Tavon Wilson signs 4 year deal: $4.2 mil, $1.5 mil signing bonus

[Off The Grid]

I think that it is noble to try to ease Jet fan suffering by devising a system that ranks the Jets as good at something over a ten year period.

I understand that it is a very difficult task, but you need to devise a system that rates most of the teams that are good at drafting at or near the top of the list.

Until that happens, you probably souldn't present it to an audience that's not made up of exclusively Jets fans.

Brother Slappy For The Win!! :rocker:

 

[Deus Irae]

Huge? Probably not, but the poor drafting has probably cost your team at least 1 Super Bowl. When I ran through the drafts I was shocked to see just how bead New England has been after the first round. The round 2 and 3 track record almost defies logic. I think it really strengthens his resume as one of the greatest coaches ever, but if they had a better picks they would have more titles, IMO.

The Patriots hit a bad spell from 2006-2008, and 2009, while an improvement, has turned out to be largely disappointing as well. As an overall proposition, though, the team is at the top of the drafting heap. Take the second round, for example, which is a round famously derided by the critics. Not counting 2011, which saw injuries keeping the team's picks on the sideline and, therefore, unavailable for analysis, here's the list of draftees under Belichick:

2010 10 42 Rob Gronkowski TE Arizona
2010 21 53 J. Cunningham LB Florida
2010 30 62 Brandon Spikes LB Florida
2009 2 34 Patrick Chung DB Oregon
2009 8 40 Ron Brace DT Boston College
2009 9 41 Darius Butler DB Connecticut
2009 26 58 S. Vollmer T Houston
2008 31 62 T Wheatley DB Colorado
2006 4 36 Chad Jackson WR Florida
2004 31 63 Marquise Hill DE Louisiana State
2003 4 36 Eugene Wilson DB Illinois
2003 13 45 Bethel Johnson WR Texas A&M
2002 33 65 Deion Branch WR Louisville
2001 17 48 Matt Light T Purdue
2000 15 46 Adrian Klemm T Hawaii

That's 7 hits in 15 picks, which is right around the 50% one should expect, and that's with two players (Brace, Cunningham) who've still got at least a chance to turn things around.

While I certainly agree that the drafting in 2006-2008/2009 had a significant negative impact upon the Patriots, I'd also note that some big free agent misses, and some poor trades, have done the same thing. It's great for us to point to one area or another as "the" reason the Patriots failed in any given year, but it's really been a total package issue, IMO. If Joey Galloway and Shawn Springs don't flame out, for example, 2009 probably goes a lot differently, regardless of the drafting.


P.S. If you want to take a look at an interesting round for success, take a look at round seven. Since the 2000 draft and through 2010, Belichick has found hits with Pass, Givens, Banta-Cain, Cassel, Andrews (STs, until his criminality cost him his career), Edelman and Deaderick. 7 out of 21 in round 7 isn't bad at all, especially with at least 5 of the 7 (Edelman could be argued, but I'll call him ST only) being positional hits, and that doesn't count Ethan Kelly, who had a four year career with 9 starts.

 

[BradyMossWelker]

How many defensive players do we have left from the last Super Bowl? It might give you a clue to how your argument somehow seems logical to you but is really preposterous.

This is one of the problems with this board. Try saying one thing that is remotely against the Pats and you get called preposterous. I love the Pats, but I am lucid enough to see we aren't perfect. Have the Patriots done anything wrong in your opinion? Jeez.

I still can't believe you're defending our defense by simply saying we got to the Superbowl. Hey, the Jets almost got to the Superbowl two seasons ago, would you say their offense is good?

You're right, it does seem logical to me.

 

[jason423]

P.S. If you want to take a look at an interesting round for success, take a look at round seven. Since the 2000 draft and through 2010, Belichick has found hits with Pass, Givens, Banta-Cain, Cassel, Andrews (STs, until his criminality cost him his career), Edelman and Deaderick. 7 out of 21 in round 7 isn't bad at all, especially with at least 5 of the 7 (Edelman could be argued, but I'll call him ST only) being positional hits, and that doesn't count Ethan Kelly, who had a four year career with 9 starts.

