USA Today: NE Patriots Best Drafting Team in NFL Past 5 Years

SMU_Sox · May 7, 2014

Here's the thing. Player A could be drafted by a good football team with good coaches and perform at a level of 95. He might be drafted by a shitty team with shitty coaches and not perform. I don't think it's just finding good players. I think coaching has so much to do with it and that's not something you can just separate easily.

Super Nomario · May 7, 2014

amarshal2 said:
Perhaps we can finally settle a long-running argument within these walls. Exactly how good is BB's strategy? Are the Patriots one of the best drafters in the NFL? Worst? Run of the mill?

Well, according to USA Today writer Steven Ruiz, the Patriots are #1 in the NFL by a significant margin.

Methodology:

I'm not familiar with Jimmy Johnson's value chart. I also know many around here are not huge fans of PFF. It sounds to me like the number of draft picks the Pats have had is certainly a big contributor, but it's only fair to include that. The fact that it's only 5 years is fair to other teams but certainly the previous 5 years would not be as kind to BB. Would love to hear people's take on the methodology. I'm just happy someone did a study with data rather than having to read the arguments around here again.

Here's the brief and somewhat disappointing (in content) write-up on the Pats:

Link:
http://q.usatoday.com/2014/05/07/nfl-draft-best-teams-seattle-seahawks-san-francisco-49ers-tennessee-titans-new-england-patriots/

There's also a best/worst draft picks section. No Patriots made it (assuming Gronk's injury and Hernandez's murderyness ruined it for them) but Sanchez showed his face. I'm sure you can guess where.

Discuss.

I think a major factor here is Belichick's willingness to cut bait on bad draft picks. PFF grades are relative to average, not replacement level, so guys like Tavon Wilson who are bad enough that they don't see the field don't hurt the Pats too much in this analysis.

Dan to Theo to Ben · May 7, 2014

I am not really a fan of the games played criterion. If a team poorly drafted in the past, or had poor players for some other reason, or released/traded away their high priced players, then the newly drafted player has a greater chance to play.

Non-first round players have the advantage of havin ga lower salary and with the cap, bring more value to the team.

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) · May 7, 2014

I'm surprised that Indy is as low as they are.

Indy, Baltimore and Pittsburgh are the three teams people mention most as "Better then the Pats" at the draft. Maybe some of that is hang over impressions from the Bill Polian days.

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) · May 7, 2014

Also would have been interesting to include Undrafted Free Agents into this mix.

MarcSullivaFan · May 7, 2014

Polian was fired two seasons ago for presiding over lousy drafts. Grigson has been a mixed bag so far and it's really too early to tell. So, I'm not surprised at all. The "teams that draft better than the Patriots" is a moving target around here. Over the last 13 years, it's hard to find another organization that has consistently been better.

TheYaz67 · May 7, 2014

I cannot trust a methodology which does not place the Redskins last, given their overall incompetence. Perhaps they have benefited from trading away so many picks that they could not accumulate alot of bad ones....

ifmanis5 · May 7, 2014

How are the Titans 2nd?

Ferm Sheller · May 7, 2014

SMU_Sox said:
Here's the thing. Player A could be drafted by a good football team with good coaches and perform at a level of 95. He might be drafted by a shitty team with shitty coaches and not perform. I don't think it's just finding good players. I think coaching has so much to do with it and that's not something you can just separate easily.

This is exactly right. Tom Brady, for example, may have stunk out the joint and been out of the league in a few years' time had he been picked by say, the Browns.

Eck'sSneakyCheese · May 7, 2014

ifmanis5 said:
How are the Titans 2nd?

Check out their drafts from '09 up. Not too bad.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft?teamId=2100&type=team

It's cool that USA Today thinks that the Pats are great at drafting and I think its more a testament to the whole organization and how they operate. SMU brings up a great point about the coaches, I think that has a big part in how the picks turn out. They are the best run team in all of professional sports it shouldn't surprise anyone that they are at the top. I think it has a lot to do with drafting for bulk/value over need.

