Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

  1. 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:

     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.

     

    Having the best coach and QB and winning only one may still have seen some grumbling.

    With good GM work we should have won at least 3 over those 9 years. After all, having the elite coach and QB is more than half the battle.

    Just getting to the SB with that mickey mouse D in 2011 is a testament to the greatness of HC and QB.

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Brad34. Show Brad34's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    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.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    But according to Rusty it is all Brady's fault. Apparently he is supposed to throw the ball, catch the ball,block,run and defend as well. BB drafting has been average at best. Some good Gronk,Hernandez,Collins a lot of bad.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    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!




    No one is saying he isn't a great coach, in fact no one is really saying he is a terrible GM, it's just that some people are saying he is a average GM (and I am one of those). Yoiu mention a lot of players that we had when we won that first Super Bowl and the truth is, Bill didn't bring in those key guys...Bruschi, McGinnest, Ty Law, Troy Brown...yet I will give him credit for building those early teams that won those Super Bowls because he did bring in Seymore, Vrabel, Pleasant, Cox, Phiefer, Brady, Light, Givens, Patten, Branch, etc. I have no problems with the first four years...the guys he brought in. It's the last five years that I have a problem with.

    I think when you average his first five years or so, with the last five years it amounts to a average GM. And I think that is what you could expect from most anyone...I was hoping for more than that, honestly. Personally I've watched the signings they've made over the last three/four off seasons and I thought...why the hell are we brining that junk in? I mean why? You got to be kidding me? Same with a lot of the draft picks - I've never been so disappointed as I've been watching this team draft over the last half decade. Now have they hit on some guys in the draft? Yes, but I wanted more - we had more selections than any team over the last five years due to trading back and acquiring picks...we came away with nowhere near enough because of draft busts. And we walked into the last three offseasons with 20-30 million to spend and we came away with a list of players that would get most guys fired. That isn't good enough in my opinion.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to NoMorePensionLooting's comment:

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    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.

     




    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.....




    I suspect we would have had another perfect regular season and finished the job easily against AZ in the SB. That 2008 schedule was a joke and Moss was still a top weapon.

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

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to HomerHead's comment:

    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!



    sausage patty today or one next week?  Price of sausage is only going up.

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

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to HomerHead's comment:

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:

     

    Tom Brady owes his entire career to Bill Belichick (and Bob Kraft) for providing the environment he plays in.

    Tom Brady was a decent college QB.

     



    Billy owes his entire career to Tom Brady (and Bob Kraft) for providing the environment he plays in.

     

    Billy wasn't even a decent head coach before the Patriots.

    Billy Greatest GM ever though.



    really Bustchise? Really?

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

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    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.




    Good point. He has had a few decent UDFA finds, but bunches of stiffs as well.

    You aren't going to win SBs with UDFAs. Even our most imbecilic imbeciles realize that.... don't they?

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

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to PhatVirgin's comment:

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

     

    In response to PhatVirgin's comment:

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

     

    Jan 30th 2013.

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

     

     



    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.

     

     



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




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




    Thanks. One of the links didn't work, but:

    The biggest obstacle in doing an objective analysis is to select the metrics that do the best job of measuring performances. DRAFTMETRICS decided to use a weighted combination of four measures to measure each team’s draft success.

    • Total number of games started
       THE MEASURE: The number of games started by each player drafted in his NFL career
       PRO: Simplest measure to understand
       CON: Earlier years are weighted more heavily than later years because a 2003 draftee has the opportunity to start more games than a player drafted in 2012

    • Number of players active for the 2012 season
       THE MEASURE: The number of players drafted that were active for the 2012 NFL season; players who missed the entire season due to injury are NOT counted
       PRO: Measures the depth of a draft class
       CON: Gives more emphasis to later years (players are more likely to still be active)

    • Average share of annual starts
       THE MEASURE: This is calculated by averaging each team’s percentage share of total
    annual starts over the study period
          -For example, the Bears 2003 draft class started 520 games, representing 5.8% of the 9040 total starts by the 2003 draft. This calculation was repeated for each team in each draft year and the results were then averaged for each team
       PRO: All years are evenly weighted
       CON: It’s a pretty geeky metric

    • Pro Bowl
       THE MEASURE: The number of drafted players who were selected for the Pro Bowl as
    original selections; injury and other replacements don’t count
       PRO: Gives credit for drafting the best players
       CON: Tends to be weighted in favor earlier years as those players have more
    opportunities to be selected

    --------

    I'm looking at the metrics - not sure if the metrics used are a good measure of draft picks. Games Started, Games Active, annual starts, pro bowl appearances. IMO, the metrics are pretty weak.  I'd rather see actual measures of on-field performance in comparison to players of the same position from the same draft year compared over time.  In addition, you could give different weighting base on round of draft - and compare to players of the same position for a given draft round - vs. other rounds.