For the period I looked at they were very good. They are about 30% better than the league average and find more than a few guys that contribute either in NE or elsewhere. If you find guys who suit up in those rounds to play in packages and specials you did a pretty good job. Things havent changed since then with the names you mentioned.

 

[RayClay]

This is one of the problems with this board. Try saying one thing that is remotely against the Pats and you get called preposterous. I love the Pats, but I am lucid enough to see we aren't perfect. Have the Patriots done anything wrong in your opinion? Jeez.

I still can't believe you're defending our defense by simply saying we got to the Superbowl. Hey, the Jets almost got to the Superbowl two seasons ago, would you say their offense is good?

You're right, it does seem logical to me.

We got to the Super Bowl twice, won it three times. I'm saying the team is perfect? Is that your argument now?

You are implying thnat we could turn around a whole defense full of vetrans who came together to win three super bowls if we were just not so inept at drafting. after all, every other team does (?).

How do you explain 2008, by the way? Was that a great defense, so great it made up for a really green QB who had hardly played since high school? Or did we luck into two all time great quarterbacks at ther bottom of the draft?

Where was the collapse and the rebuilding? You know those horrible years where we go in the tank, miss the playoffs by a mile but have great rebuilding years where we come back to be as good as the Cleveland Browns or Detroit Lions. I guarantee those teams have had better picks according to the pundits, where's their success?

You realize you can't win without making the super bowl and you can't make the super bowl without making the playoffs, right?

Our one non playoff year recently went 11-5, which is better than Detroits best year in decades. We did that despite a QB who was green as grass and a 7th round pick and a defense that was old and transitioning.

You need to come in off the ledge and make a logical argument by presenting a team that has won and been in a position to win more often than the Patriots based on their superior drafting. Who are they?

Otherwise we're just talking about your feelings and your persecution complex, indicating we all think the patriots are "perfect" because we don't share your panic.

 

[Ring 6]

"Stats are for losers"-BB

Are you serioulsy telling me that in that comment he was talking about POINTS?
Quite the contrary, if you find the correct quote, I'm pretty sure it is followed by 'winning or losing is what counts' if in fact he ever actually made that statement.
In fact, this statement REFUTES your argument.

Did you even watch the games last season? I've never been so frustrated in my life. Some analysts were saying this was the worst defense of all time And I know I shouldn't bring analysts to the discussion, mostly because they know nothing. But I can't believe they are dumb enough to say that about a average or good defense.

Analysts? Really? How could the worst defense ever be one that allowed more points than 14 teams and less points than 17 teams?
Read your comment above. You are counting up yards, many of which were allowed in garbage time. Stats are for losers. What we are talking about is winning or losing games, and points allowed says more about that than all the others stats you can find.
I could really care less that we stunk at playing prevent defense to protect a huge lead, because we protected the lead. If Indy socred zero points in the 4th quarter the result would have been the same, except in the stat column.
If you cannot realize that allowing those yards to the Colts, or the late ones to the Dolphins were irrelevant, I don't know what to say.

I can't believe anyone can say we have a good defense post 2008.

I can't believe that anyone can say that a defense that allowed the 6th fewest points in a league of 32 teams was not good.
If we split good, average and bad in 3 groups that puts roughly 11 in each group.
So if you are saying the defense was average that means that somewhere from 6 to 17 teams that allowed more points than the Patriots did somehow played better defense while doing so. I'm not sure what constitutes better when you allow the other team to put more points on the board.
If you consider them bad, then that means between 17 and 26 teams that allowed more points were somehow better at defense in your mind.

Can you explain what you think makes a defense that lets the other team score more is better than one that doesnt let them score as much?

 

[BradyMossWelker]

You are implying that we could turn around a whole defense full of vetrans who came together to win three super bowls if we were just not so inept at drafting. after all, every other team does (?).

The defense was getting old together, I think BB should have prepared better for that situation via draft, pretty much like the Ravens are doing. But even after 2008 BB has been missing on drafting impact defensive players.

 

[Ring 6]

This is one of the problems with this board. Try saying one thing that is remotely against the Pats and you get called preposterous. I love the Pats, but I am lucid enough to see we aren't perfect. Have the Patriots done anything wrong in your opinion? Jeez.

