Ongoing NFL draft chat

[crownsy]

So the Pats got the Saints second round pick this year?

Yep, now they have the following picks tomorrow alone.

33, 56, 60, 74 & 90.

And honestly, there's not a huge difference between the late first guys, and the guys you can get in the 2nd/early 3rd. I'm a fan of the trade personally.

see my post below, thats false.

Bill's track record shows he'll likely miss on 2/3 of the 2nd round picks.

What's your definition of "miss"?

Jackson, and Wheatley were misses, but Chung and Vollmer have been very good, Brace showed a lot more last year, and Butler has been up and down, but certainly hasn't busted.  

that's great chris, i agree he hit two guys in 2009 (well, 1, i still don't know about chung. Volmer is a stud), but how bout addressing the other 4 years i posted?


Who did he hit on in rounds 2-5 in those drafts?

and your much, much kinder than i am to brace and butler. They wouldn't sniff the field if we weren't so thin at their positions.

[Chris]

I just think you are expecting way too much from late first round and second round picks.

[KungPoweChicken]

So the Pats got the Saints second round pick this year?

Yep, now they have the following picks tomorrow alone.

33, 56, 60, 74 & 90.

And honestly, there's not a huge difference between the late first guys, and the guys you can get in the 2nd/early 3rd. I'm a fan of the trade personally.

see my post below, thats false.

Bill's track record shows he'll likely miss on 2/3 of the 2nd round picks.

What's your definition of "miss"?

Jackson, and Wheatley were misses, but Chung and Vollmer have been very good, Brace showed a lot more last year, and Butler has been up and down, but certainly hasn't busted.  

edit: also, not sure what your argument is with 2007.  They got a pro bowler at the end of the first round, traded their second and third rounders for pro bowl recievers, and 4th rounders and below are always crap shoots. 

I'll give you 2006 though, no defending that draft.

Butler is a bust. He looks more clueless than Gerald Green.

[Cman]

and he's missed cman, look at this:

oh, I am fully aware he has missed.  I dont think I argued one way or another about BB being a good drafter, i just argued that I liked the trade just now, I think it is good value.  I then proceeded to argue that when people argue that BB is a bad drafter they conveniently leave out stuff.

Like trading for Wes Welker.
Like trading for a future 1st that became J. Mayo (if memory serves).
Like trading for Randy Moss.

Like forgetting that because the Pats typically do so well during the regular season they are picking in the late 20s.

Maybe none of that stuff matters, though.  Maybe, even after factoring that stuff in, BB still would come up looking like a bad drafter.  My only concern is that it bugs me that all that stuff is conveniently forgotten.

[Cman]

brooks reed, jabaal sheard, anyone think either will be taken at #33?

[Greenbean]

So the Pats got the Saints second round pick this year?

Yep, now they have the following picks tomorrow alone.

33, 56, 60, 74 & 90.

And honestly, there's not a huge difference between the late first guys, and the guys you can get in the 2nd/early 3rd. I'm a fan of the trade personally.

see my post below, thats false.

Bill's track record shows he'll likely miss on 2/3 of the 2nd round picks.

So if he hits on 1/3 that means we get a contributor in the second round who will be afforable to sign.

Most teams I would assume have a similar or worse success rate in the second round meaning they might hit on a second rounder once every 3 or 4 years.

Bill hasnt been the best drafter in the NFL  wont argue with you there. That being said the strategy to gather multiple 2nd and 3rd round picks every year is sound IMO especially if you dont ever have the opportunity to pick in the top 10.

Show me another team in the last 10 years who is consistently slotted so low in the 1st round who has done more with their drafts. The draft is set up to reward the teams who have bad records and yet somehow the Pats still manage to get a crop of young players from rounds 2-4 every year in camp competing for spots.

Would  l love Bill's success rate to be 40-50%? Of course. The fact that he has more picks than anyone else every year means he doesnt have to.

If it were we might be looking at 8 or 9 SB titles.

Since 2001, the Patriots worst season was 9-7. Their success is not in spite of the NFL draft.

