Vollmer at Left Tackle

[VJCPatriot]

Right from when he was drafted and I began to watch more video of Vollmer, it seemed to me that a guy that big, who moved that well, had some decent potential - he even looked like someone who might be better able to handle a speed rusher better than Light.

Now with Vollmer getting a good amount of time at LT in practice, I'm wondering if that's exactly the role we might see Vollmer in.

Light obviously has trouble with speed rushers but that's not an every game issue... just a few times each season and even then, not on every down.

Belichick I'd think tends not to want to throw too much at rookies - so I can't help but wonder if he's being looked at as a pass rushing specialist this year, focusing on that aspect of the game, while Light will continue in his role as the primary LT.

Regardless, it seems obvious that the team has hopes for Vollmer at LT whether its in a specialst role or eventually full time. When LTs lose a step it really shows, and you always have to be planning ahead for that day when you've got a valuable commodity at QB to protect.

It's probably premature but it would be excellent if Vollmer could contribute in that capacity. Vollmer is still likely to be backup/2nd string but football is a violent game. So I hope he is fully prepared to step in if/when he becomes needed. Vollmer has off the scale physical attributes but how quickly can he adjust to the pro game?

 

[Feep50]

Here's an intimidating visual image.... Big Seabass Vollmer next to Logan Mankins...... Talk about a wall on the left side of the line!

I have no bones to pick about Matt Light. We have won 3 SuperBowls with him, after all. But Vollmer is humongous! If he's as nimble as he seems so far that's a tough combo to overcome....

SeaBass!

 

[mayoclinic]

Andy, the problem with that is that it leads to the conclusion that no fan has the right to offer ANY opinion on draft moves -- and that any move BB makes is by definition good, because he made it.

Logically, a draft pick can't really be "good" or "bad" before camp even starts, but a draftnik Pats fan can still have opinions based on the admittedly limited info available to us. Most often BB totally schools us, but occasionally (e.g. Greg Jennings vs. Chad Jackson) the PatsFans draft board turns out to have the right idea.

In the case of Vollmer vs. Beatty at #58, it certainly counts as a massive surprise. Vollmer was generally considered an intriguing day-2 pick (no combine invite), while Beatty a possible 1st rounder. Personally, I'm fascinated by Vollmer and his amazing potential, but he's raw enough that you have to call the pick risky at least in the 2nd round.

The Pats have been burned before taking "intriguing" players in the 2nd round (Bethel Johnson, and possibly Marquis Hill, who hadn't produced at all before his untimely death), and have also done quite well (Deion Branch).

There's no doubt that Vollmer offers a tantalizing combination of size, athleticism, toughness and smarts. He may turn out to be a brilliant pick or a bust, or anywhere in between, but I can understand the rationale of reaching for someone with that rare combination of attributes.

I think that sometime there is a fine line between saying "IBWT" and rubber-stamping any and every decision made by the FO. The Pats FO has made lots of mistakes over the years, and some questionable moves, but they clearly have one of the better track records across the league. I'm still a bit non-plussed about passing certain prospects in the past draft, but I'm willing to give the FO the benefit of the doubt. Only time will tell how some of these guys work out, and even then we won't know for sure how others would have fared in the Pats' complex system.

 

[Ring 6]

First, it's not a "FACT that if any of those people were better at evaluating draft choices than Bill Belichick they would be employed by an NFL team making 10 times as much money" by any stretch. "Likely"? Sure, but it's not a fact.

Second, until the day BB is proven infallible, people will disagree with him.

Third, it's sometimes the case (see Clady, Ryan) where both the pick taken by a team and the pick the draftnik wanted taken have success.

Fourth, it's easy to call something a bad pick if you think it's a bad pick. If Vollmer doesn't work out to be a quality starting left tackle, then BB will be open to all sorts of second guessing, and rightfully so.

So, you think that Mel Kiper could build a team as good or even in the area code of as good as Bill Belichick?
Someone does not have to be infallible to point out that the person criticizing them is not qualified to cirticize them.
Since it is never the case that players are picked in perfect order of guessing who will be best, you can always find someone who ended up better than your guy. I don't know why you think BB would go back and pick Clady. Just because a player turned out well does not mean he would have been the best pick for us, Im pretty happy with Mayo.

