Patriot's draft record surpriise

[NEGoldenAge]

What would make you think i've had another account on here?

That's an excellent question.... but you still haven't answer mine.

 

[Synovia]

That's not drafting though....you're getting players that have already proved themselves in the pro's. Luckily for us they both turned out to be better than expected.

Sure it is.


They took a draft pick, decided that they could get more value spending it on vets, and used it. Deciding not to draft a player and instead giving it to another team most certainly is a draft decision.


The draft is a part of player management and aquisition. Not an independant thing.

 

[randomk1]

You should take a look at who other teams draft every year. We're spoiled and most of us don't even know it.

i just went through the drafts of other top teams from the decade...there are bad drafts,some are average but none of them have 3 bad drafts in a row.

Our 2001-2005 drafts are pretty damn good.Each year producing good players. Then 3 bad drafts. And now what looks to be 3 pretty good drafts from 09 to 11 that have produced alot of starters and contributors.

The Chargers,Steelers,Ravens have been very consistent in my opinion.

 

[randomk1]

Sure it is.


They took a draft pick, decided that they could get more value spending it on vets, and used it. Deciding not to draft a player and instead giving it to another team most certainly is a draft decision.


The draft is a part of player management and aquisition. Not an independant thing.

Yeah but in the context of this thread we are talking about evaluating talent and drafting it. We didn't draft Welker,we didn't draft Moss. We traded for them.

 

[Synovia]

Yeah but in the context of this thread we are talking about evaluating talent and drafting it. We didn't draft Welker,we didn't draft Moss. We traded for them.

We spent a draft pick to aquire the rights of a player. I don't see that it really matters whether that player was a rookie.


This is a DIRECT EXAMPLE OF EVALUATING TALENT, and in this case NOT DRAFTING THAT TALENT BECAUSE IT DOESN"T EVALUATE WELL.


BB decided that the draft pick woulb be better spent on Welker than on any players in the 2nd round.

 

[Kasmir]

There's an apparent paradox here, i.e. that the hard evidence demonstrates that the Patriots have drafted very well during Belichick's tenure, yet many of us can point to lots of mistakes he's made.

As others have pointed out, part of the answer to that is that every other team makes mistakes as well, and we're glossing over those.

But my guess is that there's something else going on: I doubt the core of Belichick's advantage lies in superior effectiveness per pick. What's outstanding is that insures he has lots of picks every year

As I have pointed out in another thread, Belichick has a system which generates extra 2nd and 3rd round picks nearly every year, and he uses them. Part of the way he does that is by arranging to start and end nearly every draft with an extra 1st and 2nd round pick, cashing them in each year for an extra 2nd and 3rd. Year after year, picking twice as many 2nd and 3rd rounders as other teams is a huge cumulative advantage. The result is documented in the CHFF article.

So why don't other teams do this? The most likely answer is that they can't, because they face too much pressure from ownership, press and fans to "win now". Hell, despite having arguably the best 10 year stretch in the history of football, Belichick is still treated by many here as if he's some daft dolt who inanely refuses to do the obvious. Most fans everywhere have zero patience for investment n the future. Belichick is the epitome of patience.

Belichick is disciplined and highly analytic about every aspect of his football operations. He sticks with his system regardless of what fans and media say. He's very, very fortunate in having ownership that believes in him and supports him, probably because the results are manifest: best record in the last 10 years, best post season record, and the best draft record. It's no accident.

 

[Shelterdog]

i just went through the drafts of other top teams from the decade...there are bad drafts,some are average but none of them have 3 bad drafts in a row.

Our 2001-2005 drafts are pretty damn good.Each year producing good players. Then 3 bad drafts. And now what looks to be 3 pretty good drafts from 09 to 11 that have produced alot of starters and contributors.

The Chargers,Steelers,Ravens have been very consistent in my opinion.

I don't think the 2006-2008 drafts were great but how many pro bowlers did he draft in those three years? Guys like O'Callaghan, Wilhite, Slater, and (yes) Maroney did play for the Pats quite a bit over multiple years.


EDIT: Steelers, Ravens and Chargers have all drafted very well-and so have the Packers and Colts- but remember other than the Colts they've all had a bunch of down years where they had much better picks. Guys like Polamalu, Hawk, Ngata, Raji, Suggs, Cromartie, and Big Ben were all picked much higher than the Pats ever get to draft with their own picks, and guys like Rice and Woodley were mid to high seconds, which the Pats never get to draft with their own picks.
Even their bad drafts weren't that bad.