    I agree those metrics are pretty shaky.

    I used only rounds 1-4 in an attempt to address the weighing of rounds you speak of, as there is some luck involved in every round, but that factor increases exponentially as the rounds go by.

     

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

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to mthurl's comment:

     

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    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!




    No one is saying he isn't a great coach, in fact no one is really saying he is a terrible GM, it's just that some people are saying he is a average GM (and I am one of those). Yoiu mention a lot of players that we had when we won that first Super Bowl and the truth is, Bill didn't bring in those key guys...Bruschi, McGinnest, Ty Law, Troy Brown...yet I will give him credit for building those early teams that won those Super Bowls because he did bring in Seymore, Vrabel, Pleasant, Cox, Phiefer, Brady, Light, Givens, Patten, Branch, etc. I have no problems with the first four years...the guys he brought in. It's the last five years that I have a problem with.

    I think when you average his first five years or so, with the last five years it amounts to a average GM. And I think that is what you could expect from most anyone...I was hoping for more than that, honestly. Personally I've watched the signings they've made over the last three/four off seasons and I thought...why the hell are we brining that junk in? I mean why? You got to be kidding me? Same with a lot of the draft picks - I've never been so disappointed as I've been watching this team draft over the last half decade. Now have they hit on some guys in the draft? Yes, but I wanted more - we had more selections than any team over the last five years due to trading back and acquiring picks...we came away with nowhere near enough because of draft busts. And we walked into the last three offseasons with 20-30 million to spend and we came away with a list of players that would get most guys fired. That isn't good enough in my opinion.



    Murtl, all kidding around aside that is a ridiculous notion. If we had the ball to end the game, or used a little more time in both Super bowls, if Nink doesn't  jump off sides, if that ball doesn't stick to Tyrees helmet,  if Brady and WW made a better play on that pass, if we didn't run 30 yard routes down field after running it up the gints gut and threw the INT to Gronk, If Hobbs isn't called for face guarding when it wasn't even an NFL rule, we most likey have won 3 more Super Bowl championships.

     

    3 more championships if 1 or 2 plays go our way. Wow!

    Then we would be talking about the greatest heist in NFL history of how BB stole 23 td Randy Moss for a 4rth rounder, and a 2nd and 7th for 6 years of 6 or 700 catch ball from Welker, about rebuilding a dynasty defense into a capable one, about changing your offense to a 2 TE set and winning again!

    1 or 2 plays and we have 6 SB championships in the last 13 years, and are unquestionably the greatest franchise in sports history after maybe Bill Russels Celtics. So the difference of 1 or 2 plays on the biggest stage is the result of average GM work?

    Step outside of the box and look at that statement. He built highly competitive teams who had very, very good chances to win 3 more SB's. You guys have taken over reaction to a another planet. Its an oblong shaped ball and it bounces funny. If your team is in the biggest games year after year, you have built great teams! 

    This notion is as ridiculous as rusty trying to say everything is Brady's fault, and before I hear the same rhetoric about , "if only we had run more right" yes I think our coaching staff has lacked creativity in terms of putting our HOF QB into the best positions to win.

    They relied too much on his right arm, and neglected the run game to a certain degree, 2 undrafted starting running backs for 2 years was a GM mistake, it was a coaching mistake, it was a philosophical mistake. But over all it doesnt change the fact that if any of the plays from above go our way we probably win another SB or 2, or 3, and that means we had a great team.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattC05. Show MattC05's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    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.



    Why are you only comparing him to half of the league?

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

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In 2007 they used their 2nd pick (plus a 7th rounder) to get Welker, and their 4th pick to get Moss. I'm guessing Moss' value for the 2007 season alone was greater than any other player in that draft, and his 3 full seasons here outdid anyone as well. And Welkers value for the 6 seasons he was here was probably as good as just about anyone chosen that year. Do your statistics include these? 




    Are we going to subtract picks we got for trading away players too, or is this street one way?

