Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to PhatVirgin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to pcmIV's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Jan 30th 2013.

    http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Whos-been-doing-the-best-job-of-drafting.html

     

    [/QUOTE]

    So you claim to support an evaluation that puts BB as a top 5 drafter in the past 10 years and a top 10 drafter in the past 5 years yet you think he is the worst GM in the league and should be fired.  I love this board.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Maybe I'm missing something, but is there any information on how the ratings are calculated?

    [/QUOTE]


    Ya, if you open the link, it tells you.Laughing

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Babe, that is not objective comparison, it isselective using your own critieria.

    Independent analysis using consistent criteria is contained here (yes, I know you don't like this one):

    http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/decade-the-making-the-ultimate-nfl-draft-grades/2419/

    They have no ax to grind, sir.  And regardless of your youth, you do.

     

     



    Hmmm . . . they say BB's best pick was Asante Samuel . . . and even Belichick didn't think he was worth re-signing. 

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah, signing asante to a 6 year 60 million wasn't a good move for the future of your football team. As he showed in philly, he wasnt a corner stone player. Great move drafting him, and great move letting him walk.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Sure . . . the future was definitely bright with Ellis Hobbs and Jonathan Wilhite and Darius Butler out there instead. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Come on, prolate, that comment really isn't like you.  Asante Samuel had his talents as a ball hawk but he was not the best cover corner around and was a horrible tackler.  He wanted to get paid big money and he went where he could get it.  To suggest that BB dropped the ball by not re-signing Asante is inaccurate imo.

    With respect Hobbs, Wilhite and Butler, they were misses and everyone has acknowledged that. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Actually that is a typical prolate comment. It meets his agenda that BB doesn't know talent. 

    [/QUOTE]

    I never said BB doesn't "know" talent.  I said he has a particular style that has both upsides and downsides.  The upsides are a team that consists of players who complement each other well and play well as a team, that has great depth, that is very flexible and adaptable, and that rarely suffers from cap problems.  The downside is a lack of elite individual talent and sometimes quite large gaps in even average talent in some positions. Belichick's approach is great if you are aiming for consistent quality and competitiveness.  If you want to produce a truly dominant team, though, I think you need to value individual talent just a bit more.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Soooo signing more expensive guys will get you to "dominance" like seattle and their average 700k salary for a bunch of their stars? 

    [/QUOTE]


    Do you live in a tunnel?

    Not more expensive players but BETTER MORE TALENTED PLAYERS.

    The Pats had a crack at every one of those guys but instead they passed and picked Tavon Wilson and RAS I.  Do you understand the difference, yet?

    Talent>Busts.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to pcmIV's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Jan 30th 2013.

    http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Whos-been-doing-the-best-job-of-drafting.html

     

    [/QUOTE]

    So you claim to support an evaluation that puts BB as a top 5 drafter in the past 10 years and a top 10 drafter in the past 5 years yet you think he is the worst GM in the league and should be fired.  I love this board.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I don't recall a single person saying BB is the worst GM in the league.

    I have repeatedly stated he is mediocre.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Jan 30th 2013.

    http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Whos-been-doing-the-best-job-of-drafting.html

     • Expectations for the Patriots have been high despite their typical late drafting position
       -Expectation was 4th in 10-year review and 1st in 5-year review
       -High number of total and third round draft choices

    [/QUOTE]


    Again I will say, any measure of draft performance that uses what draftees are still "active" is deeply flawed. The scrubs just don't make much of a difference and contaminate any serious analysis.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ghostofjri37. Show ghostofjri37's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Following is the Muzwell Ratio, a complicated ranking system that attempts to meld all of the critical team building elements into an easy to understand mathematical equation. 

    Here are the results since 2000, the year Belichick became Patriots GM/HC:

    1. New England .728

    2-32 Everybody else.

    In case you're wondering, the ratio takes the number of games won in the applicable time frame and divides it by the total games played. Quite remarkable for its sheer simplicity, taking a complicated mathematical problem and reducing it to a number that even a Jets fan can understand.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Brilliant Analysis! last time i checked the NFL keeps the standings based on wins and loses. I haven't seen any judges giving out style points to rank the teams.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    Again I will say, any measure of draft performance that uses what draftees are still "active" is deeply flawed. The scrubs just don't make much of a difference and contaminate any serious analysis.