 

[TheSolderKing]

I've always thought that the third round of the NFL draft was our and/or one of our best rounds for selecting capable talent.



any thoughts on that my friends my fellow patriot comrades

 

[Don Kipines]

BB has made some bad picks. He's had some bad drafts. But even this notorious 2006-2008 period wasnt a complete bust. They got an All-Pro kicker in Gostkowski. Meriweather isn't Ed Reed, but he's been a productive, above-average four year starter. Wilhite and Slater have been active for virtually every game in the last three years. Dave Thomas, Garrett Mills, Ryan O'Callaghan and LeKevin Smith are all still in the league, just not playing for us. Thomas turned out to be a decent player, and O'Callaghan wasnt great, but he started at right tackle for the best running team in the league last year. And in 2008, how would you like to have picked Vernon Gholston instead of Jerod Mayo?

What kills NFL teams the quickest are misses in the first round and drafts where you get literally no contributors at all. The Pats have really only missed on one first-rounder in the BB era, Maroney. They've gotten at least some value out of draft picks in every draft. This is the difference between winning and losing -- how many Aaron Maybins you have versus Brandon Meriweathers, ie picks with no value at all versus picks that turn into guys who play. The problem around here is that fans got spoiled by all the home runs we had in later rounds, guys like Samuel and Cassel and Koppen. There were no guys like that in 2006-2008. But there were no Vernon Gholstons, either. Even Maroney, he started on a team that went to the Super Bowl.

2009 was a very good draft and 2010 is looking like one of the best in franchise history. We've taken 16 guys in the first three rounds in the last three years. If we get productive players out of half of those, which we almost certainly will, we're now killing the typical NFL franchise (which would have to hit on 88% of its picks to have similar success) from a value standpoint. Belichick is definitely eccentric and some of his picks are head-scratchers, but his system definitely works, as the CHFF study shows.

 

[plk]

The vast majority of players drafted are misses.

Yes. Even with a top 5 pick you only have a 50% chance of getting a high quality player.

A 50% Chance You'll Squander Millions - WSJ.com

 

[DW Toys]

You'd think from reading some of the posts here that Belichick is a drafting dunce that accumulates picks, seldom uses them, and screws up when he does.

So perhaps surprising to many, here's someone who graded all 32 teams drafts over the past ten years, and guess which team came out on top:



...and...



Cold, Hard Football Facts.com: Decade in the making: the ultimate NFL draft grades

Alas...another publication with many facts has him 9th and the Packers first. Another has him 14th. These are more relevant because it is in the last five years. I guess it is which one do you believe. I do not go with the Pats as one and you are a homer if you do. Too many factors that "coldhardfacts" dismisses.Ten years is the infancy of his reign and the Team had higher picks that they had to use.

First of all to be considered a good Drafter, you actually have to Draft not pass like it's some kind of a card game.

Sorry, I am not drinking the Koolaid. I am more interested in nearer today, not ten years ago.

As I said, greatest coach ever. Mediocre Drafter. Great teacher. He takes "C" value picks and makes them into "B" type players or "Very good" players. Just think if he actually took some more "A" or "B" type to start! He could make it easier on himself.
Likes to do it the hard way. Why? Is he more vested in the chess match itself?

The list of players he passed on is way too compelling, than those he tried to assemble into his vision. He has done well with whom he has chosen, but he left too many on the table with much more "VALUE" that he so preaches IMO.

I am starting to think Scouting may be an issue. When you Draft a kid who does not even think he would be Drafted, and whom you could have surely got as an UDFA (that is value??? Come on Bill!), to come in and have him replace another JAG like Slater whom he traded up for!!!!!,....... yes I stand on what I said about BB. Great coach..... mediocre Drafter. You want more?

Let's talk 2006 and 2008. If you talk ten years, those bad years are diluted. Talk five and he has 40% poopy Draft classes to start.