No the problem with this board is that when someone does say something preposterously negative the response is treated as if the responder is calling them perfect.
Example here. You say bad, Ray Clay or I say not so bad, and you cry that means everyone who disagrees with you to any degree is claiming they are perfect and can do no wrong.

I still can't believe you're defending our defense by simply saying we got to the Superbowl. Hey, the Jets almost got to the Superbowl two seasons ago, would you say their offense is good?

Ray Clay isn't even arguing the defense was good. He is arguing your argument is flawed. The Jets didn't get to a SB, because their offense was not good enough to get to one. Even if they had, it would only say their offense was good enough to get to a SB. That does not mean good.

 

[Deus Irae]

We got to the Super Bowl twice, won it three times. I'm saying the team is perfect? Is that your argument now?

You are implying thnat we could turn around a whole defense full of vetrans who came together to win three super bowls if we were just not so inept at drafting. after all, every other team does (?).

How do you explain 2008, by the way? Was that a great defense, so great it made up for a really green QB who had hardly played since high school? Or did we luck into two all time great quarterbacks at ther bottom of the draft?

Where was the collapse and the rebuilding? You know those horrible years where we go in the tank, miss the playoffs by a mile but have great rebuilding years where we come back to be as good as the Cleveland Browns or Detroit Lions. I guarantee those teams have had better picks according to the pundits, where's their success?

You realize you can't win without making the super bowl and you can't make the super bowl without making the playoffs, right?

Our one non playoff year recently went 11-5, which is better than Detroits best year in decades. We did that despite a QB who was green as grass and a 7th round pick and a defense that was old and transitioning.

You need to come in off the ledge and make a logical argument by presenting a team that has won and been in a position to win more often than the Patriots based on their superior drafting. Who are they?

Otherwise we're just talking about your feelings and your persecution complex, indicating we all think the patriots are "perfect" because we don't share your panic.

The defensive personnel has been bad since the old crew faded and retired. Coaching and offense have been carrying the team. Belichick didn't go defense with 6 of the team's 7 draft picks because he thought those players had really nice moms who needed new homes.

 

[Deus Irae]

The defense was getting old together, I think BB should have prepared better for that situation via draft, pretty much like the Ravens are doing. But even after 2008 BB has been missing on drafting impact defensive players.

Belichick was missing on the draft, trades and free agency. That seems to have turned around in the past 2 years. Let's hope the trend continues.

 

[Ring 6]

The defense was getting old together, I think BB should have prepared better for that situation via draft, pretty much like the Ravens are doing. But even after 2008 BB has been missing on drafting impact defensive players.

After 2008 encompasses 3 drafts, not counting the one just completed.
That includes 2 1st rounders and 8 2nd rounders, of which 7 were spend on defense. 1 first and 7 seconds. The first has started every game (other than a couple he was injured and out for) and made a probowl.
Of the 7 seconds, 6 are still on the team, 4 appear to be starters, and one of the other 2 started all season as a rookie.
This years he added 2 1st and a 3rd to the front 7 and a 2nd to secondary.
What exactly are your expectations?

 

[BradyMossWelker]

I can't believe that anyone can say that a defense that allowed the 6th fewest points in a league of 32 teams was not good.
If we split good, average and bad in 3 groups that puts roughly 11 in each group.
So if you are saying the defense was average that means that somewhere from 6 to 17 teams that allowed more points than the Patriots did somehow played better defense while doing so. I'm not sure what constitutes better when you allow the other team to put more points on the board.
If you consider them bad, then that means between 17 and 26 teams that allowed more points were somehow better at defense in your mind.

Can you explain what you think makes a defense that lets the other team score more is better than one that doesnt let them score as much?

I agree that yards is a ridiculous stat to measure the defense. But the offense does interfere with both points allowed and yards allowed. I think the offense helps the defense in points allowed because they make the other team desesperate. I don't know how that good of a defense would allow career games to every QB they face.

Again, you can keep bringing up all the stats you want. I still think the D sucked. But I am hopeful for 2013.

 

[BradyMossWelker]

Example here. You say bad, Ray Clay or I say not so bad, and you cry that means everyone who disagrees with you to any degree is claiming they are perfect and can do no wrong.

That wasn't even directed to that particular comment. The first post in the discussion he lol'ed at something I said. To me, that's disrespectful, something I try not to be.