The point isnt calling a pick that turns out bad a bad pick its having the nerve to act as if you have either the amount of information to make the decision or the ability to judge that information correctly as BB does, not to mention the arrogance to think you have both.

The analogy that fits here is to look over the shoulder of the portfolio manager of a large mutual fund. Since we are analogizing to BB it would have to be the best performing mutual fund.
The manager will make good decisions and bad ones. You or I couldn't come close to being as accurate on our best day. But once in a while we could guess better.
You are saying that you will look at his transactions, read some guy who writes a financial column (again if he was that much of an expert someone would pay him a lot more to pick stocks that to write about them) and feel competant to judge his decisions, and have the arrogance to say you have as much information or ability to digest it as he does. That is totally ludicrous

 

[Deus Irae]

So, you think that Mel Kiper could build a team as good or even in the area code of as good as Bill Belichick?
Someone does not have to be infallible to point out that the person criticizing them is not qualified to cirticize them.
Since it is never the case that players are picked in perfect order of guessing who will be best, you can always find someone who ended up better than your guy. I don't know why you think BB would go back and pick Clady. Just because a player turned out well does not mean he would have been the best pick for us, Im pretty happy with Mayo.

I didn't mention anyone specifically. I simply pointed out that what you were asserting as a fact was not one.

The point isnt calling a pick that turns out bad a bad pick its having the nerve to act as if you have either the amount of information to make the decision or the ability to judge that information correctly as BB does, not to mention the arrogance to think you have both.

This is an absolutely idiotic assertion for the moderator of a message board to be making.

The analogy that fits here is to look over the shoulder of the portfolio manager of a large mutual fund. Since we are analogizing to BB it would have to be the best performing mutual fund.
The manager will make good decisions and bad ones. You or I couldn't come close to being as accurate on our best day. But once in a while we could guess better.
You are saying that you will look at his transactions, read some guy who writes a financial column (again if he was that much of an expert someone would pay him a lot more to pick stocks that to write about them) and feel competant to judge his decisions, and have the arrogance to say you have as much information or ability to digest it as he does. That is totally ludicrous

In summary, stock market experts as a group do not reliably outguess the market. Some experts, though, may be better than others.

CXOAG Guru Grades

It's not ludicrous at all. Frankly, I'm stunned that you'd claim it was, given that this is not the only study done that's gotten these types of results. Well, no, I guess I'm not stunned. Searching for bad analogies, this sort of thing can happen.

The homers are becoming bigger homers as the summer progresses, even as more trolls have begun infesting the board. It's the time of year, after all. BB isn't perfect, and you'd be better off if you stopped defending him every time someone makes a point that proves that. Even the best in a field will make mistakes, after all, and there's always someone, somewhere, with the potential to be better than he is.

 

[Ring 6]

Bill has effed-up plenty of draft picks in the past, esp. on the second day, and will likely do so in the future, if he hasn't done so already this year.

What's so hard to understand about that?

It's also a fact that because those other people whom we read & listen to during draft season get paid too, their opinion obviously carries some degree of legitimacy for those who pay them, and read them, and listen to them.
Those other people also have personal contact with players;
they also have studied film;
they also have watched live games & live workouts;
they also have knowledge of which players would better fit which systems.

What about that doesn't make sense?

Finally, and based on Bill's lousy draft record after Vince Wilfork and until Darius Butler - with the happy exception of 2005 - I am calling Vollmer (and Tate, and Ohrnburger, and Bussey, and Pryor) a bad pick because I do indeed have more faith in those other people - and myself - right now than I do in the infallible, almighty Bill Belichick.

Now, if any of the aforementioned draft picks this year prove to be worth the places at which they were taken, then I will be right here to take my lumps, congratulate Bill, and begin to restore my faith in him.

This could be the most ignorant post since this board was started.