Greatest coach ever. His only wart is his fear of actually Drafting a player that does not fit every criteria so he trades out. Yet he picks up second tier guys and tries to mold them. Everything I say is true. He should trust his real board and look at how well he did with Mayo.
DW Toys

 

[bucky]

I've always thought that the third round of the NFL draft was our and/or one of our best rounds for selecting capable talent.



any thoughts on that my friends my fellow patriot comrades

IMO, there is no discernible difference between picks 50ish and 120. Obviously it varies year to year, but in general I think the success rate throughout the league between late 2nd, 3rd, and 4th rounds is about the same. I believe BB has had much better success in the 4th round (Samuel, Klecko, Hernandez, Davey, Jarvis Green, Sanders) than the 3rd (Hobbs, Kaczur, and Tate would qualify as his only "hits" as 3rd round picks.) But in general I think these can be lumped together for the purpose of evaluating the overall mid-round success rate.

 

[Don Kipines]

Again, just in the last two years, they've picked productive players in Chung, Vollmer, Tate, Pryor, Brace, Edelman, McCourty, Gronkowski, Cunningham, Spikes, Hernandez, Mesko, Butler, and Deaderick. Not all of those guys are great or even very good, but they're probably all going to play this year. That's fourteen players -- in other words, for a normal team, that's a 100% hit rate.

Plus the jury is still out on a redshirt guy like Price, and Larsen started 14 games for another team. That's an amazing haul. There are three perennial Pro Bowl types in McCourty, Gronkowski and Vollmer (an All-Pro right tackle this year) and three very good special teams players in Tate, Mesko and Edelman. Toss in Hoyer, Brown, and Fletcher and they've done amazingly well bringing in rookies.

BB is definitely a different kind of cat and his mania for ignoring roster holes is bizarre (it's a different spot every year -- remember when he refused to bring in a real nose tackle for two years?) but numbers-wise his draft record is pretty great. It's worth noting that Floyd Reese was pretty good with Tennessee and that seems to be continuing.

 

[plk]

First of all to be considered a good Drafter, you actually have to Draft not pass like it's some kind of a card game.

That is complete nonsense. Success in drafting comes even more from avoiding unsuccessful picks than in making good picks.

Do you buy stocks? Do you buy stocks the way that you would draft players?

 

[eom]

If you guys were paying any attention AT all you'd Sue that the probowl is full of players every single year that belichick missed on.
and who ends up drafting them- ---- OTHER teams.

 

[NEGoldenAge]

If you guys were paying any attention AT all you'd Sue that the probowl is full of players every single year that belichick missed on.
and who ends up drafting them- ---- OTHER teams.

Ya! BB should have nabbed ALL of those players. Regardless of system, need or premadonna status.

Just for the record, no team can afford all pro bowlers on a roster.

I think when it comes down to it, the bend-don't break/read-and-react defense that BB runs is fundamentally different than what many people want to watch. They simply can not separate that preference from drafting for BB's specific system. They want sexy. BB wants rings.

 

[VI PATS]

On the latter point, consider Andre Tippett.. who many think should be in the hall of fame, however he suffered because he was a really great player on pyss poor teams.

In the NFL you are a product of the system in which you play..

Thought Andre Tippett IS in the HOF ???

 

[Gon_Trevil]

The Pats poor drafting in recent years have been overstated. They had one bad year and one or two other not so great years. Name a team that doesn't go through a slump in drafting here and there.

Yeah...they are called the Lions and every ****ty bottom dweller for the past decade. I can't help but feel that a 3 year run of mostly misses costed us some big games.

Look at the 2009 Patriots...that was probably the weakest team we had the entire decade and the lack of talent was evident on both sides of the ball imo.

Not that you had any credibility left, but saying that the Lions and "every ****ty bottom dweller for the past decade" never go through draft slumps is kind of way out there even for a troll.

 

[Gon_Trevil]

I'll be waiting for your list of teams that haven't missed on picks.

lol...i don't have the time and energy for that.

No, you don't have the time and energy for that. In fact, nobody does, because such a list does not exist.

You do seem to have a lot of time to troll the forums with baseless opinion, though. God forbid looking up facts takes time away from that!

 

[randomk1]

No, you don't have the time and energy for that. In fact, nobody does, because such a list does not exist.

You do seem to have a lot of time to troll the forums with baseless opinion, though. God forbid looking up facts takes time away from that!

Steelers,Ravens,Chargers. Lately Packers

That good enough for you? They have had misses but overall their drafts have been very consistent.

Arguing that we're the best team in the NFL at drafting is pure homerism when 3 entire drafts produce absolutely nothing but 2 average starters(1 isn't on the team and probably on his way out of the NFL) and 1 good one in Mayo.