Richard Seymour Traded

[the_Bird]

It would be very usual for BB not to package a high pick (assuming the Raiders still suck) for a lower 1st rounder and a second rounder.  Of course, his MO may change entirely if an NBA-style rookie-salary slotting system comes into place, if salaries are known and reasonable the high draft picks will potentially be much more valuable.

It would also be shocking for BB to spend a high pick on a QB, not just because of the success he's had with Brady and Cassell but because such a high percentage of those guys flame out.  It wouldn't be a surprise to see him use a high pick on a stud defensive lineman, a lot would depend on who might be available.  Can't see them spending a high pick on a QB to groom, though.

Never say never with these guys, though.

[Rondo2287]

I hope to god its not another TE ala Ben Watson

[Chris]

I think Belichick's "tendency" to not want high picks is vastly overstated (not just here, I hear it everywhere).  I think its pretty clear that he believes in value, both monetarily, and pick-wise.  However, he also has shown that he does value the right players near the top of the draft.  What he doesn't like to do is pay first round money to guys who have similar talent to guys who are second-rounders.

So it really depends on where the pick is, and the particular draft.  If you look at the draft in a "tier" system, it is easier to see why they make these moves.  Basically, each tier has so many players that score similarly when teams scout the players.  Most drafts would have maybe 4 tiers in the first 2 rounds (note, I am just making these up to demonstrate...it varies a lot each year).  Tier 1 would be the blue chip guys.  Ussually around the first 3-5 picks, depending on the year.  Tier 2 would be the guys with franchise talent, but aren't quite at the top of the list.  It would ussually be something like picks 5-15.  Tier 3 would be the rest of the first round quality picks, and sometimes only goes to #25, and sometimes goes to #45 (like last year).  Then finally, tier 4 would be the remaining round 2 guys.

Last year, they had a high pick.  However, they ended up being right at the top of the second tier.  And particularly that high in the draft, each pick means a big difference in money.  So they knew that they could get similar talent at 10 as they could at 8, and both pick up an extra asset, and pay him less money, so they traded down.  However, if they traded down to say, 15, they may not have been able to get the same level of talent, and therefore would likely not have done that trade.

Next year (or 2011 I should say) will be no exception.  While they may trade down a little, if they get a high pick, I expect them to keep a high pick.  Of course it will all depend on who is available, but I do not expect to see them pass up talent.

[nickagneta]

I think Belichick's "tendency" to not want high picks is vastly overstated (not just here, I hear it everywhere).  I think its pretty clear that he believes in value, both monetarily, and pick-wise.  However, he also has shown that he does value the right players near the top of the draft.  What he doesn't like to do is pay first round money to guys who have similar talent to guys who are second-rounders.

So it really depends on where the pick is, and the particular draft.  If you look at the draft in a "tier" system, it is easier to see why they make these moves.  Basically, each tier has so many players that score similarly when teams scout the players.  Most drafts would have maybe 4 tiers in the first 2 rounds (note, I am just making these up to demonstrate...it varies a lot each year).  Tier 1 would be the blue chip guys.  Ussually around the first 3-5 picks, depending on the year.  Tier 2 would be the guys with franchise talent, but aren't quite at the top of the list.  It would ussually be something like picks 5-15.  Tier 3 would be the rest of the first round quality picks, and sometimes only goes to #25, and sometimes goes to #45 (like last year).  Then finally, tier 4 would be the remaining round 2 guys.

Last year, they had a high pick.  However, they ended up being right at the top of the second tier.  And particularly that high in the draft, each pick means a big difference in money.  So they knew that they could get similar talent at 10 as they could at 8, and both pick up an extra asset, and pay him less money, so they traded down.  However, if they traded down to say, 15, they may not have been able to get the same level of talent, and therefore would likely not have done that trade.

Next year (or 2011 I should say) will be no exception.  While they may trade down a little, if they get a high pick, I expect them to keep a high pick.  Of course it will all depend on who is available, but I do not expect to see them pass up talent.

Gee Chris, where were you when I was trying to discuss tiers vs rounds and their worth during the CB NBA draft? I could really have used you. TP. I see drafts in talent tiers and not rounds as well and believe Belichick is a mastermind of it's management and getting the most value from it.

[Rondo2287]

I think Belichick's "tendency" to not want high picks is vastly overstated (not just here, I hear it everywhere).  I think its pretty clear that he believes in value, both monetarily, and pick-wise.  However, he also has shown that he does value the right players near the top of the draft.  What he doesn't like to do is pay first round money to guys who have similar talent to guys who are second-rounders.