     



    Do the calculation any way you like, but the Pats used draft picks to get Moss and Welker and had them both for some of their most productive seasons. Note: if the Pats traded away a player that was in their top 10, then these numbers might be off a little. The top 10 average for the Pats was 29.6 (using your numbers). Subtract out 2 of those 29.6 guys and add Moss' 123 rating and Welkers 88 rating. Now you have 29.6 * 8 = 237 + 123 (Moss) + 88 (Welker) and you get 460, which puts them ahead of everyone. 

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

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    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.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     




    Babe's ceaseless whining never ends.

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

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to rtuinila's comment:

    I hate that I clicked on this link, Babe knows nothing about football. He knows everything about endless ranting!




    Babe's only connection to football is his manlove for Brady. All his posts are designed to attack anyone who has to do with the Pats to deflect from the fact that the love of his life is nearing the end of his career

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

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In 2007 they used their 2nd pick (plus a 7th rounder) to get Welker, and their 4th pick to get Moss. I'm guessing Moss' value for the 2007 season alone was greater than any other player in that draft, and his 3 full seasons here outdid anyone as well. And Welkers value for the 6 seasons he was here was probably as good as just about anyone chosen that year. Do your statistics include these? 




    Are we going to subtract picks we got for trading away players too, or is this street one way?

     



    Do the calculation any way you like, but the Pats used draft picks to get Moss and Welker and had them both for some of their most productive seasons. Note: if the Pats traded away a player that was in their top 10, then these numbers might be off a little. The top 10 average for the Pats was 29.6 (using your numbers). Subtract out 2 of those 29.6 guys and add Moss' 123 rating and Welkers 88 rating. Now you have 29.6 * 8 = 237 + 123 (Moss) + 88 (Welker) and you get 460, which puts them ahead of everyone. 




    You realize those numbers are cumulative over a career, right? You want to count things Moss did as a Viking toward BB's rating? LMAO

    Are you going to do the groundwork  and track down every trade involving players and picks over those 7 years? Are you going to calculate the Branch trade and Cassel trade for example, or do you just want to cherry pick the ones that make BB look better?

    Really, your entire spin here is just silly.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    I would only ask the following questions for those that think BB doesn't know what he is doing as a GM.

    If BB the GM does not think much of a player to draft him or want him as a FA, what exactly makes you think BB the coach would want the player to play for him?

    They might be different titles but are the same person making the same football ability decisions. It is one person with the exact same mindset.

    If there was a different GM that everyone wanted and he brought in players instead of BB but then BB cuts half of them because he can't use them because they are not what he is looking for in his system, or they are excellent talents but stupid do you think he plays them? What prevents him from cutting them if he does not think much of them? Do you think he does not eventually pull a Bill Parcells and say hey if they want you to cook the meal they should let you buy the groceries?

    Are the people that complain about him as a GM trying to say that a real GM just collects talent and potential in a vacuum, without a coaches marching ordersof what he's looking for? Even if the GM had the final decision he often shares the same vision of the coach and tries to find what the coach is looking for. Do they not realize that BB, and most likely most coaches who know what they are doing, try and find players that fit not only specific roles, but also the team culture and what qualities the coach values in a player? Not just who is the best athlete or has the best CFB stats? If you are questioning the later few things then you are not questioning BB the GM at all. You are questioning BB the coach. That is fine as well, anyone should feel free to question anything they like without ridicule but don't kid yourself or anyone else as to what you are actually questioning.

    Anyone can go google and find any report, graph, or table from a dozen sites that will have some opinion based on some specific set of data and requirements that they created to try and put some sort of difinitive stamp of what organizations have done what in regards to team building/drafting, etc.

    They are ALL completely subjective to what value is placed on what criteria. Is it more important how many players you drafted are on your team currently? Is it more important how many years each player you drafted stayed on your team? Is it most important how many players you drafted stayed in the league on any team, and for how long? Is it most important how many probowlers or all pro players you drafted, whether they are still on your team or not? Is the number of players who stayed the healthiest and played in the most total number of games in the NFL the most important? Is it most important that a player drafted was successful in any system he played in, for any team, rather than only in specific roles or systems with a specific team? The subjectivity is absolutely endless.

    I read most often on here that you can't win without great players. In large part there is a lot of truth to that. At least you can't win without your best players playing or playing their best. No matter how good of a coach you are you also have to have good players playing and playing excellent to win. So if we agree those statements are true, how would people explain away the following?

