SI.com: Pats reached on 3 players

[KCSVEN]

The article that started this used "reach" in a negative context of "steals" vs. "reaches" but then some here want to say its a reach because of where the consensus online draft sites had players rated. Which makes it a meaningless discussion. Some people had Jerod Mayo as a reach but Mike Mayock had him as the #8 overall talent in the draft.

Go look at the 2004 and 2005 drafts, 1/2 the first rounders are not that good, Alex Smith #1 overall? Yet people want to call a late 3rd round pick and a 5th round pick which both fit into areas the Patriots need(a developmental QB ad a KR/gunner) reaches. It's a meaningless word, it's a poor way to judge drafts. Team needs, whether a person will make the roster, and upside potential in your system is the way to judge and that article does not discuss any of that.

Let's not overlook the 2nd round pick garnered for 2009, the Patriots history has shown they are much better in the first couple rounds then later in the draft, another reason drafting guys to fill rolls late is a good idea. That 2nd rounder could easily end up being a Safety they'll need next year as that may be a major position of need next year and safety's tend to go later than other positions.

 

[p8ryts]

The Matt Slater pick is really mind boggling. Where does he fit in with the recievers the Pats already have? I doubt Slater will make the team. However, reading that Wheatley "gets beat deep on a regular basis" kind of scares me. But then again, when I need good analysis, I never turn to cnnsi. Most of the time they are wrong and have no idea what their talking about. Also, we have to take all the info we read online now with a grain of salt because 99.9% of America hates the New England Patriots.

The Pats don't want to expose a starting corner, Hobbs, running back, Maroney to injury on kick returns and the thought of Chad Jackson scares me. If the guy works out I will think its a great pick.

 

[Jimke]

I hope to hell Bill Belichick and Dom Capes know more about defensive

backs than SI. SI projected Deon Branch as a 5th round draft pick.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I hope to hell Bill Belichick and Dom Capes know more about defensive

backs than SI. SI projected Deon Branch as a 5th round draft pick.

Well said. Look, we're at the silly point in the mediots' season where they have to justify the millions of dollars that the networks put into their "Pre Draft Analysis and Coverage." Let's face it, no one knows how the Draftees are going to play out for virtually every team, including the first couple of picks where the players might make the roster but not justify the bucks they were paid. But, these guys have to write something this morning and this drivel is what we get.

I also noted, however, that SI also had the humility to run a feature on the top 16 Draft steals or whatever of all time, including, Brady, Brewski, Curtis and (later acquired by the Pats) Rodney. So, historically, they're also acknowledging that 25% of the biggest draft surprises were drafted by or now play for the Patriots.

 

[Lampshade]

I don't get this "reaching" crap. If there is a player you want in a certain range, and you have no opportunity to trade into a different spot in your range, and you know the guy won't be there next time it's your turn, what are you supposed to do? Take someone else who's rated higher on someone else's draft board?

Exactly right.

The term "reach" supposes you should take a player you don't want simply because a bunch of amateurs think you should.

 

[sebman2112]

How is drafting one of the best special teamers in college football a "reach" in the fifth round?

I'm not only talking about his play as a gunner, but his return ability. Slater averaged 30.9 yards per kick return on 30 returns, and returned three kicks for TD's in 2007. Maybe he'll grow as a defender or receiver as well, but his special teams ability should be good enough to justify that pick, especially since other top ranked kick returners have been taken much higher.

On the field I don't really have any problems with the Patriots selection of Wheatley. Love his 3-cone (6.74), top end speed (4.37 forty), burst (1.48 ten split), ball skills, footwork, fluid hips, instincts, and physicality. The only thing I've worried about personally is his injury history. So, maybe he could have been taken a little later when you consider his injuries, but his play on the football field shouldn't have made this pick a reach.

 

[Lloyd_Christmas]

Neither. I'm calling them reaches for one reason, and one reason only: They went higher than the general consensus thought they would. It's a simple and harmless definition that is what has been the basic definition for decades, which is why all the hostility about it is silly.

It's just as likely, if not more likely, that the team could have dropped down anywhere in front of Detroit and still gotten Mayo.

"general consensus" - whose consensus are we talking about? Fans? Mediots? Alledged draft gurus?

The only people's opinions that may be remotely worth know are the other GM's and Coaches around the league because they are the ones with huge teams of scouts and the expertise to property rate talent.

However, even if they all published their draft boards after the draft, we still couldn't be sure if a player was a "reach", because all teams are looking for different things in a player... to fit the needs and schemes of their team.

You can go with your general consensus of amateur draft entertainers (like Kiper) and call picks "reaches" if it makes you feel better. Just remember that the measurements you are using to evaluate these players are only as accurate as the tools you use to measure them. In this case, "tools" might be an appropriate term since most of these so-called experts don't know squat compared to the teams GMs, coaches, and scouts.... whose "general consensus" you don't have access to.

As far as players dropping, it only takes ONE team to take YOUR player, and that strategy blows up in your face in a big way. You have to decide if scratching out that last 10% of perceived draft value is really worth losing the players you had your heart set on.

 

[Deus Irae]

You can go with your general consensus of amateur draft entertainers (like Kiper) and call picks "reaches" if it makes you feel better. Just remember that the measurements you are using to evaluate these players are only as accurate as the tools you use to measure them. In this case, "tools" might be an appropriate term since most of these so-called experts don't know squat compared to the teams GMs, coaches, and scouts.... whose "general consensus" you don't have access to.

