifice of a trade-back), you end up with four first-round picks and ten second-rounders. That's as opposed to five first-rounders and five second-rounders if you stand pat, and five first-rounders and FOUR second-rounders if you do what New Orleans did, and trade up. So just to add it up:

5 YEAR HAUL

Patriot method: 4 first-round picks + 10 second-round picks = 14 players.
No-trade method: 5 first-rounders and 5 second-rounders = 10 players.
Trade-up method: 5 first-rounders and 4 second-rounders = 9 players.

This stuff really isn't that hard.

Yep. Additionally, you don't put all your eggs in one basket. This way, when you crack open that egg labeled "Maroney", your basket isn't empty.

Patriots fans should know better than anyone that there are no guarantees in the draft. Increasing your number of picks is a good way to increase your chances of a successful pick.

 

[upstater1]

Please explain to us (and to the jets and steelers) why it would have been reaching to draft Wilkerson or Heyward.

Against BCS competition, Wilkerson was locked up. I saw his games against PSU and UConn. He dominated the MAC, but the MAC is weaker than it used to be. It's practically D1AA these days.

Heyward, I agree with you, but he is a big headcase who doesn't always bring it. I would not be surprised if he were totally off the Patriots board for this reason alone.

 

[dryheat44]

Personally, I think "BB the coach" bails out "BB the GM" far too much. And even his HOF coaching can't even help some guys enough some times.

That's the great thing about it. BB the GM knows which players BB the HC can help get by.

 

[dryheat44]

Against BCS competition, Wilkerson was locked up. I saw his games against PSU and UConn. He dominated the MAC, but the MAC is weaker than it used to be. It's practically D1AA these days.

Heyward, I agree with you, but he is a big headcase who doesn't always bring it. I would not be surprised if he were totally off the Patriots board for this reason alone.

Also possibly were concerned about the medical.

 

[Real World]

While it is great that the Patriots will continually move one of their annual 1st round picks for a future 1st, and a current 2nd year in and year out, at what point do you look at someone like Clay Matthews Jr, or my binky this year, Cameron Jordan, and actually use the pick? If we get another Ron Brace at the expense of passing on a premier pass rusher like Matthews, is that really good management? Especially when you currently have the #33 pick that could theoretically net you that 1st next year and 2nd this year, just as the #28 did. Why noy do what Cleveland did, and package a 3rd rounder with the #28, and move up 5 or 6 spots to snag Jordan? Then use the #33 to accomplish what it is you aim to do year in and year out. I'm really disappointed that the Patriots didn't move up from 28 to draft Jordan.

 

[dryheat44]

I'm really disappointed that the Patriots didn't move up from 28 to draft Jordan.

Obviously they didn't like Jordan as much as you or I did. If they did, they would have done exactly that.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

While it is great that the Patriots will continually move one of their annual 1st round picks for a future 1st, and a current 2nd year in and year out, at what point do you look at someone like Clay Matthews Jr, or my binky this year, Cameron Jordan, and actually use the pick? If we get another Ron Brace at the expense of passing on a premier pass rusher like Matthews, is that really good management? Especially when you currently have the #33 pick that could theoretically net you that 1st next year and 2nd this year, just as the #28 did. Why noy do what Cleveland did, and package a 3rd rounder with the #28, and move up 5 or 6 spots to snag Jordan? Then use the #33 to accomplish what it is you aim to do year in and year out. I'm really disappointed that the Patriots didn't move up from 28 to draft Jordan.

I don't think Jordan fits our scheme. But I agree that the opportunity cost we incur by trading for future picks is hurting the team.

Looking at it in hindsight, we helped Green Bay win a championship by passing on Jennings, Mathews, and Bulaga due to trades.

We just handed the Jets Wilkerson. It makes me sick. We all knew Wilkerson was not going to be a day 1 starter in our defense, but with a year of development, he would be a 8 to 10 year starter and provide excellent run support while keeping O lineman off our LBers.

 

[Real World]

Obviously they didn't like Jordan as much as you or I did. If they did, they would have done exactly that.

I understand, but they must have not "liked" Matthews all that much and how'd that one turn out? Obviously they do what they do for a reason, and those reasons aren't necessarily going to match ours (we like Jordan), but it is somewhat frustrating to constantly opt for quantity over quality like they do.

 

[upstater1]

While it is great that the Patriots will continually move one of their annual 1st round picks for a future 1st, and a current 2nd year in and year out, at what point do you look at someone like Clay Matthews Jr, or my binky this year, Cameron Jordan, and actually use the pick? If we get another Ron Brace at the expense of passing on a premier pass rusher like Matthews, is that really good management? Especially when you currently have the #33 pick that could theoretically net you that 1st next year and 2nd this year, just as the #28 did. Why noy do what Cleveland did, and package a 3rd rounder with the #28, and move up 5 or 6 spots to snag Jordan? Then use the #33 to accomplish what it is you aim to do year in and year out. I'm really disappointed that the Patriots didn't move up from 28 to draft Jordan.

You have to look at ALL the Patriots 2nd rounders, not just the ones that were directly traded for that pick. First off, Matthews wouldn't have fit in New England except for sub packages maybe (he gets washed out trying to set the edge). Second, you don't know if the Patriots would take a chance on players such as Cunningham or Spikes or even Gronk or chung if they had ONLy one second round picks. The multiple second round picks allows them to choose a host of players they like rather than trying to maximize the safety/security of that 2nd. So you have to look at this holistically.

 

[JackBauer]

but they must have not "liked" Matthews all that much and how'd that one turn out?

I'm confused. Have we seen Matthews play in a Patriots uniform?

 

[upstater1]

I understand, but they must have not "liked" Matthews all that much and how'd that one turn out? Obviously they do what they do for a reason, and those reasons aren't necessarily going to match ours (we like Jordan), but it is somewhat frustrating to constantly opt for quantity over quality like they do.

You can't just assume that every player would fit on the Patriots. Remember when we cut/traded (can't remember) Greg Spires and then he became a Pro Bowler? He didn't fit, but he was a helluva player.