DJnVa · May 7, 2014

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) said:
Also would have been interesting to include Undrafted Free Agents into this mix.

Well, it's about the draft.

I'm not familiar with Jimmy Johnson's value chart.

Wait, really? http://walterfootball.com/draftchart.php

I'm just happy someone did a study with data rather than having to read the arguments around here again.

You think having data from a study will stop arguments? Have you read the main board?

Tony C · May 7, 2014

rather than draft, bloomberg did an "efficiency index" that tries to balance spending, wins, playoff wins, and championships. Something like this:

Our ranking of all 122 franchises in the NFL, NBA, NHL, and MLB rates teams based on how much they spent in player payroll for every win during the last five seasons. Each team is compared against the average price per win in its league to produce a score we call the efficiency index. The less a team spends compared with its peers, the lower its score. Playoff victories and championships get extra weight. Payroll data come from the best available published sources.*
Playoff wins count for 10 percent of a season (e.g., 16.2 wins in baseball); Wild Card wins get half credit.

Championships count for 50 percent of a season (81 wins in baseball).

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-04-24/smartest-spenders-in-sports-2014

Pats are 4th among North American franchises and 1st among NFL teams.

Brickowski · May 7, 2014

How many championships have they won in the last 5 years? All of these "value picks" haven't produced any hardware.

Ferm Sheller · May 7, 2014

That's a great, great point. They haven't won a Superbowl in the last five years, so their last five drafts must not have been that good. Sheesh.

DJnVa · May 7, 2014

Brickowski said:
How many championships have they won in the last 5 years? All of these "value picks" haven't produced any hardware.

So, if they pick 8 punters this year and win the Super Bowl, you'd think they were better drafters?

SMU_Sox · May 7, 2014

Either he's being sarcastic (good), trolling (annoying), or actually believes that (in which case just ban him).

Brickowski · May 8, 2014

Their drafts have been fine for the most part. Jamie Collins, in particular, was a great pick IMHO. I wasn't being sarcastic, or trolling--just pointing out a fact.

mpx42 · May 8, 2014

If Welker holds on to the ball a couple years ago, does that improve the quality of their drafts?

Point out facts that aren't worthless.

RG33 · May 8, 2014

Wow, I had forgotten what a piece of shit the 2007 draft was. 2 relatively decent years from Meriweather is literally all they got??

RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
1 24 Brandon Meriweather DB Miami (Fla.)
4 127 Kareem Brown DT Miami (Fla.)
5 171 Clint Oldenburg T Colorado State
6 180 Justin Rogers LB Southern Methodist
6 202 Mike Richardson DB Notre Dame
6 208 Justise Hairston RB Central Connecticut State
6 209 Corey Hilliard OT Oklahoma State
7 211 Oscar Lua LB USC
7 247 Mike Elgin G Iowa

moondog80 · May 8, 2014

RGREELEY33 said:
Wow, I had forgotten what a piece of shit the 2007 draft was. 2 relatively decent years from Meriweather is literally all they got??

They used the 2nd and 3rd round picks to get Welker and Moss. So it was an awesome draft.

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) · May 8, 2014

Papelbon's Poutine said:
When have the colts been cited as top of the food chain for drafting? Please show your work...

Should I change my first statement to "The mouth breathers on the radio often cite the Colts as a superior drafting team"?

Because that's what I meant.

Lack_of_Imagination · May 8, 2014

If we're going to reminisce, the 2009 draft was real bad, in general and specifically with Chung being taking in the 2nd round 8 spots before Byrd and from the same school. They must have seen plenty of both on tape. And of course just bad with Butler and Brace taken right before Byrd as well. Our 2010 draft was great but the Cunningham pick right before Dunlop in the 2nd round again from the same school (with supposedly insider information) sucked. I know you cant nail them all but imagine how our defensive 3rd down stops would have been with Dunlop pass rushing and Byrd in the secondary. Oh well.