     

    Since 2005 (9 seasons since Pats won SB last)

     

    patriots  2 seasons of 10 wins or less (both 10 win seasons)

    Colts     2 seasons of 10 wins or less (one 10 win season)

    ravens    5 seasons of 10 wins or less (one 10 win season)

    Steelers  5 seasons of 10 wins or less (one 10 win season)

    Packers   5 seasons of 10 wins or less (one 10 win seasons)

    Saints    5 seasons of 10 wins or less (one 10 win seasons)

    Seahawks  6 seasons of 10 wins or less (one 10 win season)

    Bears     6 seasons of 10 wins or less (one 10 win season)

    49ers     6 seasons of 10 wins or less (zero 10 win seasons)

    Broncos   6 seasons of 10 wins or less (zero 10 win seasons)

    Giants    7 seasons of 10 wins or less (two 10 win seasons)

    eagles    8 seasons of 10 wins or less (three 10 win seasons)

    Cardinals 9 seasons of 10 wins or less (two 10 win seasons)

     

    So even after 3 superbowls in 4 years the Patriots have still never had a single season with less than 10 wins.

    Not one organization that has played in a superbowl since 2004 can say that. NOT one.? Other than the Patriots.

    How do they win so much? They must have talent. I know BB and Brady and great but we just agreed you can't win without talent. People can not have the argument both ways. This is NOT to say BB as a GM is "the best". I do not think there is anyone who can quantify that or say that any GM is this or that as any sort of fact.

    However, you do not win at that rate, or have an undefeated regular season, or make it to two more superbowls without doing very well for yourself in the team building department.

    To put a final stamp of my two cents on the subject let's look at the two superbowl losses.

    In each case the game was able to be pretty much be sealed away by arguably some of or the most talented players on the team.

    2007 Harrison and Samuel, at the time beloved by Patriots fans and widely accepted as excellent players. Samuel by simply holding on to a pass thrown into his hands and Harrison by simply pulling a mans single arm away from his body while using both his arms to do so. Both failed miserably. This was NOT a lack of the GM not having talent on the team. It was a epic failure by exceptional talent in the biggest moment.

    2011 Brady and Welker have a broken coverage play and only need to complete an easy pitch and catch to most likely seal the game. Brady either grips that ball too tightly or gets too excited and rushes it. He throws a horrendous pass and Welker, although needing to twist in the air and slam to the ground upside down, has his hands on it and can not maintain possession from the impact. Both players arguably the single best players in the league, at the time, at their respective positions. Again, that was NOT a lack of the GM not having talent on the team. It was a epic failure by exceptional talent in the biggest moment.

    To be clear, I am NOT saying those things are the reasons for the losses. Only that they were game defining moments of the games that were failed by the best of talents not the weakest of talents. Remember what I said, you can not win without your best players playing in the bigs games AND playing exceptional.

    I honeslty do not know how anyone of sane mind can not look at the data, difficulties of  sustainability in a parity/salary cap era, etc and come to the conclusions that BB as a GM is awful, stinks, or even just average. He's clearly proven otherwise. Even if you only wanted to say he was the 10th best. That still seems better than average to me and a heck of a lot better than awful, stinks or even the worst.

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

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    Great post LowIQ and it echoes my thoughts from above. We were 1 or 2 bounces of the ball away from winning not 1, not 2 , but 3 SB's as no way in hell Chicago and Rex Grossman was beating us in 06. So because the other team got a crucial break that we were the benfits of in our dynasty years(we easily could have lost all 3 Super Bowls) then our Gm is only average? 8 afc championship appearances with 5 wins and he is average?

    An oblong ball bounces a different direction or Brady's pass to Welker a bit tighter, Welker wearing the same gloves as Tyree wore? Not throwing the INT to a DE 40 yards down field with the lead? Nink not jumping off sides? The ref realizing face guarding was not indeed an NFL rule in 2006 and our Gm goes from average to hands down the greatest team builder in NFL history as he wins 4 or 5 or 6 Super Bowl championships in 13 years? 

    Pretty tough sell, no wonder these guys have to commit so many posts to the topic. I mean poor babe has tried like 17,000 times to tell us BB ain't that good!

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

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In 2007 they used their 2nd pick (plus a 7th rounder) to get Welker, and their 4th pick to get Moss. I'm guessing Moss' value for the 2007 season alone was greater than any other player in that draft, and his 3 full seasons here outdid anyone as well. And Welkers value for the 6 seasons he was here was probably as good as just about anyone chosen that year. Do your statistics include these? 




    Are we going to subtract picks we got for trading away players too, or is this street one way?

