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

[nwoganja]

Here's a question, what good young players have the Pats drafted over the last few years?

In 2010, they had 12 draft picks, only 6 made the team.

In 2009, they had 12 picks, only 2 or 3 of them start.

In 2008, they had 7 picks, only 2 of them play.

In 2007, they had 8 picks, only 1 starts.

In 2006, they had 10 picks, I think only 1 is still on the team.

So yeah they've had alot of draft picks, but can you name the best young players on the Pats? Jerod Mayo and who else? Patrick Chung and Brandon Tate could break out and be starts, but they don't have many great young players. Just because you have draft picks, doesn't mean you'll get good players out of them.

But to counterfact this, more picks = more opportunity to pick up a good player.

[MrWill]

People hate on Belichick because he is a confirmed cheater who has no class. He completely skirted the issue when he was accused ('I didn't know I couldn't do that'.....Dave Chapelle style). He claimed that it DID NOT GIVE HIS TEAM ANY ADVANTAGE. That's right, because we all know that knowing what defense the opponent is going to call ahead of time really doesn't help your team out much. And, when he was called out and punished for this, he went on to run up the score vs. every team he faced......as if this somehow proves that 'we are just this good anyway, regardless of our cheating'. I have deep-seated hatred for the guy......partly because I watched him go for it on 4th down twice while up 38+ points on our Redskins. I used to really admire the Pats and their fans when they were a blue collar team that would overachieve from time to time........now, to me, they are the evil empire.......the Yankees of the NFL.

Edit: Oops....still getting used to the new format, didn't include the quote from page one about 'everyone hating on Belichick'

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

But to counterfact this, more picks = more opportunity to pick up a good player.

But if you are trading away good players to get those picks, doesn't it become a zero sum game? Would the Pats have a better chance to win the AFC East if they still had Richard Seymour and Randy Moss?

I can understand the Seymour trade, but everyone is acting like he is 60 years old. Right now, he is 31. He could still have four or five good years in him. Philip Daniels is still pluggin along and Philip Daniels on his best day was not the player Seymour is on his worst.

I'm on the record for years advocating holding onto picks, trading down, and building through the draft. But the Patriots have taken that philosophy and gone completely off the deep end. It seems like Belichik wants a team with 40 UFL quality players and 56 day one draft picks.

The Steelers, Ravens, and Colts follow the same plan without treating their players like nuisances.

[The Tris]

I was wondering who you weren't counting. I was thinking that you had overlooked Vermiel.

I wouldn't dismiss Gruden like that because he did help build that Raiders team (well, as much as you can help with the cryptkeeper being the owner of the team) which he defeated in that SB. Course, the argument of whether that 2001 Raiders team should have been in that SB rather than the Patriots will go on.

That being said, we have one of the oldest teams in the league and a lot of holes. While I value veterans, this team is in need of a serious injection of youth at many positions.

6 to one, half dozen to another....whether its 8 of the past 13, 9 of the past 13, whatever, retread coaches have been very successful the past decade+. Belichick is far from "the execption".

I'm not sure anyone would argue the Redskins DON'T need an injection of youth, I think the point it, gettting draft picks for the sake of draft picks doesn't equal instant success. A balanced plan of free agency and draft aquisitions seems most successful, as the early 2000 Pats showed.

And, as many have pointed out, hitting way above your career average in the draft and finding one of the best QBs of this generation tend to help as well.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

One thing that could be said about the Pats. In 2001, 2003 amd 2004. They are definitely still a playoff team with an average QB not named Tom Brady. Hell, Drew Bledsoe won the 2001 AFCCG for them. They probably don't win three Super Bowls without him, but they would be competitive.

The 2010 Patriots without Brady would be a dreadful team. Just dreadful.

By the way, does anyone remember Zoony's off-season plan that involved trading away anyone on the team with a pulse, drafting three QBs, and going 0-16 for the next three years?