LEt me understand:
1) BB has built arguably (and not even arguably when you consider the cap era) the gretest dynasty in NFL history.
2) You feel his is incompetant because he is not infallible.
3) You think that Mel Kiper or some guy who makes 50k a year to write a draft blog has as much or more ability to judge talent than BB, and would equally know what qualities work in a BB system, know the long term strategy for the franchise the draft is based on as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the players currently on the roster, and would do, apparently a BETTER job than BB.
4) If 3 is true, I think about 30 NFL teams should fire their front office and hire bloggers, Kipers and draftniks.

I must toss this in:
You said:

Finally, and based on Bill's lousy draft record after Vince Wilfork and until Darius Butler - with the happy exception of 2005
So Wilfork was drafted in 04, you like 05.
So Jerrod Mayo is a stiff? Logan Mankins, does he suck? Meriwhether, you could have done better? I guess all of your picks would have resulted in better than the lousy results BB has been having, right.

But even better:

I am calling Vollmer (and Tate, and Ohrnburger, and Bussey, and Pryor) a bad pick because I do indeed have more faith in those other people - and myself - right now than I do in the infallible, almighty Bill Belichick.

I am going to give you the opportunity to retract that. But if not, you just said that you are better than Bill Belichick and you would like our franchise run by a blogging geek.
Nice.
Please retract, if not, we wont be speaking again because I will value the opinion of the empty water bottle on my desk more than yours.

 

[Ring 6]

Andy, the problem with that is that it leads to the conclusion that no fan has the right to offer ANY opinion on draft moves -- and that any move BB makes is by definition good, because he made it.

Logically, a draft pick can't really be "good" or "bad" before camp even starts, but a draftnik Pats fan can still have opinions based on the admittedly limited info available to us. Most often BB totally schools us, but occasionally (e.g. Greg Jennings vs. Chad Jackson) the PatsFans draft board turns out to have the right idea.

In the case of Vollmer vs. Beatty at #58, it certainly counts as a massive surprise. Vollmer was generally considered an intriguing day-2 pick (no combine invite), while Beatty a possible 1st rounder. Personally, I'm fascinated by Vollmer and his amazing potential, but he's raw enough that you have to call the pick risky at least in the 2nd round.

I can understand questioning. But the comments that are made are as if the poster KNOWS and is informing all of us that BB was wrong. Such as I can;'t believe he made such a stupid decision.
Even if that poster had the football intelligence of BB (Which no one on this board gets to 50% of) he isnt making his living studying who to pick, and making a judgment on one player vs the other.
In other words, AT BEST it is calling an informed decision stupid from an uninformed viewpoint. (or less informed)
To add on top of that that with less information I can not only make a better decision than BB but also tell you that I know he is wrong is just ignorant.

Pet peeve I have. I just hate when people act like they are an expert on something they cant possibly know enuogh about to be one.

 

[Ring 6]

For once and for all, the Dean of the draft gurus, Rich Gosslin had Darius Butler as his 28th pick, Patrick Chung as his 58th pick, Ron Brace as his 59th pick, Sebastion Volmer as his 76th pick, Rich Orhnberger as his 80th pick, Tyrone McKenzie as his 97th pick.

The only guy that the Patriots drafted in the first four rounds, not on his Top 100 list was unrated Brandon Tate, and with his Knee and MJ test, it is easy to see why Gosslein dropped him from his ratings.

You don't know sh!t from Shinola, so stop acting and posting as if you did!

Beatty will develop into a n average good pass block, no run block, LOT. SeaBass has the possibility of joining the Ogden, Bosselli, class of LOTs, able to run block, as well as pass block. Dante Scarnechia worked both out, at UConn and Houston, and made the judgement from up-close.:snob:

But we need to get something straight here.
Rich gosselin IS NOT A TALENT EVALUATOR. If he and BB disagree, BB is 50 times more likely to be right.
Rich Gosselin ranks players TO PREDICT THE DRAFT. He does this by having contacts throughout the league who share their opinions with him.
He is not ranking players, he is guessing where NFL GMs have them ranked. It is night and day different.

 

[reflexblue]

The Pats have been burned before taking "intriguing" players in the 2nd round (Bethel Johnson, and possibly Marquis Hill, who hadn't produced at all before his untimely death), and have also done quite well (Deion Branch).