[crownsy]

I just think you are expecting way too much from late first round and second round picks.

Then why on earth am i supposed to be pleased we just picked up more of them?

It's a circular argument. You say it was a good move because it added good value, but you agree that there aren't impact players in the late first and second.

So explain to me, given bill's subpar (to be kind) draft record in those rounds, that im supposed to be pleased we got a late 2nd and what promises to be a late 1st next year.

[Tai]

I actually thought the Pats would trade with a team to help them get Mark Ingram with their #17 pick, for all that's worth to say now. Well, I was one pick too early, WHOOPS! 

Overall, considering that our RB by committee didn't really do too bad last season, if not stellar, I'm ok with not having to spend top dollar on another one. Mark Ingram may very well live up to being a late 1st rounder for the Saints, but I dunno if he was gonna help the Pats more then say...you know, some players that can play on the other side of the ball like some DEs and DTs to eat opposing QBs?

As of now, the Pats have 3 2nd round picks including the top 2nd round pick in the draft. Whoever they get that's good, they won't have to pay top dollar for the way they would a 1st rounder. I'm cool with that, the question is can they get said good players.

[crownsy]

and he's missed cman, look at this:

oh, I am fully aware he has missed.  I dont think I argued one way or another about BB being a good drafter, i just argued that I liked the trade just now, I think it is good value.  I then proceeded to argue that when people argue that BB is a bad drafter they conveniently leave out stuff.

Like trading for Wes Welker.
Like trading for a future 1st that became J. Mayo (if memory serves).
Like trading for Randy Moss.

Like forgetting that because the Pats typically do so well during the regular season they are picking in the late 20s.

Maybe none of that stuff matters, though.  Maybe, even after factoring that stuff in, BB still would come up looking like a bad drafter.  My only concern is that it bugs me that all that stuff is conveniently forgotten.

It bugs me that he trades our picks for value every year and people go nuts like he's going to pick the future tom brady because of the incredible value he acquired, so I feel your frustration.

[crownsy]

So the Pats got the Saints second round pick this year?

Yep, now they have the following picks tomorrow alone.

33, 56, 60, 74 & 90.

And honestly, there's not a huge difference between the late first guys, and the guys you can get in the 2nd/early 3rd. I'm a fan of the trade personally.

see my post below, thats false.

Bill's track record shows he'll likely miss on 2/3 of the 2nd round picks.

So if he hits on 1/3 that means we get a contributor in the second round who will be afforable to sign.

Most teams I would assume have a similar or worse success rate in the second round meaning they might hit on a second rounder once every 3 or 4 years.

Bill hasnt been the best drafter in the NFL  wont argue with you there. That being said the strategy to gather multiple 2nd and 3rd round picks every year is sound IMO especially if you dont ever have the opportunity to pick in the top 10.

Show me another team in the last 10 years who is consistently slotted so low in the 1st round who has done more with their drafts. The draft is set up to reward the teams who have bad records and yet somehow the Pats still manage to get a crop of young players from rounds 2-4 every year in camp competing for spots.

so mabey you can be the first person to give me an explanation, given the bolded, why is it such a good thing he acquired more low value picks rather than just picking a solid guy at a position of relative need (ingram)

As i said, everyone tells me how the pick wasen't that good and it was a shrewd move to acquire value, but then they turn around and tell me that im being unrealistic to expect him to hit knockouts picking in the later rounds.

You know, the later rounds he traded the pick for in the first place?

[Tai]

And yes, it shouldn't be forgotten that picks can be used to get good players (see: Welker and Moss?). That 1st round pick in 2012 could definitely be a good example of that.

[Tai]

So the Pats got the Saints second round pick this year?

Yep, now they have the following picks tomorrow alone.

33, 56, 60, 74 & 90.

And honestly, there's not a huge difference between the late first guys, and the guys you can get in the 2nd/early 3rd. I'm a fan of the trade personally.

see my post below, thats false.

Bill's track record shows he'll likely miss on 2/3 of the 2nd round picks.

