Something to consider when thinking about trading away draft picks . . . look at the Patriots

[Oldfan]

...It makes me really wonder if we are going to go through endless repetitions of retread coaches because they are the only ones that can hold up under the pressure here. I've asked the question before whether a young coach could ever succeed here and that is still an open question.

Good question.

I think our fanbase, and Dan Snyder's reaction to it, makes it impossible to have anything but win-now mediocrity because we're not willing to pay the price for excellence. Hiring retreads is a win-now move.

[pjfootballer]

In the first part of the decade' date=' they were awesome.

The Patriots have not been awesome for quite a while. Right now, they are a middle of the pack team. Yes, they have a smart coach and a great QB. So, they will occasionally go on tv and embarrass someone in their home stadium and everyone will think that it is 2004 again. But it's not.

They are a borderline wild card team right now unless the Jets just implode (which is completely possible).[/quote']

Agreed. And it showed last year against a tough defense (Baltimore) in the playoffs that the cracks were starting to show. The Ravens manhandled them all over the field and even the great Brady couldn't save them.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Good question.

I think our fanbase, and Dan Snyder's reaction to it, makes it impossible to have anything but win-now mediocrity because we're not willing to pay the price for excellence. Hiring retreads is a win-now move.

You train fanbases. Snyder trained this fan-base into a win now model. That did not exist prior to him.

Patriot fans did not exist prior to 2001. Seriously, there were 15 season ticket holders to Foxboro in the 90s. Now, they all think that they are the smartest fans in the NFL, because "We've had the honah of watching Belichick. It's like when Larry Bird played at the Gahden. We were bettah fans than everyone else." Belichik could trade Brady to the Jets for a fifth round pick and his minions would justify it.

Steeler fans don't blink when the team lets All Pro free agents walk away. There was a contingent in Pittsburgh that actually WANTED to trade Roethlisberger, because he was not doing it the Steeler Way (which is taking a ****load of steroids, I guess). They've been very well trained.

Even Browns fans only get depressed when the season ends and they realize that they are 3-13. And then someone says, "But you didn't even have a team!!!!!" and they all fall into line again.

You can train a fanbase to do anything.

[pjfootballer]

I sometimes don't know where theory begins and ends with you.

Yes' date=' offense and defense are both important. But the Pats D was better than its O during the title years. They didn't beat the Rams by out-scoring them.

They had a Great D and a Good O - which gave them a huge advantage in an AFC filled with teams with bad Os like Pittsburgh and Baltimore.[/quote']

And their special teams won 2 of the 3 SBs (kicker).

[Oldfan]

Which they never do.

The Patriot do trade up' date=' but not nearly as often as they trade down.

The biggest change in NE is that Belichik does not seem to look at players as players. He looks at them as pieces. At some point, you need to draft a stud just because he is a stud. He does not do that.

Neither did Walsh who Belichick learned from. Walsh's theory was the same as Red Auerbach's who said that the individual talent didn't matter so much as how well the parts fit together.

Ozzie Newsome stockpiles picks and just drafts talent. He doesn't care if he already has a bunch of OLBs. If the biggest impact player is an OLB, he takes him and worries about the details later. Granted, he has skewed his selections towards offense lately. But he won't pass up Michael Oher because he needs a safety or because he not might fit into the "Ravens Way" or whatever.

Post this again after Ozzie builds a dynasty will you?

[MassSkinsFan]

It would be good to find a way to compare the benefits.

I'm thinking you could measure it with a formula - something like the number of games played and started (say give 1.5x more for starts where played games is a 1) divided by overall cost, possibly times a constant to make the number meaningful. I don't know...

Example:

Player A - 15 starts in 32 games played, overall cost of $14M = 39.5/14M x 1M (the constant) = 2.82

Player B - 11 starts in 30 games played, overall cost of $14M = 24.5/14M x 1M = 1.75

Player C - 32 starts in 32 games played, overall cost of $14M = 48/14M x 1M = 3.42

Player D - 0 starts in 7 games played, overall cost of $750K = 7/750K x 1M = 9.33

Player E - 0 starts in 2 games played, overall cost of $750K = 2/750K x 1M = 2.66

Player F - 32 starts in 32 games played, overall cost of $750K = 48/750K x 1M = 64

Of course you'd have to divide the product of the equation by the number of years with the team to see the annual rate of return.

Any thoughts on this approach?

I think it could provide us some examples to see whether the draft or FA/trade is the better investment.

[Oldfan]

...You can train a fanbase to do anything.

Let's simplify the problem a bit to try to gain perspective. Imagine trying to train the ES membership to one way of thinking. I think you'd have better luck trying to train six 15-foot alligators to pull a stagecoach.

[MassSkinsFan]

Patriot fans did not exist prior to 2001.

Sorry LKB - this is wrong. I moved here in '88 and there were nearly as many Pats fans then as now - they were just much more miserable. Kind of like Skins fans.

[MassSkinsFan]

Let's simplify the problem a bit to try to gain perspective. Imagine trying to train the ES membership to one way of thinking. I think you'd have better luck trying to train six 15-foot alligators to pull a stagecoach.