DJnVa · May 8, 2014

Brickowski said:
Their drafts have been fine for the most part. Jamie Collins, in particular, was a great pick IMHO. I wasn't being sarcastic, or trolling--just pointing out a fact.

Thanks for informing a board full of Pats fans that they haven't won a title in those 5 years.

SMU_Sox · May 8, 2014

No, it wasn't a fact. It's your opinion. A fact is that they drafted players x, y, and z in those 5 years. Your opinion on the quality of those Draft picks is opinion not fact. Furthermore your opinion is... wrong imo. Even discounting the methodology here the sheer number of hits is above average especially considering where they draft. Collins, Hightower, Jones, DMC, Dennard, Harmon, Ryan, Gronk, Murder, Tompkins and Dobson, and I'm sure I'm missing a few.

Brickowski · May 8, 2014

mpx42 said:
If Welker holds on to the ball a couple years ago, does that improve the quality of their drafts?

Point out facts that aren't worthless.

Tyree also made that ridiculous catch. Yes, they've been close to #4. I'm just not sure that the systems used here to evaluate players or the positional value of each pick are all that accurate. IMHO there is a legitmate argument that if the Pats had moved up in some draft years instead of trading down they would have a more talented roster today.

Stitch01 · May 8, 2014

If they had moved up in the draft and picked with the benefit of hindsight to know which players were good in the NFL, they'd have a more talented roster today. Also they haven't won a Super Bowl in 5 years.

Cool story bro.

xjack · May 8, 2014

For me, the takeaway from this is less about the Patriots than the rest of the league. We tend to put our blinders on when talking about various Pats draft picks that didn't pan out. The reality is that every team makes lots of mistakes.

Stitch01 · May 8, 2014

I take all of these draft evaluations with a huge grain of salt, Pats have finished first, last, and many points in between in these over the years. There's probably skill in drafting and developing players, and I expect the Pats are one of the better teams because of the way they work the draft board, continuity, the fact we know the FO and coach are on the same page, and the fact they win every damn year. That said, the skill to noise ratio seems like its super, super low.

MarcSullivaFan · May 8, 2014

Lack_of_Imagination said:
If we're going to reminisce, the 2009 draft was real bad, in general and specifically with Chung being taking in the 2nd round 8 spots before Byrd and from the same school. They must have seen plenty of both on tape. And of course just bad with Butler and Brace taken right before Byrd as well. Our 2010 draft was great but the Cunningham pick right before Dunlop in the 2nd round again from the same school (with supposedly insider information) sucked. I know you cant nail them all but imagine how our defensive 3rd down stops would have been with Dunlop pass rushing and Byrd in the secondary. Oh well.

Eh, 2009 was mediocre, but not terrible. They ended up with two very good players in Vollmer and Edelman. Butler washed out in NE, but has turned into a decent player in Indy. Brace and Chung were pretty lousy.

Playing the "they could have drafted X player" game with the benefit of hindsight is unfair. Plenty of other teams passed on Byrd and Dunlap for inferior players. By the time you get to the lower first round and second round everyone has substantial question marks.

Generally I think judging teams draft acumen in a vacuum is a rather meaningless exercise. It's one important element of roster building. Ultimately, if a team consistently fields a top roster, does it really matter how it was built? Over the Belichick era no team has consistently done a better job of putting competitive rosters on the field.

Super Nomario · May 8, 2014

Lack_of_Imagination said:
If we're going to reminisce, the 2009 draft was real bad, in general and specifically with Chung being taking in the 2nd round 8 spots before Byrd and from the same school. They must have seen plenty of both on tape. And of course just bad with Butler and Brace taken right before Byrd as well. Our 2010 draft was great but the Cunningham pick right before Dunlop in the 2nd round again from the same school (with supposedly insider information) sucked. I know you cant nail them all but imagine how our defensive 3rd down stops would have been with Dunlop pass rushing and Byrd in the secondary. Oh well.

The goal of the draft is to add talent, not avoid busts. The Pats got probably the best offensive lineman in that entire draft in Vollmer. They also got a decent WR in Edelman and a few years of a decent safety in Chung. In re-drafts of that draft, Vollmer finished in the top 10; that outweighs a lot of misses.