So it really depends on where the pick is, and the particular draft.  If you look at the draft in a "tier" system, it is easier to see why they make these moves.  Basically, each tier has so many players that score similarly when teams scout the players.  Most drafts would have maybe 4 tiers in the first 2 rounds (note, I am just making these up to demonstrate...it varies a lot each year).  Tier 1 would be the blue chip guys.  Ussually around the first 3-5 picks, depending on the year.  Tier 2 would be the guys with franchise talent, but aren't quite at the top of the list.  It would ussually be something like picks 5-15.  Tier 3 would be the rest of the first round quality picks, and sometimes only goes to #25, and sometimes goes to #45 (like last year).  Then finally, tier 4 would be the remaining round 2 guys.

Last year, they had a high pick.  However, they ended up being right at the top of the second tier.  And particularly that high in the draft, each pick means a big difference in money.  So they knew that they could get similar talent at 10 as they could at 8, and both pick up an extra asset, and pay him less money, so they traded down.  However, if they traded down to say, 15, they may not have been able to get the same level of talent, and therefore would likely not have done that trade.

Next year (or 2011 I should say) will be no exception.  While they may trade down a little, if they get a high pick, I expect them to keep a high pick.  Of course it will all depend on who is available, but I do not expect to see them pass up talent.

I disagree, I think its the same thinking behind the fact that the Panthers didnt want a first round pick for Julius Peppers, they wanted multiple second round picks, I think there is a great deal to say for how much economics vs talent weighs in the mind of not just belichick but also many other organizations in the NFL

[the_Bird]

If you look at the number of times BB has traded down versus the number of times he has traded up, there's a clear bias in one direction.  It's not *just* that the right player hasn't been there, it's too many moved down (which generally seems to be the right course of action).

Impose an NBA-style rookie-salary slotting system, I suspect that will change; as of right now, short of that once-a-decade prospect it's hard to see BB taking a guy in the top 5 instead of trading down.  Too much $$ for the risk/reward; virtually the same chance of a guy picked #5 overall being a complete bust as there is for a bguy picked #25, but a huge amount of financial risk entailed. 

Incidentally, how about this quote from Tom Cable?

Cable said you can't pay too much for a player of Seymour's ability.

"The issue is, you want to make your team better for right now," Cable said. "Right now is all that matters. We'll address that when the time comes, but I don't see that as a negative, I really don't. Not at this time."

http://www.insidebayarea.com/raiders/ci_13282431

I mean, I KINDA understand hearing that from a coach...  but have they not been paying ANY attention to how things work?

[Rondo2287]

Cable is a Coach, BB is coach and GM.  Cable's job is to win right now, BB's job is to win now and set the team up to win in the future. 

[the_Bird]

Cable is a Coach, BB is coach and GM.  Cable's job is to win right now, BB's job is to win now and set the team up to win in the future. 

Oakland's problem, though, is that it's the same for Al Davis - the organization makes these decisions to get marginally, marginally better, [dang] the consequences for the future.  Spend way too much money for players they don't need, and waste draft picks.  Is it any wonder BB loves trading with them?

[Rondo2287]

I agree but then look at some of the bad trades BB has made for instance giving up picks for greg lewis, and Alex smith, neither of which made the team. 

[the_Bird]

Fifth rounders, though.  Even on teams with more available roster spots, fifth rounders are what, a 50/50 chance to stick with the team?  BB's not infallible, but the difference between risking a 5th rounder and what could well be 5th *overall* is beyond comparison. 

[Chris]

I think Belichick's "tendency" to not want high picks is vastly overstated (not just here, I hear it everywhere).  I think its pretty clear that he believes in value, both monetarily, and pick-wise.  However, he also has shown that he does value the right players near the top of the draft.  What he doesn't like to do is pay first round money to guys who have similar talent to guys who are second-rounders.

So it really depends on where the pick is, and the particular draft.  If you look at the draft in a "tier" system, it is easier to see why they make these moves.  Basically, each tier has so many players that score similarly when teams scout the players.  Most drafts would have maybe 4 tiers in the first 2 rounds (note, I am just making these up to demonstrate...it varies a lot each year).  Tier 1 would be the blue chip guys.  Ussually around the first 3-5 picks, depending on the year.  Tier 2 would be the guys with franchise talent, but aren't quite at the top of the list.  It would ussually be something like picks 5-15.  Tier 3 would be the rest of the first round quality picks, and sometimes only goes to #25, and sometimes goes to #45 (like last year).  Then finally, tier 4 would be the remaining round 2 guys.

Last year, they had a high pick.  However, they ended up being right at the top of the second tier.  And particularly that high in the draft, each pick means a big difference in money.  So they knew that they could get similar talent at 10 as they could at 8, and both pick up an extra asset, and pay him less money, so they traded down.  However, if they traded down to say, 15, they may not have been able to get the same level of talent, and therefore would likely not have done that trade.

Next year (or 2011 I should say) will be no exception.  While they may trade down a little, if they get a high pick, I expect them to keep a high pick.  Of course it will all depend on who is available, but I do not expect to see them pass up talent.