You'd just need 20 stagecoaches - then you could separate the ESers into groups and organize from there.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Neither did Walsh who Belichick learned from. Walsh's theory was the same as Red Auerbach's who said that the individual talent didn't matter so much as how well the parts fit together.

That's horse****. Auerbach traded his two best players AND the Ice Capades for Bill Russell. He drafted Larry Bird a year early because he was Larry Bird. He set the wheels in motion to draft Len Bias 18 months before he drafted him. Auerbach knew that talent mattered.

And Walsh thought that he could make any QB a star in his system (and he may have been right). But his team was transcendent beause it had Hall of Famers.

Post this again after Ozzie builds a dynasty will you?

Nobody builds dynasties in the NFL anymore. The Pats were probably the last team to even approach that level of dominance. The NFL playoffs are like a college tournament now. Sometimes, they crown the best team. Sometimes, the Giants win.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Let's simplify the problem a bit to try to gain perspective. Imagine trying to train the ES membership to one way of thinking. I think you'd have better luck trying to train six 15-foot alligators to pull a stagecoach.

There are always going to be people ****ing. Go to a Steelers message board. The posters hate everyone from the Rooneys to Lebeau. And that's been the most consistent organization in football since the 70s. But - for the most part - the fanbase falls in line. It's like 25 percent of their fanbase is Longshots. We have, well, Longshot.

[stwasm]

It's an old adage that teaches us that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Well, I'm not sure if we care (or do the Patriots for that matter) how we look if we imitate the Patriots and how they seem to keep reloading year after year, but here's one eye-popping :yikes: thing to ponder and consider: with the Moss trade, the Patriots now have two first round picks, two second round picks, two third round picks, and two fourth rounders in the coming draft. They already are a Superbowl caliber team, and now have multiple picks to supply them with young, cheap talent to reload as they continue to age gracefully.

In the 2011 draft, we still have most of our picks, and we should hold on to all of them unless someone like a V-Jax can be had for a third rounder. The problem with trading away for vets like V-Jax is that ,while you get a polished pro right now, the vet you get has a shelf-life that will be due to expire sooner rather than later and will cost your team much more in terms of money than a third rounder that you can develop, have around here for a while, and pay a relative pittance to.

That's what the Patriots do, and it's time to start flattering Bill Belichick & Co.

I thought we didn't have our third- and fourth-round picks for 2011?

[Oldskool]

I thought we didn't have our third- and fourth-round picks for 2011?

We don't. But never let the facts get in the way of a good argument!

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

For the record, I believe that you need to hold onto your draft picks. And parlaying them into more draft picks is generally a good move. That used to be the Belichik strategy as it was the Jimmy Johnson strategy. And if you can trade an aging star like Seymour for a #1 to a bad team, well, that's an Auerbach move.

But you should not trade for the sake of trading (which is what the Pats do now). And at some point, you have to **** or get off the pot. Belichik has been rolling over his draft picks for three years now. And his team has declined as a result.

[TheLongshot]

There are always going to be people ****ing. Go to a Steelers message board. The posters hate everyone from the Rooneys to Lebeau. And that's been the most consistent organization in football since the 70s. But - for the most part - the fanbase falls in line. It's like 25 percent of their fanbase is Longshots. We have' date=' well, Longshot.[/quote']

I think more of the fanbase is like me than you think, given the large amounts of people who still buy their season tickets despite tepid results. Given that despite all the anger over last season we have Snyder going to the well once again and seemingly satiating the fans, I don't think there are many differences. Fans are fans. Many talk about taking the hit if we can be good down the road, but few have the intestinal fortitude to deal with it. Look at some of the threads after the Rams beat us.

When you get an owner who is willing to spend money for players, hire the biggest names for head coach, those expectations are going to get raised. It would be nice if the message was different, but even Shanahan has tried to sell us on the "win now" thing. Never mind that we are still trying to recover from the lack of picks during the Gibbs era and it is showing pretty hard right now.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I think more of the fanbase is like me than you think, given the large amounts of people who still buy their season tickets despite tepid results. Given that despite all the anger over last season we have Snyder going to the well once again and seemingly satiating the fans, I don't think there are many differences. Fans are fans. Many talk about taking the hit if we can be good down the road, but few have the intestinal fortitude to deal with it. Look at some of the threads after the Rams beat us.

So, a lot of the fans are like you but a lot of the fans don't have the patience you have.

That makes sense.

[Oldfan]

It would be good to find a way to compare the benefits.

I'm thinking you could measure it with a formula - something like the number of games played and started (say give 1.5x more for starts where played games is a 1) divided by overall cost, possibly times a constant to make the number meaningful. I don't know...

Example:

Player A - 15 starts in 32 games played, overall cost of $14M = 39.5/14M x 1M (the constant) = 2.82

Player B - 11 starts in 30 games played, overall cost of $14M = 24.5/14M x 1M = 1.75

Player C - 32 starts in 32 games played, overall cost of $14M = 48/14M x 1M = 3.42

Player D - 0 starts in 7 games played, overall cost of $750K = 7/750K x 1M = 9.33

Player E - 0 starts in 2 games played, overall cost of $750K = 2/750K x 1M = 2.66

Player F - 32 starts in 32 games played, overall cost of $750K = 48/750K x 1M = 64

Of course you'd have to divide the product of the equation by the number of years with the team to see the annual rate of return.