     



    Do the calculation any way you like, but the Pats used draft picks to get Moss and Welker and had them both for some of their most productive seasons. Note: if the Pats traded away a player that was in their top 10, then these numbers might be off a little. The top 10 average for the Pats was 29.6 (using your numbers). Subtract out 2 of those 29.6 guys and add Moss' 123 rating and Welkers 88 rating. Now you have 29.6 * 8 = 237 + 123 (Moss) + 88 (Welker) and you get 460, which puts them ahead of everyone. 




    You realize those numbers are cumulative over a career, right? You want to count things Moss did as a Viking toward BB's rating? LMAO

    Are you going to do the groundwork  and track down every trade involving players and picks over those 7 years? Are you going to calculate the Branch trade and Cassel trade for example, or do you just want to cherry pick the ones that make BB look better?

    Really, your entire spin here is just silly.



    There is no spin. The Branch trade and Cassell trades would already be factored in because you picked the 10 best players the Pats picked during that time frame in the first 4 rounds. Presumably whoever they got with the picks they got in those trades are included in your analysis. It also doesn't factor in where each of those teams drafted each year due to heir prior year record. I'm willing to bet guys picked with a top 10 selection will have a higher career value than guys picked 25-32 each year, which is where the Pats normally are because they win the division, make the confrence championship or play in the Super Bowl so frequently. It a totally subjective number that has very little basis when you add in real world criteria.

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

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In 2007 they used their 2nd pick (plus a 7th rounder) to get Welker, and their 4th pick to get Moss. I'm guessing Moss' value for the 2007 season alone was greater than any other player in that draft, and his 3 full seasons here outdid anyone as well. And Welkers value for the 6 seasons he was here was probably as good as just about anyone chosen that year. Do your statistics include these? 




    Are we going to subtract picks we got for trading away players too, or is this street one way?

     



    Do the calculation any way you like, but the Pats used draft picks to get Moss and Welker and had them both for some of their most productive seasons. Note: if the Pats traded away a player that was in their top 10, then these numbers might be off a little. The top 10 average for the Pats was 29.6 (using your numbers). Subtract out 2 of those 29.6 guys and add Moss' 123 rating and Welkers 88 rating. Now you have 29.6 * 8 = 237 + 123 (Moss) + 88 (Welker) and you get 460, which puts them ahead of everyone. 




    You realize those numbers are cumulative over a career, right? You want to count things Moss did as a Viking toward BB's rating? LMAO

    Are you going to do the groundwork  and track down every trade involving players and picks over those 7 years? Are you going to calculate the Branch trade and Cassel trade for example, or do you just want to cherry pick the ones that make BB look better?

    Really, your entire spin here is just silly.



    The Branch trade and Cassell trades would already be factored in because you picked the 10 best players the Pats picked during that time frame in the first 4 rounds. Presumably whoever they got with the picks they got in those trades are included in your analysis.



    I'm saying you have to take away those picks they got for the traded players. You want to count players they got for picks, AND count picks they got for players they gave up.

    You can't have it both ways and be honest.

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

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In 2007 they used their 2nd pick (plus a 7th rounder) to get Welker, and their 4th pick to get Moss. I'm guessing Moss' value for the 2007 season alone was greater than any other player in that draft, and his 3 full seasons here outdid anyone as well. And Welkers value for the 6 seasons he was here was probably as good as just about anyone chosen that year. Do your statistics include these? 




    Are we going to subtract picks we got for trading away players too, or is this street one way?

     



    Do the calculation any way you like, but the Pats used draft picks to get Moss and Welker and had them both for some of their most productive seasons. Note: if the Pats traded away a player that was in their top 10, then these numbers might be off a little. The top 10 average for the Pats was 29.6 (using your numbers). Subtract out 2 of those 29.6 guys and add Moss' 123 rating and Welkers 88 rating. Now you have 29.6 * 8 = 237 + 123 (Moss) + 88 (Welker) and you get 460, which puts them ahead of everyone. 




    You realize those numbers are cumulative over a career, right? You want to count things Moss did as a Viking toward BB's rating? LMAO

    Are you going to do the groundwork  and track down every trade involving players and picks over those 7 years? Are you going to calculate the Branch trade and Cassel trade for example, or do you just want to cherry pick the ones that make BB look better?

    Really, your entire spin here is just silly.