I disagree, I think its the same thinking behind the fact that the Panthers didnt want a first round pick for Julius Peppers, they wanted multiple second round picks, I think there is a great deal to say for how much economics vs talent weighs in the mind of not just belichick but also many other organizations in the NFL

If you believe that, then you have been listening to too much WEEI. 

While its true that there are specific picks in particular drafts which no one want, when you are discussing trading for future picks, first rounders are ALWAYS move valuable than second rounders. 

Now, if it is draft day, then yes, the last pick in the first round is less valuable than the first pick in the second round.  However, the 15th pick in the first round is much more valuable than both of them.

[nickagneta]

I think Belichick's "tendency" to not want high picks is vastly overstated (not just here, I hear it everywhere).  I think its pretty clear that he believes in value, both monetarily, and pick-wise.  However, he also has shown that he does value the right players near the top of the draft.  What he doesn't like to do is pay first round money to guys who have similar talent to guys who are second-rounders.

So it really depends on where the pick is, and the particular draft.  If you look at the draft in a "tier" system, it is easier to see why they make these moves.  Basically, each tier has so many players that score similarly when teams scout the players.  Most drafts would have maybe 4 tiers in the first 2 rounds (note, I am just making these up to demonstrate...it varies a lot each year).  Tier 1 would be the blue chip guys.  Ussually around the first 3-5 picks, depending on the year.  Tier 2 would be the guys with franchise talent, but aren't quite at the top of the list.  It would ussually be something like picks 5-15.  Tier 3 would be the rest of the first round quality picks, and sometimes only goes to #25, and sometimes goes to #45 (like last year).  Then finally, tier 4 would be the remaining round 2 guys.

Last year, they had a high pick.  However, they ended up being right at the top of the second tier.  And particularly that high in the draft, each pick means a big difference in money.  So they knew that they could get similar talent at 10 as they could at 8, and both pick up an extra asset, and pay him less money, so they traded down.  However, if they traded down to say, 15, they may not have been able to get the same level of talent, and therefore would likely not have done that trade.

Next year (or 2011 I should say) will be no exception.  While they may trade down a little, if they get a high pick, I expect them to keep a high pick.  Of course it will all depend on who is available, but I do not expect to see them pass up talent.

I disagree, I think its the same thinking behind the fact that the Panthers didnt want a first round pick for Julius Peppers, they wanted multiple second round picks, I think there is a great deal to say for how much economics vs talent weighs in the mind of not just belichick but also many other organizations in the NFL

I think you guys are talking about two whole different things here. Chris is talking about talent tiers and the value found in those tiers while you, Rondo, are talking the difference between 1st round and 2nd round salary guarantees and contracts and control of those players.

Carolina wanted second rounders because they were already very close to the cap, had cap problems coming and didn't want to give the guarantees to a player that a first rounder gets while at the same time wanting to fill multiple spots.

New England drafts down a lot but are willing to draft high so long as the value is there. They chose Seymour 6th, Mayo 10th and Wilfork 13th. Seymour and Wilfork will one day be in the NE Patriot HOF and maybe NFL HOF and Mayo is a stud. But if there isn't value, they won't pay for choosing someone who isn't worth it.

Talent tiers differ every year. The number of players in those tiers, the overall talent in those tiers, the difference in talent between the tiers and where those tiers fall in the unofficial salary slots the NFL has for paying talent all vary from year to year. Only the inner workings of the Pats know where those tiers start and begin and really only they can say how they felt about those players in those drafts.

But can one really argue with the results. Seymour, Light, Branch, Green, Graham, Warren, Koppen, Samuel, Banta-Cain, Wilfork, Watson Hobbs, Mankins, Kazcur, Cassel, Gostkowski, Merriweather, Mayo, Wheatley, Wilhite have all been drafted by the Pats and the Pats used picks to trade for Moss, Welker, Burgess, and Dillon.

[Rondo2287]

One of the guys I was really looking for to replace some of his production was Ron
Brace.  Has anybody seen him do anything or heard anything about Ron this year?

[shookones99]

One of the guys I was really looking for to replace some of his production was Ron
Brace.  Has anybody seen him do anything or heard anything about Ron this year?

He played briefly against the Falcons after both Wilfork and Mike Wright got hurt. 

Then, I think, the week later they signed Terrell Sands.  So it sort of looks like they're not too high on him.  Although I remember Ty Warren hardly played at all his rookie season. 

Did Wilfork sit out the majority of his rookie season or was he a starter from day one?

[the_Bird]

Sands just got cut to make room for Seau. 

Not too worried about Brace.  Rookie, and it's still early in the season.  If he's not in the D-line rotation by week 10 or 12, then we might start getting a little nervous.