Because, it seems like Belichik is actually implementing about 60 percent of that plan.

[Oldfan]

I believe it would, as you have made numerous references to some vague, overarching Pats system that overrides talent. I'd be curious if you could define it in some way other that abstract terms.

If you don't understand that particular concept, I can explain that by using an example. "Defining" the entire system would be a huge and unnecessary task for that purpose.

Let's start with Bill Walsh and the WCO offense. He designed that offense in Cincinnati for Virgil Carter, a backup QB on a poor football team that could not run the ball well. Belichick has done much the same thing. He doesn't need a super-athlete at the QB position. His QB must be quick-witted and be able to throw the football with accuracy. Walsh spent a third-round draft pick for Montana and traded the last pick in the fourth round for Steve Young. Belichick spent a sixth on Brady, a seventh on Cassel and a low round pick on Hoyer who looks pretty good to me.

Belichick learned from Walsh that you don't need to have a great athlete at the QB position to win football games. However, the concept that schemes can be designed to get more production from lesser talent applies to all positions.

[Frostx08]

That being said, we have one of the oldest teams in the league and a lot of holes. While I value veterans, this team is in need of a serious injection of youth at many positions.

I can agree with that

[TheLongshot]

6 to one, half dozen to another....whether its 8 of the past 13, 9 of the past 13, whatever, retread coaches have been very successful the past decade+. Belichick is far from "the execption".

And as I pointed out, few of those head coaches actually built those teams. Belichick, Coughlin (Who was getting pretty close to getting fired before winning his) and Vermiel. The other 4 inherited good teams and were able to take them over the top.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Belichick learned from Walsh that you don't need to have a great athlete at the QB position to win football games. However, the concept that schemes can be designed to get more production from lesser talent applies to all positions.

So, why does the NE defense currently stink?

Also, I think you are completely wrong on what Belichik's philosophy is and how he attempts to implement it. Just like Moneyball was not about Sabremetrics, the Patriots approach is not about "lesser talent." Only an idiot would look at McGinnest and Seymour and call them lesser talents.

The Patriots philosophy is based around under-valued talent and flexibility of talent. Belichik wants to pay less for an OLB than you do and then use him in multiple ways. Think of how lost Andre Carter is in our 3-4. Willie McGinnest could play end, OLB, rush the passer, stop the run, and cover freaking wide receivers. And would be asked to do all those in one series. And he was able to do this while costing less than - say - Lavar Arrington.

Every football player was a cheap Swiss Army knife. There were no "specialists" which meant that you could not necessarily scheme to stop anything, because it would change.

The problem is that the Patriots failed to see that some of their stars were actual stars. They were not products of the system; they were damn good football players playing for a coach who optimized their talent. You couldn't just pick any DE and turn him into Richard Seymour. The guy actually needed Richard Seymour's talent.

At some point, the Patriots began to believe that the "system" made the players.

Obviously, some players thrive with certain coaches. What is strange about Belichik is that he worked for the master of this in Parcells. Wherever Parcells went, "his guys" were sure to follow. Dave Meggett. Brian Cox. That fat Offensive Tackle. Belichik has no guys.

[Rufus T Firefly]

The Patriots likely just traded away a legit shot at a title for a 3rd round draft choice. This is hardly a genius-level move that should be admired and emulated.

Now, maybe Moss had to go and there was no other way to handle it (though I wonder if throwing him $1 mil and a promise of not franchising him would have kept him in line for one more year), but since the point of this thread is "look at how brilliant the Pats are for acquiring so many draft picks" I think it's worth pointing out that, on the face of it, it is a terrible move.

[Rufus T Firefly]

So' date=' why does the NE defense currently stink?

Also, I think you are completely wrong on what Belichik's philosophy is and how he attempts to implement it. Just like Moneyball was not about Sabremetrics, the Patriots approach is not about "lesser talent." Only an idiot would look at McGinnest and Seymour and call them lesser talents.