     

    Well, I somewhat agree, but they are using a players longevity as a measure of worth.

    IE bad players don't last long.

    But I do agree that when that player is released, it should count as a negative towards the drafting team because his value is now with someone else.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Following is the Muzwell Ratio, a complicated ranking system that attempts to meld all of the critical team building elements into an easy to understand mathematical equation. 

    Here are the results since 2000, the year Belichick became Patriots GM/HC:

    1. New England .728

    2-32 Everybody else.

    In case you're wondering, the ratio takes the number of games won in the applicable time frame and divides it by the total games played. Quite remarkable for its sheer simplicity, taking a complicated mathematical problem and reducing it to a number that even a Jets fan can understand.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Brilliant Analysis! last time i checked the NFL keeps the standings based on wins and loses. I haven't seen any judges giving out style points to rank the teams.

    [/QUOTE]


    I haven't seen the NFL giving out any of these for winning regular season games, have you?

     

    http://www.legendaryauctions.com/ItemImages/000118/121957a_lg.jpeg

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    I don't recall a single person saying BB is the worst GM in the league.



    Pezz has which is why my comment was directed at him.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from ghostofjri37. Show ghostofjri37's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Following is the Muzwell Ratio, a complicated ranking system that attempts to meld all of the critical team building elements into an easy to understand mathematical equation. 

    Here are the results since 2000, the year Belichick became Patriots GM/HC:

    1. New England .728

    2-32 Everybody else.

    In case you're wondering, the ratio takes the number of games won in the applicable time frame and divides it by the total games played. Quite remarkable for its sheer simplicity, taking a complicated mathematical problem and reducing it to a number that even a Jets fan can understand.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Brilliant Analysis! last time i checked the NFL keeps the standings based on wins and loses. I haven't seen any judges giving out style points to rank the teams.

    [/QUOTE]


    I haven't seen the NFL giving out any of these for winning regular season games, have you?

     

    http://www.legendaryauctions.com/ItemImages/000118/121957a_lg.jpeg

    [/QUOTE]


    So under BB the coach and GM which is the premise of this thread they have won 3 or those. just out of curiosity how many GM's/coaches currently have won more? It takes wins and  to get in the position to win those and as we have seen the Pats have had the chance to win 2 more of those due to those wins which put them in that position in 42 and 46. As dissapointing as those 2 loses were they were literally a play or 2 away from having 2 more SB's.  In order to get to that point it is all about wins not style points.

    Just getting to an AFC or NFC title game is an accomplishment imagine getting to 8. Unforunately they have lost 3 but in order to have the oppotunity to get to that point you have to win.

    Is BB perfect... heck no but considering what the alternative could be I'll take the BB.

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    These discussions get so emotional.  Let's look at the facts:

    • The Pats are a very good team that has stayed remarkably competitive for a remarkably long time, with the best regular season winning record over the past several years of any team in history, I believe. 
    • The Pats had an extraordinary run of three Super Bowl wins in four years roughly 10 years ago.
    • The Pats, despite numerous trips to the playoffs and many high seeds, have not won a Super Bowl in nearly a decade and have suffered playoff defeats in which they did not look very impressive (Baltimore in 2009, the Jets in 2010, the Giants in 2011, the Ravens again in 2012, and the Broncos this year). 

    The conclusion is that much is working right for the Pats.  Still, you have to wonder about recent playoff performances, where they've been underwhelming against good (and sometimes even mediocre) playoff teams.  

    Personally, I see a team that has good mid-level players and one or two stand-outs (Brady especially), is very well coached, and is very adaptable.  At the same time, it's a team that has a limited number of truly elite athletes and has some very big holes in certain positions (most notably the secondary and the WRs).  In the playoffs since 2009, that lack of elite talent has hurt it against teams that are also very good, but have a few more true playmakers.  

     

     

     

     

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from NoMorePensionLooting. Show NoMorePensionLooting's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    I think it's great that the Pats have been in the hunt every year.

    I am holding out hope they can improve to the point where they can hoist their 4th Lombardi....