Any thoughts on this approach?

I think it could provide us some examples to see whether the draft or FA/trade is the better investment.

I think the study has already been done.

If we start by assuming that the NFL will always have a salary cap or its equivalent, then building the strongest possible roster requires that a team makes an effort to make each and every transaction a performance bargain. That means that, since the draft is a closed market, and free agents are compensated by an open market, drafted players are better bargains.

If memory serves, the Thaler-Massey study identified the bottom half of the first round, plus the second and third rounds as the best bargains. The Skins have been trading away these picks for the last six or seven years.

Here's a 2006 article by an economist re: Patriots v. Redskins

[MassSkinsFan]

I think the study has already been done.

If we start by assuming that the NFL will always have a salary cap or its equivalent, then building the strongest possible roster requires that a team makes an effort to make each and every transaction a performance bargain. That means that, since the draft is a closed market, and free agents are compensated by an open market, drafted players are better bargains.

If memory serves, the Thaler-Massey study identified the bottom half of the first round, plus the second and third rounds as the best bargains. The Skins have been trading away these picks for the last six or seven years.

Here's a 2006 article by an economist re: Patriots v. Redskins

Thanks OF

[honejc]

our coach and gm are too stupid to get draft picks. they dont even use the young draft picks we have. dumb****s

[Oldfan]

That's horse****. Auerbach traded his two best players AND the Ice Capades for Bill Russell. He drafted Larry Bird a year early because he was Larry Bird. He set the wheels in motion to draft Len Bias 18 months before he drafted him. Auerbach knew that talent mattered.

I'm telling you what Auerbach said. He said it often. In order to counter this' date=' you need to show that he drafted super talent that didn't fit his system. You can't do that.

And Walsh thought that he could make any QB a star in his system (and he may have been right). But his team was transcendent beause it had Hall of Famers.

You have cause and effect confused. Many of the players went on to the HOF because they played for the 49ers. A few might have made it with other teams, but their election would have been far less likely.

Nobody builds dynasties in the NFL anymore. The Pats were probably the last team to even approach that level of dominance. The NFL playoffs are like a college tournament now. Sometimes, they crown the best team. Sometimes, the Giants win.

It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. Most teams, like the Redskins, are not trying to build a dynasty.

[ddub52]

Dont get me wrong, I think Bill has done an excellent job organizing that team. But as of late they have done some things that make me scratch my head. They drafted TE Ben Watson in the first round and he was very productive. Then they just traded him away for a 5th I think it was. I guess they felt like he could be replaced by one of their many draft picks? Aside from that, even with all their picks, that defense has been pretty bad so far this year. I know they are fairly young, but it seems like he has so many picks that he just wastes them. Im sure he has a philosophy that I dont understand, but they hardly even take top talent in the first round. Maybe for payroll reasons?

Also, they must be the only NFL team ever that doesnt have an offensive coordinator.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I'm telling you what Auerbach said. He said it often. In order to counter this, you need to show that he drafted super talent that didn't fit his system. You can't do that.

System? Auerbach had six plays.

You have cause and effect confused. Many of the players went on to the HOF because they played for the 49ers. A few might have made it with other teams, but their election would have been far less likely.

Jerry Rice was a great receiver at age 40 on the Raiders. Who was going to be pretty good regardless of where he played. Ditto with Ronnie Lott.

It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. Most teams, like the Redskins, are not trying to build a dynasty.

Apparently, neither are the Pats since they just gave up on 2010 (and 2011 may not even happen).

[Dub70s]

Yeah I agree we should focus on this season... And I almost forgot to start a thread "Should we try to get Sidney Rice next year when he recovers"

Rather get Percy Harvin and bring him back home...Va Beach native...with moist East Cost air will do those migrains some good

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Also, OF, you are way in over your head when you move the subject to basketball. Auerbach's teams played every style - from the run and gun 60s to the below the rim fundamentals of the non-ABA 70s to the low post bump and grind of the 80s. The only thing that connected the Celtics from the late 50s to the late 80s was a) Auerbach and really good players.

But seriously, how do you connect Russell to Cowens? They played the same position in the "system." Surely, there must be some connection to the Superfreak athleticism and defensive prowess of Russell to the nailed to the floor, I will kill you to get this rebound style of Cowens.

Finally, I have read three books either by or on Auerbach. I've never seen a quote like that. So, produce one.

He talked the usual coach-speak about "true Celtics" and the "Celtic Way." And he generally avoided me first scorers and head cases. But his teams always were filled with super-talented guys, because he was often just smarter than everyone else. He stole Russel. He stole Bird. He stole McHale and Parish. He would have stolen Bias had the guy lived.

[Oldskool]

our coach and gm are too stupid to get draft picks. they dont even use the young draft picks we have. dumb****s