The Patriots philosophy is based around under-valued talent and flexibility of talent. Belichik wants to pay less for an OLB than you do and then use him in multiple ways. Think of how lost Andre Carter is in our 3-4. Willie McGinnest could play end, OLB, rush the passer, stop the run, and cover freaking wide receivers. And would be asked to do all those in one series. And he was able to do this while costing less than - say - Lavar Arrington.

Every football player was a cheap Swiss Army knife. There were no "specialists" which meant that you could not necessarily scheme to stop anything, because it would change.

The problem is that the Patriots failed to see that some of their stars were actual stars. They were not products of the system; they were damn good football players playing for a coach who optimized their talent. You couldn't just pick any DE and turn him into Richard Seymour. The guy actually needed Richard Seymour's talent.

At some point, the Patriots began to believe that the "system" made the players.

Obviously, some players thrive with certain coaches. What is strange about Belichik is that he worked for the master of this in Parcells. Wherever Parcells went, "his guys" were sure to follow. Dave Meggett. Brian Cox. That fat Offensive Tackle. Belichik has no guys.[/quote']

The problem is that at some point, Bellichick's ego started running the team. They would have had one more title if he hadn't pulled his "I'm going to prove I can win with scrap heap WRs" year. And he did the same with CBs a couple of years later. and he seems to stubbornly refuse to adress specific weaknesses at points.

The Patriots could have been a real dynasty if BB wasn't busy trying to prove how much smarter he is thatn the rest of the world.

[GhostofSparta]

The Patriots likely just traded away a legit shot at a title for a 3rd round draft choice. This is hardly a genius-level move that should be admired and emulated.

Now, maybe Moss had to go and there was no other way to handle it (though I wonder if throwing him $1 mil and a promise of not franchising him would have kept him in line for one more year), but since the point of this thread is "look at how brilliant the Pats are for acquiring so many draft picks" I think it's worth pointing out that, on the face of it, it is a terrible move.

Not to mention that if they don't re-sign Moss and he gets a big FA contract, they'll get a pretty high comp pick. I guess the only thing that benefits them is that the pick they got in the trade is tradable on draft day. And Belicheck is a man who loves to trade on draft day.

[Oldfan]

So' date=' why does the NE defense currently stink?[/quote'] You and I have only agreed on one thing so far: they have not been drafting well in recent years.

Also, I think you are completely wrong on what Belichik's philosophy is and how he attempts to implement it. Just like Moneyball was not about Sabremetrics, the Patriots approach is not about "lesser talent." Only an idiot would look at McGinnest and Seymour and call them lesser talents.

Only an idiot would not realize that having a few outstanding athletes on a team does not prove that the scheme wasn't designed to get more production from lesser athletes.

The Patriots philosophy is based around under-valued talent and flexibility of talent. Belichik wants to pay less for an OLB than you do and then use him in multiple ways.

Both true statements. Neither contradicts the point I made.

The problem is that the Patriots failed to see that some of their stars were actual stars. They were not products of the system; they were damn good football players playing for a coach who optimized their talent. You couldn't just pick any DE and turn him into Richard Seymour. The guy actually needed Richard Seymour's talent.

Your statement is true, but you haven't taken into account the age and wear and tear on Richard Seymour. Belichick was presented an opportunity to trade a player for far more than his current value. Seizing those long-term opportunities extends his winning run.

[The Tris]

Your statement is true, but you haven't taken into account the age and wear and tear on Richard Seymour. Belichick was presented an opportunity to trade a player for far more than his current value. Seizing those long-term opportunities extends his winning run.

At what cost? Maybe Seymour wouldn't have put them over the top last year, but their dreadful defense would have been far better had he not essential punted the season the day before the first game was played.

Similarly, Moss's absence clearly makes them a weaker team this season, where they are 3-1 in a wide open division race with no clear dominate team in the conference. He has punted another chance at the Super Bowl run for a long term player who might not be a contributor until Brady is far past his prime.