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Iceman4. Show Iceman4's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    These discussions get so emotional.  Let's look at the facts:

    • The Pats are a very good team that has stayed remarkably competitive for a remarkably long time, with the best regular season winning record over the past several years of any team in history, I believe. 
    • The Pats had an extraordinary run of three Super Bowl wins in four years roughly 10 years ago.
    • The Pats, despite numerous trips to the playoffs and many high seeds, have not won a Super Bowl in nearly a decade and have suffered playoff defeats in which they did not look very impressive (Baltimore in 2009, the Jets in 2010, the Giants in 2011, the Ravens again in 2012, and the Broncos this year). 

    The conclusion is that much is working right for the Pats.  Still, you have to wonder about recent playoff performances, where they've been underwhelming against good (and sometimes even mediocre) playoff teams.  

    Personally, I see a team that has good mid-level players and one or two stand-outs (Brady especially), is very well coached, and is very adaptable.  At the same time, it's a team that has a limited number of truly elite athletes and has some very big holes in certain positions (most notably the secondary and the WRs).  In the playoffs since 2009, that lack of elite talent has hurt it against teams that are also very good, but have a few more true playmakers.  

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I disagree...the Pats have rebuilt on the fly...and yet challenged each of those seasons....the Pats are on right course to stay dominant. The big question is can BB get a player to eventually replace Brady...still a few years from that though.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    Personally, I see a team that has good mid-level players and one or two stand-outs (Brady especially), is very well coached, and is very adaptable.  At the same time, it's a team that has a limited number of truly elite athletes and has some very big holes in certain positions (most notably the secondary and the WRs).  In the playoffs, that lack of elite talent has hurt it against teams that are also very good, but have a few more true playmakers.

     



    I think If NE was healthy the past few years we win one.  It's easy to say that every team in the NFL has to deal with injuries, but if you look at the last few SB champs they had a lot of "success" avoiding injuries to key players.  I still believe if that as_shole Pollard hadn't rolled Gronk's ankle in the AFC Championship game we win that SB and then we aren't having this debate because no one would be complaining about drafting 2 years removed from a Lombardi.

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from ghostofjri37. Show ghostofjri37's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to pcmIV's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

     

    Personally, I see a team that has good mid-level players and one or two stand-outs (Brady especially), is very well coached, and is very adaptable.  At the same time, it's a team that has a limited number of truly elite athletes and has some very big holes in certain positions (most notably the secondary and the WRs).  In the playoffs, that lack of elite talent has hurt it against teams that are also very good, but have a few more true playmakers.

     

     



    I think If NE was healthy the past few years we win one.  It's easy to say that every team in the NFL has to deal with injuries, but if you look at the last few SB champs they had a lot of "success" avoiding injuries to key players.  I still believe if that as_shole Pollard hadn't rolled Gronk's ankle in the AFC Championship game we win that SB and then we aren't having this debate because no one would be complaining about drafting 2 years removed from a Lombardi.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    This

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from NoMorePensionLooting. Show NoMorePensionLooting's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to pcmIV's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

    Personally, I see a team that has good mid-level players and one or two stand-outs (Brady especially), is very well coached, and is very adaptable.  At the same time, it's a team that has a limited number of truly elite athletes and has some very big holes in certain positions (most notably the secondary and the WRs).  In the playoffs, that lack of elite talent has hurt it against teams that are also very good, but have a few more true playmakers.

     

    [/QUOTE]

     



    I think If NE was healthy the past few years we win one.  It's easy to say that every team in the NFL has to deal with injuries, but if you look at the last few SB champs they had a lot of "success" avoiding injuries to key players.  I still believe if that as_shole Pollard hadn't rolled Gronk's ankle in the AFC Championship game we win that SB and then we aren't having this debate because no one would be complaining about drafting 2 years removed from a Lombardi.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    One may actually wonder if Pollard doesn't take out Brady's knee in 08 if the Pats don't host the Lombardi then...Pitt...we would have beat them...Arizona...again...we win...

    Oh well, shoulda, woulda, coulda.....

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    These discussions get so emotional.  Let's look at the facts:

    • The Pats are a very good team that has stayed remarkably competitive for a remarkably long time, with the best regular season winning record over the past several years of any team in history, I believe. 
    • The Pats had an extraordinary run of three Super Bowl wins in four years roughly 10 years ago.
    • The Pats, despite numerous trips to the playoffs and many high seeds, have not won a Super Bowl in nearly a decade and have suffered playoff defeats in which they did not look very impressive (Baltimore in 2009, the Jets in 2010, the Giants in 2011, the Ravens again in 2012, and the Broncos this year). 