And if you think the defense is above average, then you must think the Patriots are perfect.

 

[Ring 6]

The defense was getting old together, I think BB should have prepared better for that situation via draft, pretty much like the Ravens are doing. But even after 2008 BB has been missing on drafting impact defensive players.

The Ravens? They have not lose anyone of note yet. How do you know they have replaced them?
You do realize they drafted a total of 5 defenisve players from 2009-2011, right?
One has gotten into 2 games in 2 years. Last years #1 started 3 games, another has started 1 game in 3 years.
I guess Lardarius Webb 9who didnt start until his 3rd year) and Fat Cody represent some type of haul, that is better than McCourty, Chung, Spikes, Dowling, Cunningham, Brace and Butler?

 

[The Gr8est]

The 2010 San Diego Chargers, with their #1 rated offense and #1 rated defense, both measured in total yards, would have loved to have played in the Superbowl that year.

Of course they would have loved just making the playoffs that year with their gaudy statistics, but they failed to do even that.

So much for statistics.

2010 San Diego Chargers Statistics & Players - Pro-Football-Reference.com

 

[BradyMossWelker]

After 2008 encompasses 3 drafts, not counting the one just completed.
That includes 2 1st rounders and 8 2nd rounders, of which 7 were spend on defense. 1 first and 7 seconds. The first has started every game (other than a couple he was injured and out for) and made a probowl.
Of the 7 seconds, 6 are still on the team, 4 appear to be starters, and one of the other 2 started all season as a rookie.
This years he added 2 1st and a 3rd to the front 7 and a 2nd to secondary.
What exactly are your expectations?

Expectations? Not drafting Ron Brace, Darius Butler, Jermaine Cunningham, Terrence Wheatley, Shawn Crable, Wilhite in high rounds(pray McCourty improves). And hope to draft players like Mayo, Spikes, Chung...

 

[Ring 6]

That wasn't even directed to that particular comment. The first post in the discussion he lol'ed at something I said. To me, that's disrespectful, something I try not to be.

And if you think the defense is above average, then you must think the Patriots are perfect.

15 out of 32 is slightly above average, but probably should be lumped in to average, which is a good description of what they are.
However we were discussing a time period of the last 3 years. In those 3 years they were 6th in points allowed. I will ask again, which defenses that allowed more points did such wonderous things that they were better than one that allowed fewer.
You should also be aware that while allowing the 6th fewest points they also had the second most takeaways, the second most important statistic of a defenses impact on a game.

 

[Ring 6]

Expectations? Not drafting Ron Brace, Darius Butler, Jermaine Cunningham, Terrence Wheatley, Shawn Crable, Wilhite in high rounds(pray McCourty improves). And hope to draft players like Mayo, Spikes, Chung...

You have a ridiculously unreasonable expectation of the draft.
And Wilhite in the 4th is hardly a 'high round'.

 

[Deus Irae]

The 2010 San Diego Chargers, with their #1 rated offense and #1 rated defense, both measured in total yards, would have loved to have played in the Superbowl that year.

Of course they would have loved just making the playoffs that year with their gaudy statistics, but they failed to do even that.

So much for statistics.

2010 San Diego Chargers Statistics & Players - Pro-Football-Reference.com

It's easy to deride the Chargers 2010 statistics when you ignore the ST stats (i.e. 4 returns for TDs, 5 blocked punts) from that team.

It's not "so much for statistics". It's "statistics can't tell the whole story, especially when you use them selectively". There's a big difference.

 

[RayClay]

That wasn't even directed to that particular comment. The first post in the discussion he lol'ed at something I said. To me, that's disrespectful, something I try not to be.

And if you think the defense is above average, then you must think the Patriots are perfect.

The defense is in transition. Our team is well above average. While we are in the process of replacing 11 starters on our defense, we have been to the SB twice, playoffs yearly, except one year without our QB when we went 11-5. Other teams fans look at threads like this in disbelief.

You make it seem like we go to the take out window and order 11 defensive players to go. It's a bit more complicated. also, we had a short camp last year and are transitioning our defense because of players, or the league or both.

If it was so easy to build a defense, even with low picks every year, wouldn't everyone do it?