At some point, you need to stop pushing back your Super Bowl chances and go for it.

[Oldfan]

The problem is that at some point, Bellichick's ego started running the team. They would have had one more title if he hadn't pulled his "I'm going to prove I can win with scrap heap WRs" year. And he did the same with CBs a couple of years later. and he seems to stubbornly refuse to adress specific weaknesses at points.

The Patriots could have been a real dynasty if BB wasn't busy trying to prove how much smarter he is thatn the rest of the world.

Belichick and his alter ego, Ernie Adams, majored in economics. In post #93, I linked a 2006 article by an economist comparing the Redskins roster building to the Patriots. His position on the WRs can be explained by basic economic theory.

[Oldfan]

At what cost? Maybe Seymour wouldn't have put them over the top last year, but their dreadful defense would have been far better had he not essential punted the season the day before the first game was played.

Similarly, Moss's absence clearly makes them a weaker team this season, where they are 3-1 in a wide open division race with no clear dominate team in the conference. He has punted another chance at the Super Bowl run for a long term player who might not be a contributor until Brady is far past his prime.

At some point, you need to stop pushing back your Super Bowl chances and go for it.

Trading veterans for more than they're worth in draft picks lowers the chances of winning a Super Bowl this year, but raises them in several future years if one assumes a reasonably competent drafting method.

[Skadden]

At what cost? Maybe Seymour wouldn't have put them over the top last year, but their dreadful defense would have been far better had he not essential punted the season the day before the first game was played.

Similarly, Moss's absence clearly makes them a weaker team this season, where they are 3-1 in a wide open division race with no clear dominate team in the conference. He has punted another chance at the Super Bowl run for a long term player who might not be a contributor until Brady is far past his prime.

At some point, you need to stop pushing back your Super Bowl chances and go for it.

Seymour was through. To be sure, he might've provided some help for the Pats, but not a whole lot. And at what expense? A whiny, broken-down player who's simply trying to ride out his career. The Pats made a shrewd move in trading Seymour before all his warts started to appear by duping one of the only people who wouldn't see this -- Al Davis. No one would've given the Pats anything more than a third rounder for Seymour, but now the Pats got what might be a top five overall pick. In the long run (and short run as well), this was a great move. And even if the Pats are "rebuilding" by moving people like Seymour and Moss, any team would take this version of rebuilding than what other teams go through. Brady still has some good years left, and the Pats have positioned themselves to reload with a lot of young talent, starting with that prime pick they got from senile Al Davis last year.

[drtdrums]

Who the hell are we to question an organization with such a massive track record of success? Anyone knocking NE or BB is looking through a skewed prism and failing to recognize the truly incredible results that the NE franchise has created. They have the best organization in professional sports, and that's not even arguable. True brilliance is often counter-intuitive (although there are also morons who believe that anything counter-intuitive is brilliant). The fact that the NFL is so incredibly competitive and that they are in the conversation every single year is astonishing.

Someday, maybe, we can hope to be in their position. The thing that worries me is that, in order to get to that position, you have to do certain things. NE has done those things, and we have not even begun to do them. I believe we're headed up, but it will take a few years for us to understand Allen's managing style. So far, so good, but we have only pried the window open an inch where NE is always *at least* a dark horse. We are several pieces (quality depth being the biggest piece) away from being where the Pats are. Until we're there, or even in the same zip code, we would be wise to sit back and shut up.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Trading veterans for more than they're worth in draft picks lowers the chances of winning a Super Bowl this year, but raises them in several future years if one assumes a reasonably competent drafting method.

But you can't do this forever. Teams need to maximize their superstars when they have them. Belichik has traded away vets for picks so many times that his team has become Tom Brady, Vince Wilfork, Wes Welker and the Street Free Agents. Brady has to realize that if next year's draft is the bonanza Belichik wants it to be, he probably won't be ready for a title run until 2012 or 2013.