    The conclusion is that much is working right for the Pats.  Still, you have to wonder about recent playoff performances, where they've been underwhelming against good (and sometimes even mediocre) playoff teams.  

    Personally, I see a team that has good mid-level players and one or two stand-outs (Brady especially), is very well coached, and is very adaptable.  At the same time, it's a team that has a limited number of truly elite athletes and has some very big holes in certain positions (most notably the secondary and the WRs).  In the playoffs since 2009, that lack of elite talent has hurt it against teams that are also very good, but have a few more true playmakers.  

     

     

     

     

     



    So you see a team that has good mid level players, and Tom Brady, kind of like they used to say about our 2001 and 2003 SB winning teams. I distinctly remember pundits everywhere saying we had no real stars. I actually took offense to it as I believed Lawyer, Law, and Willie Mac were amazing players, but seeing as how none of them are getting into the HOF, I guess in a sense they were right.

    BB has always built his teams the same way he did back then, its just that he had an amazing collection of coaches and personell guys that really took the franchise to a dynasty. Scott Pioli told me this on a talk we had on siruis radio last year and I posted about it.

    He said it was an almost magical situation of how many great men they had working under BB, and it translated to championships. As we see with Denver, winning championships is about way more then talent.

    As we see with Seattle a bunch of men(mid level draft picks all over the place) working together and being coached up at every turn, motivated and mentally tough is what it takes to win championships.  We have come close but didn't make the 1 or 2 clutch plays we needed to win really 2 or even 3 more SB's(2006) . 

    This doesn't mean we have bad coaching, it just means that BB has had to start over too many times, and it now looks as though he will be starting over again as we lose a 7 super bowl Patriots coach with Scar, and a 5x SB champion in Pepper Johnson. Those guys were 2 of the last with culture.

     If you have ever managed a business, you know that leadership and maintaining the culture are 2 of the most important aspects in longevity. BB's cupboard has been plundered, robbed, looted! Yet he still maintains a highly competitive team. He is an amazing football guy, and we as Pats fans should thank our lucky stars that Kraft was smart enough to steal him back from the jets at all costs!

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonSportsFan111. Show BostonSportsFan111's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    The answer is "John Bowie, Samson Satele, and Abraham Wright." 

    Who are the 3 players drafted by Oakland and Miami with the draft picks they got for Randy Moss and Wes Welker?

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from tanbass. Show tanbass's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    These discussions get so emotional.  Let's look at the facts:

    • The Pats are a very good team that has stayed remarkably competitive for a remarkably long time, with the best regular season winning record over the past several years of any team in history, I believe. 
    • The Pats had an extraordinary run of three Super Bowl wins in four years roughly 10 years ago.
    • The Pats, despite numerous trips to the playoffs and many high seeds, have not won a Super Bowl in nearly a decade and have suffered playoff defeats in which they did not look very impressive (Baltimore in 2009, the Jets in 2010, the Giants in 2011, the Ravens again in 2012, and the Broncos this year). 

    The conclusion is that much is working right for the Pats.  Still, you have to wonder about recent playoff performances, where they've been underwhelming against good (and sometimes even mediocre) playoff teams.  

    Personally, I see a team that has good mid-level players and one or two stand-outs (Brady especially), is very well coached, and is very adaptable.  At the same time, it's a team that has a limited number of truly elite athletes and has some very big holes in certain positions (most notably the secondary and the WRs).  In the playoffs since 2009, that lack of elite talent has hurt it against teams that are also very good, but have a few more true playmakers.  

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree with a lot of what you posted....and I believe that we could use more talent, but at what cost is the question.

    Can we afford to go out and buy a couple of game changers at WR or DB without losing too much of a pretty solid base? I definitely feels like we are just a few players away from pushing us over the top....but how do we get them and still retain key players already on the roster? Who are those people in free agency that are definite winners?

    I feel like BB is gun shy after Adalius Thomas.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonTrollSpanker. Show BostonTrollSpanker's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    "Babe, that is not objective comparison, it is highly selective using your own critieria."

    By "not objective," you mean you disagree with the results right? 

    Objectivity is an end state no one can ever achieve. But - transparency helps. Babe's criteria have a numeric value. 

    The writer you referred to doesn't offer us a numerical value, except total numbers of draftees still active in the NFL which is a weak number (top playmakers matter much more than benchwarmers). 