So if he hits on 1/3 that means we get a contributor in the second round who will be afforable to sign.

Most teams I would assume have a similar or worse success rate in the second round meaning they might hit on a second rounder once every 3 or 4 years.

Bill hasnt been the best drafter in the NFL  wont argue with you there. That being said the strategy to gather multiple 2nd and 3rd round picks every year is sound IMO especially if you dont ever have the opportunity to pick in the top 10.

Show me another team in the last 10 years who is consistently slotted so low in the 1st round who has done more with their drafts. The draft is set up to reward the teams who have bad records and yet somehow the Pats still manage to get a crop of young players from rounds 2-4 every year in camp competing for spots.

so mabey you can be the first person to give me an explanation, given the bolded, why is it such a good thing he acquired more low value picks rather than just picking a solid guy at a position of relative need (ingram)

As i said, everyone tells me how the pick wasen't that good and it was a shrewd move to acquire value, but then they turn around and tell me that im being unrealistic to expect him to hit knockouts picking in the later rounds.

You know, the later rounds he traded the pick for in the first place?

If RB's a need, it's definitely not one over getting guys in the trenches. I mentioned defense, but now that I think about it, our offensive line is kinda getting old. Definitely not such an eager need that we needed to get a 1st rounder.

[Mean Gerald Green]

This guy is a beast.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7e4YkLkF_0

[crownsy]

So the Pats got the Saints second round pick this year?

Yep, now they have the following picks tomorrow alone.

33, 56, 60, 74 & 90.

And honestly, there's not a huge difference between the late first guys, and the guys you can get in the 2nd/early 3rd. I'm a fan of the trade personally.

see my post below, thats false.

Bill's track record shows he'll likely miss on 2/3 of the 2nd round picks.

So if he hits on 1/3 that means we get a contributor in the second round who will be afforable to sign.

Most teams I would assume have a similar or worse success rate in the second round meaning they might hit on a second rounder once every 3 or 4 years.

Bill hasnt been the best drafter in the NFL  wont argue with you there. That being said the strategy to gather multiple 2nd and 3rd round picks every year is sound IMO especially if you dont ever have the opportunity to pick in the top 10.

Show me another team in the last 10 years who is consistently slotted so low in the 1st round who has done more with their drafts. The draft is set up to reward the teams who have bad records and yet somehow the Pats still manage to get a crop of young players from rounds 2-4 every year in camp competing for spots.

so mabey you can be the first person to give me an explanation, given the bolded, why is it such a good thing he acquired more low value picks rather than just picking a solid guy at a position of relative need (ingram)

As i said, everyone tells me how the pick wasen't that good and it was a shrewd move to acquire value, but then they turn around and tell me that im being unrealistic to expect him to hit knockouts picking in the later rounds.

You know, the later rounds he traded the pick for in the first place?

If RB's a need, it's definitely not one over getting guys in the trenches. I mentioned defense, but now that I think about it, our offensive line is kinda getting old. Definitely not such an eager need that we needed to get a 1st rounder.

we addressed that need, and if he thought OL was such a need, 3 OL men went after the 28th pick.

DL/DE got raided 12 of them are gone. i wouldn't mind them taking a shot at bowers tommrow

[The DarkPassenger]

I'm not sure how I feel about the Nate Solder pick. With the names that were on the board at the time it's a B or a C grade pick but in the end could be better. But over Prince, Jordan, Heyward, Bowers, Ingram... hm... jury is out on that one.

I am sick of the trading down though. I understand the way he looks at the players and that he doesn't want to pick a name he wants to pick talent but if you keep trading and trading the ceiling of that player gets lower.

Honestly I was hoping that with the 17th pick they take Cameron Jordan and then with the 28th they took a OT... maybe even traded up ahead of the Colts and grabbed Solder. With Bowers on the board still maybe they take the risk with the potential injury issues (knee) and then go after a OLB.

Pats need a pass rush and a better running game in order to get back to the playoffs and bring us another super bowl. Green-Ellis and Woodhead are okay but will they hold up for 16 games plus playoffs? I don't know.