Say what you will about their lack of playoff success, but the Colts never weaken their team today for the hope that it will be better tomorrow. Like the Steelers, they let vets walk but they try to keep their stars together as long as they can.

Because, ultimately, it's the stars that win titles. Pittsburgh was making the playoffs every year and losing until they finally got a star QB. Baltimore thinks they finally have enough stars at offense to make a real run. I suppose they could have traded Terrell Suggs to someone for draft picks, but that negates what you gained in finding Ray Rice in the second round. You have to take your shot at some point.

[lowek723]

They have the best organization in professional sports, and that's not even arguable..

To even say that is a dumbass statement...Im not even a yankee fan and its no question they are they "best organization in professional sports"

Maybe you should do some wiki and see how many years the pats were a joke of a franchise...

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Seymour was through. To be sure, he might've provided some help for the Pats, but not a whole lot. And at what expense? A whiny, broken-down player who's simply trying to ride out his career. The Pats made a shrewd move in trading Seymour before all his warts started to appear by duping one of the only people who wouldn't see this -- Al Davis. No one would've given the Pats anything more than a third rounder for Seymour, but now the Pats got what might be a top five overall pick. In the long run (and short run as well), this was a great move. And even if the Pats are "rebuilding" by moving people like Seymour and Moss, any team would take this version of rebuilding than what other teams go through. Brady still has some good years left, and the Pats have positioned themselves to reload with a lot of young talent, starting with that prime pick they got from senile Al Davis last year.

Al Davis overpayed for Seymour in such an insane way that the Pats had to make that deal. But I don't think Seymour is broken down. He's 31. That's not ancient for a 3-4 DE.

Put it this way, if he was here, he would be our best lineman.

[Oldfan]

LKB ~ But you can't do this forever.

If we once again assume competent drafts, a team which consistently trades aged vets for more than their worth in draft picks, should get stronger and stronger every year.

Teams need to maximize their superstars when they have them. Belichik has traded away vets for picks so many times that his team has become Tom Brady, Vince Wilfork, Wes Welker and the Street Free Agents. Brady has to realize that if next year's draft is the bonanza Belichik wants it to be, he probably won't be ready for a title run until 2012 or 2013.

The weakness you see is because they haven't drafted well. The failure is in the execution, not in the plan.

Say what you will about their lack of playoff success, but the Colts never weaken their team today for the hope that it will be better tomorrow. Like the Steelers, they let vets walk but they try to keep their stars together as long as they can.

The Colts are showing signs of cracking also. They too have a problem replacing the parts.

Because, ultimately, it's the stars that win titles.

There's some truth in that only because building dynasties is a hard thing to do. So, teams like the Giants can have a run of luck and win a Super Bowl. That wasn't true for Walsh's 49ers, though. That team created its stars.

[HailToTheRedskins14]

To even say that is a dumbass statement...Im not even a yankee fan and its no question they are they "best organization in professional sports"

Maybe you should do some wiki and see how many years the pats were a joke of a franchise...

I think he meant "recently".

And the Yankees should be automatically disqualified because of the no salary cap. Sorry but it doesn't take a genius to pay a crapload of money for all stars at every position.

[Commander Adama]

It's time to stop admiring other teams and see if we can even get through this damn season first.

Totally agree. I am over the Patriots man-crush thing that a lot have going on.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

There's some truth in that only because building dynasties is a hard thing to do. So, teams like the Giants can have a run of luck and win a Super Bowl. That wasn't true for Walsh's 49ers, though. That team created its stars.

That's also a pre-salary cap, pre-free-agency, pre-drug-testing, pre-conduct policy era. Charles Haley probably murdered six prostitutes during that run and DeBartalo covered it up.

Any plan is a good plan on paper. The Patriots plan is a good plan on paper. It's also almost impossible to achieve.