Lack_of_Imagination · May 8, 2014

Great point on Vollmer, brain cramp forgetting they had 4 2nd rounders that year. I was thinking he was 2008. I still think 2009 was not a good draft. Isnt it a combination of adding talent in relation to the opportunities you had to add talent? Those 3 players, plus Pryor (one very good, one good and two average) with six picks within the top 100 and 12 overall doesn't feel that successful but as I type it maybe it was an ok draft.

Specifically I guess I was speaking on missing on two high quality players, at the same position, from the same school within a handful of picks of each other felt like big misses and ones that would have significantly altered our defense. I guess it does speak to (the obvious of) how hard it is to evaluate talent. Picking Chung and Cunningham high in the second round, they obviously watched a lot of Oregon secondary and UF defensive line tape and Byrd and Dunlop were of course on their radars as well. Maybe its just venting on my part but those two picks have always stuck in my mind for those reasons combined with how bad our pass defense has been. But point taken.

RG33 · May 8, 2014

moondog80 said:
They used the 2nd and 3rd round picks to get Welker and Moss. So it was an awesome draft.

Yes, I'm aware, I was more just commenting on the players they drafted. The Welker/Moss moves obviously made it a homerun. I don't recall any of those players except for Meriweather.

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) · May 8, 2014

RGREELEY33 said:
Yes, I'm aware, I was more just commenting on the players they drafted. The Welker/Moss moves obviously made it a homerun. I don't recall any of those players except for Meriweather.

I don't think its uncommon to come out of a draft with nothing of value beyond the first couple of rounds. It's much more of a crap shoot then people care to admit.

Super Nomario · May 8, 2014

Lack_of_Imagination said:
Great point on Vollmer, brain cramp forgetting they had 4 2nd rounders that year. I was thinking he was 2008. I still think 2009 was not a good draft. Isnt it a combination of adding talent in relation to the opportunities you had to add talent? Those 3 players, plus Pryor (one very good, one good and two average) with six picks within the top 100 and 12 overall doesn't feel that successful but maybe Im probably being overly critical.

If you draft 10 players and get 3 hits, you're better off than a team that drafts 4 players and gets 2 hits even though your ratio is much worse. The goal of the draft is to add talent. I get that misses stick in people's craws, but the negative impact of misses (excepting a top 5 QB under the old CBA) is much less than the positive impact of a hit. That's why trading back makes sense - you significantly increase the chances you miss on any individual pick, but you also gave yourself more chances at success, and in the end you come out ahead on average.

But even evaluating the Pats relative to opportunities, the Pats had four 2nd-rounders in the 2009 draft. They ended up with the #3 (Vollmer), #16 (Chung), #17 (Butler), and #24 (Brace) players among the 32 taken in the second round that year by careerAV to date. Chung and Butler look like crappy picks compared to Byrd, but they look pretty good compared to guys like Eben Britton, Alphonso Smith, Brian Robiskie, and Pat White. The hit rate on 2nd-rounders is only about 50%; Chung grades out as pretty much an average 2nd-rounder (the pick was worse than average once you factor in that he was a high-2nd, but not much worse than average).

Lack_of_Imagination said:
Specifically I guess I was speaking on missing on two high quality players, at the same position, from the same school within a handful of picks of each other felt like big misses and ones that would have significantly altered our defense. I guess it does speak to (the obvious of) how hard it is to evaluate talent. Picking Chung and Cunningham high in the second round, they obviously watched a lot of Oregon secondary and UF defensive line tape and Byrd and Dunlop were of course on their radars as well. Maybe its just venting on my part but those two picks have always stuck in my mind for those reasons combined with how bad our pass defense has been. But point taken.

I see that as more unfortunate coincidence than anything.