    Just because a web site has "facts" in the URL doesn't mean it's objective. 

    If Asante Samuel is BB's best pick during that whole period, and you don't even think he was worth re-signing, that's not exactly high praise. 

    The eye test also works. Denver has more offensive talent than us and Seattle has far more defensive talent. 

    The GM is accountable for that. But: injuries changed the equation. When Richard Sherman went out of the game, Seattle didnt' really miss a beat. When Talib went out, our entire defense crumbled. That's on the GM. Drafting is one reason for the problem. An outdated "read and react/bend don't break" philosophy may be another. 

    That said I saw signs of real change this year and it could well get even better next year with guys back from IR and new draftees.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    But babe you're forgeting all the undrafted free agent jems Belichick finds!! Look at Justin Francis, that guy looked like he was going to be really something for about 45 seconds in the three agmes he played...doesn't that count for something? I mean we got all excited over him, doesn't that mean something too? And then there was Fletcher...two years ago he made like three tackles...guy should be in the Hall of Fame because he's still here. And we can't forget BJGE! That guy got 1000 yards rushing twice - yeah all his other seasons he may of been the single worst starting back in the league, but we all love Benny. And look at Kyle Love, it's not his fault he is sick. I could list a million more, but I'd just be wasting my time, you are incapable of happiness. Troll.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Babe, that is not objective comparison, it isselective using your own critieria.

    Independent analysis using consistent criteria is contained here (yes, I know you don't like this one):

    http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/decade-the-making-the-ultimate-nfl-draft-grades/2419/

    They have no ax to grind, sir.  And regardless of your youth, you do.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Hmmm . . . they say BB's best pick was Asante Samuel . . . and even Belichick didn't think he was worth re-signing. 

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah, signing asante to a 6 year 60 million wasn't a good move for the future of your football team. As he showed in philly, he wasnt a corner stone player. Great move drafting him, and great move letting him walk.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Sure . . . the future was definitely bright with Ellis Hobbs and Jonathan Wilhite and Darius Butler out there instead. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Come on, prolate, that comment really isn't like you.  Asante Samuel had his talents as a ball hawk but he was not the best cover corner around and was a horrible tackler.  He wanted to get paid big money and he went where he could get it.  To suggest that BB dropped the ball by not re-signing Asante is inaccurate imo.

    With respect Hobbs, Wilhite and Butler, they were misses and everyone has acknowledged that. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Actually that is a typical prolate comment. It meets his agenda that BB doesn't know talent. 

    [/QUOTE]

    I never said BB doesn't "know" talent.  I said he has a particular style that has both upsides and downsides.  The upsides are a team that consists of players who complement each other well and play well as a team, that has great depth, that is very flexible and adaptable, and that rarely suffers from cap problems.  The downside is a lack of elite individual talent and sometimes quite large gaps in even average talent in some positions. Belichick's approach is great if you are aiming for consistent quality and competitiveness.  If you want to produce a truly dominant team, though, I think you need to value individual talent just a bit more.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Soooo signing more expensive guys will get you to "dominance" like seattle and their average 700k salary for a bunch of their stars? 

    [/QUOTE]

    Talent wins championships.  If you don't draft the talent like Seattle did, you have to buy it.

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from kjfitone. Show kjfitone's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Comparing BB's 10 best players picked (based on PFR's CarAV rating, rounds 1-4), from the 2006 to the 2012 draft, to the best 10 picks of the SB teams since 2006 and/or the teams that made the playoffs this year.

     

    49ers 436

    Packers 435

    Ravens 433

    Broncos 420

    Saints 401

    Panthers 390

    Bengals 384

    Chiefs 364

    Steelers 347

    Seahawks 326

    Chargers 322

    Eagles 307

    BB 296

    Cardinals 293

    Giants 274

    Bears 274

    Colts 267

     

    So BB comes in 13th out of the 17 teams compared. He has performed about the same as the Cardinals.

     

    There's the facts, now let the homer spin begin.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]
    i dont even look forward to the draft like i used to because you know bb is going to either trade the first round pick away or draft a stiff in the second round. love the jamie collins pick but lots of bad misses recently.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to pcmIV's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

     

    Personally, I see a team that has good mid-level players and one or two stand-outs (Brady especially), is very well coached, and is very adaptable.  At the same time, it's a team that has a limited number of truly elite athletes and has some very big holes in certain positions (most notably the secondary and the WRs).  In the playoffs, that lack of elite talent has hurt it against teams that are also very good, but have a few more true playmakers.