There's no doubt that Vollmer offers a tantalizing combination of size, athleticism, toughness and smarts. He may turn out to be a brilliant pick or a bust, or anywhere in between, but I can understand the rationale of reaching for someone with that rare combination of attributes.

I think that sometime there is a fine line between saying "IBWT" and rubber-stamping any and every decision made by the FO. The Pats FO has made lots of mistakes over the years, and some questionable moves, but they clearly have one of the better track records across the league. I'm still a bit non-plussed about passing certain prospects in the past draft, but I'm willing to give the FO the benefit of the doubt. Only time will tell how some of these guys work out, and even then we won't know for sure how others would have fared in the Pats' complex system.

I agree totaly, there have been plenty of mistakes in the past. But on the whole the FO has made many more pos. than neg. moves.
I guess the only question i have is, is it that BB and staff are such good coaches that they make their picks look better than they are.
An argument could be made that that is the case, look at how many have left and failed.

 

[Clonamery]

.....with the potential to be better than he is.

I have no faith in that statement.

 

[Deus Irae]

I have no faith in that statement.

History has proven such over and over, and in pretty much every field of endeavor.

 

[Kontradiction]

Kontra, lest others take your statement too literally, let's remember that Oher was drafted at #23, Vollmer at #58. Here's what the Pats got for the Oher pick:

Darius Butler, Brandon Tate, Julian Edelman, AND Jacksonville's 2010 2nd-round pick.
(Chung had nothing to do with it, he was taken with the Cassel pick.)

In any case, time will tell. Vollmer is wildly inexperienced but he's highly intelligent and his raw physical tools eclipse Oher's:

Oher:
6'04" 309 5.34/3.03/1.78 21 30.5" 08'07" 4.60 7.81
Vollmer:
6'08" 312 5.13/2.90/1.77 32 36.6" 09'03" 4.50 7.51

I was comparing what we could have had (Oher) to what we got (Vollmer), not where they were picked. But I do agree with everything in this post. Vollmer's measurables are outstanding.

 

[AzPatsFan]

But we need to get something straight here.
Rich gosselin IS NOT A TALENT EVALUATOR. If he and BB disagree, BB is 50 times more likely to be right.
Rich Gosselin ranks players TO PREDICT THE DRAFT. He does this by having contacts throughout the league who share their opinions with him.
He is not ranking players, he is guessing where NFL GMs have them ranked. It is night and day different.

Andy J,

All the better. RG is taking a poll of his contacts in the NFL to assess who these people think are the best players; and where they collectively and consensually rate them to be taken. In this case, we don't have a basement draftnik guru creating his own draft opinions.

What we have is a reporter who consistently, year in and year out, has demonstrated that he has the pulse of the proper number of NFL people, to more correctly read their pre-draft opinions of the collegiate draft crop than any other draft source.:snob:

 

[patchick]

I was comparing what we could have had (Oher) to what we got (Vollmer), not where they were picked.

I understand. I guess what I'm trying to say is that to compare "what we could have had to what we got," the comparison should be:

Sebastian Vollmer + Darius Butler + Brandon Tate + Julian Edelman, + Jacksonville's 2010 2nd-round pick
vs.
Michael Oher + 2009 pick #58

IOW, Vollmer doesn't have to be a better prospect than Oher for the value proposition to work out in the Pats' favor, so they shouldn't be compared head to head.

 

[AzPatsFan]

I understand. I guess what I'm trying to say is that to compare "what we could have had to what we got," the comparison should be:

Sebastian Vollmer + Darius Butler + Brandon Tate + Julian Edelman, + Jacksonville's 2010 2nd-round pick
vs.
Michael Oher + 2009 pick #58

IOW, Vollmer doesn't have to be a better prospect than Oher for the value proposition to work out in the Pats' favor, so they shouldn't be compared head to head.

Belichick and Scarnecchia don't want to waste all the Offensive line's practice time, constantly repeating a play over and over, when all but the Dunce have long understood & gotten it. That reduces the number of plays that they can practice, and the options that they might install and have available off each one. Plus it ruins the concentration of all the other Offensive line players. There is a reason why Belichcik seeks smart players. Sometimes the simple things are not so obvious.