I will. As will everyone else. This same nonsensical argument is taking place on almost every message board of every team I've looked at in the past 2 days. Those people defending their team's picks are deriding 'reach' and the analysts. Those people who don't feel a need to act like shills for their favorite teams aren't being that ridiculous.

 

[Clonamery]

I will. As will everyone else. This same nonsensical argument is taking place on almost every message board of every team I've looked at in the past 2 days. Those people defending their team's picks are deriding 'reach' and the analysts. Those people who don't feel a need to act like shills for their favorite teams aren't being that ridiculous.

I'm not sure why you torture yourself.

 

[Deus Irae]

I'm not sure why you torture yourself.

It keeps the mind working. I'm the sort who tends to be working on 4-5 things at a time and, if I don't have enough going on to keep my brain occupied, I look for things to do. For the most part, I take this stuff with a grain of salt.

In this case, the irony of a bunch of geeks on computers calling people who've studied the draft and used their contacts for years "clueless" and "idiots", is delicious. Mel Kiper, who's studied these kids for 4 years is clueless, but "Generic Patsfan who bangs away on a message board while at work" knows what he's talking about? It makes me laugh pretty much every time I see it.

 

[OhExaulted1]

Would it be a "reach" to say there are WAAAYYY to many I-think-I-know-it-alls on this board? 90 posts to bicker about the definition of a "reach"?

I wish I could "reach" through my screen and klunk your collective heads together like I was Moe and the rest of you were Larry's and Curley's.

 

[Keegs]

First off, Godfrey is listed as a free safety. Let's not mix apples and oranges, OK?

.

ummm how do you mix apples and oranges? They are both solid fruits.

 

[Lloyd_Christmas]

This same nonsensical argument is taking place on almost every message board of every team I've looked at in the past 2 days. Those people defending their team's picks are deriding 'reach' and the analysts. Those people who don't feel a need to act like shills for their favorite teams aren't being that ridiculous.

Why is the argument nonsensical? I pointed out that the tools you are using to measure the players as "reaches" are, in fact, flawed.

I am a "shill for my favorite team" because I recognize the flaws in the rating system that you are depending on?

They are entertainers who have limited personell, time, and budgets compared to the teams that are actually drafting.

So, while they may be FAR more knowledgable in most cases compared to the average fan, they are by far inferrior at rating talent compared to the NFL teams.

I don't put any stock in a player being a reach if the standard used is fan expectations or Kiper-esque draft hacks.

 

[OhExaulted1]

ummm how do you mix apples and oranges? They are both solid fruits.

Get a blender.

 

[RayClay]

The selection of Wheatley in particular when Terrell Thomas was still there and picked next by the Giants....

This one was a total dud.

What are you saying? The Patriots didn't know which corners were available?

Or do you know better than the coach and executives which corner fits our system?

I am really curious. What is your area of expertise regarding cornerback play?

The fact that I can guess the reason based on a quick search leads me to believe you think you are an expert because you can read measurements.

 

[Lloyd_Christmas]

In this case, the irony of a bunch of geeks on computers calling people who've studied the draft and used their contacts for years "clueless" and "idiots", is delicious. Mel Kiper, who's studied these kids for 4 years is clueless, but "Generic Patsfan who bangs away on a message board while at work" knows what he's talking about? It makes me laugh pretty much every time I see it.

Mel Kiper knows more than most (possibly all) of us fans, but he isn't qualified to hold Scott Piolli's clipboard. If he were any good, he'd be getting paid ten times his current salary to evaluate talent for an actual NFL team.

My issue is that you seem to rate talents and budgets and resources of these entertainers as equal to or superior to those of the actual NFL teams.

I find that absurd.

 

[RayClay]

No, the media wasn't wrong. A 'reach' is a simple thing. It's when a team drafts a player above the general consensus of the projected draft range of that player. The Patriots reached on multiple players in this draft. Whether a player that was 'reached' for works out or not, he's still a 'reach'.

The general consensus of a bunch of guys with big hair that don't run football teams.

 

[Deus Irae]

So, while they may be FAR more knowledgable in most cases compared to the average fan, they are by far inferrior at rating talent compared to the NFL teams.

Given that some of them have actually been talent evaluators for NFL teams, you're making my point about the nonsensical nature of the shills' arguments:

1.) Clayton/Kiper/fill in name here is an idiot and knows nothing. Yes, he's studied this for years/has all kinds of contacts, but I'm able to dismiss him because I'm a computer geek who doesn't mind being hypocritical about who knows what and should be judging whom.

2.) The press doesn't know as much about drafting as teams do, even though the press has former players, scouts, coaches and general managers helping out with the draft.

3.) It can't be a reach because Belichick made the pick.

At least you're willing to concede that the 'entertainers' know more than the 'average fan', though. Most of the people who've been crying "no reach!" don't even admit that.

 

[Deus Irae]

The general consensus of a bunch of guys with big hair that don't run football teams.

Hmmm... wasn't one of the evaluators for ESPN a former G.M. for the Titans, for example? Wasn't one working for NFLN a former G.M. of multiple teams, for another example?

 

[RayClay]

The Patriots reached a lot this weekend. If the players pan out, they will be added to the list of Patriots reaches that worked out. .

Let me get this straight.

If the player the Patriots picked works out and the player Mel Kiper thought we should have flops, our pick was still a reach, even though the Patriots have better knowledge of what other teams might have picked than a draft analyst does?