     

     



    I think If NE was healthy the past few years we win one.  It's easy to say that every team in the NFL has to deal with injuries, but if you look at the last few SB champs they had a lot of "success" avoiding injuries to key players.  I still believe if that as_shole Pollard hadn't rolled Gronk's ankle in the AFC Championship game we win that SB and then we aren't having this debate because no one would be complaining about drafting 2 years removed from a Lombardi.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    This

    [/QUOTE]

    Yep, Gronk makes a huge difference, but I think it's a very legitimate question why our offense been quite so dependent on one player who isn't the QB.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    These discussions get so emotional.  Let's look at the facts:

    • The Pats are a very good team that has stayed remarkably competitive for a remarkably long time, with the best regular season winning record over the past several years of any team in history, I believe. 
    • The Pats had an extraordinary run of three Super Bowl wins in four years roughly 10 years ago.
    • The Pats, despite numerous trips to the playoffs and many high seeds, have not won a Super Bowl in nearly a decade and have suffered playoff defeats in which they did not look very impressive (Baltimore in 2009, the Jets in 2010, the Giants in 2011, the Ravens again in 2012, and the Broncos this year). 

    The conclusion is that much is working right for the Pats.  Still, you have to wonder about recent playoff performances, where they've been underwhelming against good (and sometimes even mediocre) playoff teams.  

    Personally, I see a team that has good mid-level players and one or two stand-outs (Brady especially), is very well coached, and is very adaptable.  At the same time, it's a team that has a limited number of truly elite athletes and has some very big holes in certain positions (most notably the secondary and the WRs).  In the playoffs since 2009, that lack of elite talent has hurt it against teams that are also very good, but have a few more true playmakers.  

     

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    So you see a team that has good mid level players, and Tom Brady, kind of like they used to say about our 2001 and 2003 SB winning teams. I distinctly remember pundits everywhere saying we had no real stars. I actually took offense to it as I believed Lawyer, Law, and Willie Mac were amazing players, but seeing as how none of them are getting into the HOF, I guess in a sense they were right.

     

    BB has always built his teams the same way he did back then, its just that he had an amazing collection of coaches and personell guys that really took the franchise to a dynasty. Scott Pioli told me this on a talk we had on siruis radio last year and I posted about it.

    He said it was an almost magical situation of how many great men they had working under BB, and it translated to championships. As we see with Denver, winning championships is about way more then talent.

    As we see with Seattle a bunch of men(mid level draft picks all over the place) working together and being coached up at every turn, motivated and mentally tough is what it takes to win championships.  We have come close but didn't make the 1 or 2 clutch plays we needed to win really 2 or even 3 more SB's(2006) . 

    This doesn't mean we have bad coaching, it just means that BB has had to start over too many times, and it now looks as though he will be starting over again as we lose a 7 super bowl Patriots coach with Scar, and a 5x SB champion in Pepper Johnson. Those guys were 2 of the last with culture.

     If you have ever managed a business, you know that leadership and maintaining the culture are 2 of the most important aspects in longevity. BB's cupboard has been plundered, robbed, looted! Yet he still maintains a highly competitive team. He is an amazing football guy, and we as Pats fans should thank our lucky stars that Kraft was smart enough to steal him back from the jets at all costs!

    [/QUOTE]

    I guess I don't see evidence that the coaching has declined.  I know you don't like the offensive playcalling, but I disagree it's a problem.  And the defense has been a big underperformer in playoff games (and even the regular season too.) Was Romeo the source of our success in 2003 and 2004?  Maybe, but then BB is not the defensive coach we all thought he was.

     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mediumsizednuts. Show Mediumsizednuts's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to HomerHead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    D'oh!

    I disagree babe.  Belichicks drafts are the greatest.  I learn so much from him.  Today for breakfast I traded back my bacon, eggs and hashbrowns for 1 sausage patty.  Value pick! Best move ever!

    [/QUOTE]I dont know I acquired 5 65 corvettes and traded them for 1 95 escort and a ham sandwich that looks like Ras Dowling from a distance.


     

Share