EDIT: also, that 2009 draft was straight garbage. The top 5 were Matt Stafford, Jason Smith, Tyson Jackson, Aaron Curry, and Mark Sanchez. YIKES

JohnnyTheBone · May 8, 2014

moondog80

They used the 2nd and 3rd round picks to get Welker and Moss. So it was an awesome draft.

How many championships have they won since then? All of these "awesome trades" haven't produced any f*cking hardware.

dcmissle · May 8, 2014

Yeah, but we came very close twice.

NEP are the most proficient franchise since BB arrived. How you want to carve that up, between draft and FA and undradted FAs, is up to you.

And I am one of those who is accused of having an unusually acute eye for the dark side. We have been the best for a long time. Enjoy

Ed Hillel · May 8, 2014

xjack said:
For me, the takeaway from this is less about the Patriots than the rest of the league. We tend to put our blinders on when talking about various Pats draft picks that didn't pan out. The reality is that every team makes lots of mistakes.

The draft is a lot like poker. Even if you calculate and play things as well as you possibly can, you're still going to lose sometimes. That's why drafting has to be evaluated over the long term, to see which teams are making the best picks with the resources they have available. There is so much data involved that there will always be circumstances where we can look back and say "OH WHY DIDN'T THEY DRAFT BLAH BLAH BLOO BLOO!?" but that's going to happen to everyone. It just happens with the Patriots less often than it does with most others.

To me, the one real legitimate criticism of Belichick in the draft is there have been a few cases where I think he's drafted people early who would have been available later (COUGH TAVON WILSON). I guess there's a story that he thought Baltimore would take him, but I don't know...they must have really seen something in him that almost every other team didn't come close to seeing. I think they basically just draft on best available, without really considering how a player is viewed by others. I'm not sure that's always the wisest course of action. But it's clear that their draft record speaks for itself. It's been great the past five years.

Hendu for Kutch · May 8, 2014

Ed Hillel said:
The draft is a lot like poker. Even if you calculate and play things as well as you possibly can, you're still going to lose sometimes. That's why drafting has to be evaluated over the long term, to see which teams are making the best picks with the resources they have available. There is so much data involved that there will always be circumstances where we can look back and say "OH WHY DIDN'T THEY DRAFT BLAH BLAH BLOO BLOO!?" but that's going to happen to everyone. It just happens with the Patriots less often than it does with most others.

To me, the one real legitimate criticism of Belichick in the draft is there have been a few cases where I think he's drafted people early who would have been available later (COUGH TAVON WILSON). I guess there's a story that he thought Baltimore would take him, but I don't know...they must have really seen something in him that almost every other team didn't come close to seeing. I think they basically just draft on best available, without really considering how a player is viewed by others. I'm not sure that's always the wisest course of action. But it's clear that their draft record speaks for itself. It's been great the past five years.

The problem with determining if a guy is too early or not is that we don't know and will likely never know when that person would have actually been taken if the Patriots had decided to wait.

A good example was Mankins. People were up in arms that he was taken too early only to later find out that the 49ers were planning to take him with the very next pick. Which may or may not be true, but illustrates the point that we only know about 10% of what's going on around the league.

Better to judge a pick on the results rather than when they "should" have been taken. Chad Jackson should have gone higher and Sebastian Vollmer should have gone lower, but we both know which one turned out to actually be a better value.

soxfan121 · May 8, 2014

Gresh & Zo today were heavily referencing that "only 20% (or close to that) of NFL draft picks get a second contract".

Make of that what you will - I can't find a source on that number but it seems reasonable.

USA Today: NE Patriots Best Drafting Team in NFL Past 5 Years

Member

queer eye for the next pats guy

Member

Banned

T&A

T&A

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Dorito Dawg

Moderator

Banned

Member

Dorito Dawg

queer eye for the next pats guy

Banned

New Member

Certain Class of Poster

heart is two sizes two small

T&A

New Member

Dorito Dawg

queer eye for the next pats guy

Banned

Member

Futbol Crazed

Member

Member

Member

New Member

Certain Class of Poster

T&A

Member

Member

Deflatigator

Wants to be startin somethin

Member

JAG