    You are also counting values that the players drafted did for other teams. Example, you include Santonio Holmes as one of Pittsburghs top 10 guys, he has an AV of 44. He only played for Pittsburgh for 4 of his eight years, yet you include his entire total as a Steeler. This entire 'analysis' is flawed. Trades for players or picks are a part of building a roster. They could have just let Cassell and Branch walk as free agents. But BB knew Cassell was never taking over the QB job from Brady, so he got a very good return on his investment. He traded a guy he drafted in the 7th round and got 3 years as a backup and one year as a pretty good starter out of for a 2nd rounder (I know the washed up Vrabel was also included in that trade). That has to be considered a good move by BB. Same with Branch, he was originally a 3rd round pick. The Pats got several good seasons out of him, including  a Super Bowl MVP. He was holding out and BB was not going to pay him what Branch felt he was worth. Branch was nowhere near the player he was away from NE that he was with Brady and BB, yet BB got a first rounder for him. They could have not traded their 2nd, 4th and 7th picks in 2007 and presumably would have drafted players that would have added tot their own AV total and moved them up the list you produced.  Instead they got two of the most productive WRs in the NFL. Show me the 4th rounder who produced 50 TDs over the next 3+ seasons as Moss did. Or a 2nd and 7th combined who produced as Welker did for the last 7 years, 6 of them with the Patriots.

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

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    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.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     



    Babe you're back to your old. compare teams that pick from the top of the draft to the pats. routine again?

     

    You bring shame to the username you have chosen!

     


    You left out that the Cards pick from the top of the draft every year but the Pats pick from the bottom. Why don't you try adding the average draft position of all those teams ahead of the Pats during those years. Or better yet add up all the draft positions of all the players rated for those stats. Highest number divided by the stat wins!

    Other than that, stats are for losing teams and their fans to feel better about themselves and their team!

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

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    Here is all I need to know about this AV rating being a meaningless stat.

    Brandon Tate - 2009 3rd round pick 

    career - 38 catches 649 yards 4 TDs  

    Player AV = 11

     

    Julian Edelmann - 2009 7th round pick

    career - 174 catches 1770 yards 10 TDs

    Player AV = 10

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

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

     

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In 2007 they used their 2nd pick (plus a 7th rounder) to get Welker, and their 4th pick to get Moss. I'm guessing Moss' value for the 2007 season alone was greater than any other player in that draft, and his 3 full seasons here outdid anyone as well. And Welkers value for the 6 seasons he was here was probably as good as just about anyone chosen that year. Do your statistics include these? 

     




    Are we going to subtract picks we got for trading away players too, or is this street one way?

     

     

     



    Do the calculation any way you like, but the Pats used draft picks to get Moss and Welker and had them both for some of their most productive seasons. Note: if the Pats traded away a player that was in their top 10, then these numbers might be off a little. The top 10 average for the Pats was 29.6 (using your numbers). Subtract out 2 of those 29.6 guys and add Moss' 123 rating and Welkers 88 rating. Now you have 29.6 * 8 = 237 + 123 (Moss) + 88 (Welker) and you get 460, which puts them ahead of everyone. 

     




    You realize those numbers are cumulative over a career, right? You want to count things Moss did as a Viking toward BB's rating? LMAO

    Are you going to do the groundwork  and track down every trade involving players and picks over those 7 years? Are you going to calculate the Branch trade and Cassel trade for example, or do you just want to cherry pick the ones that make BB look better?

    Really, your entire spin here is just silly.



    You are also counting values that the players drafted did for other teams. Example, you include Santonio Holmes as one of Pittsburghs top 10 guys, he has an AV of 44. He only played for Pittsburgh for 4 of his eight years, yet you include his entire total as a Steeler. This entire 'analysis' is flawed. Trades for players or picks are a part of building a roster.



    The thread isn't about every aspect of roster building: it's about drafting. Calling an analysis about drafting flawed because it doesn't include other aspects than drafting is absurd.

    If you want to make a thread analyzing the other aspects of team building such as trading and FA signing, I'll check it out.

    This examination looks at players DRAFTED by a large number of teams over a period of time. The facts of that are readily available as opposed to the trading you are trying to inject into the conversation. Whether all players spent all their playing time on the team that drafted them is moot to the analysis. A number of BB's draftees have accumulated points with other teams. That doesn't change the fact that he drafted them.

    As I suggested, if you want to include all trades involving draft picks over that period by all teams to further scrutinize the use of draft picks, be my guest. Good luck with that.

    I'm simply resisting your attempt to include specific yet unrelated instances to bolster BB to skew the results while doing it for nobody else and not subtracting the flip side of that aspect.

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

    Re: Comparing BB's drafting to the competition.

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    Here is all I need to know about this AV rating being a meaningless stat.

    Brandon Tate - 2009 3rd round pick 

    career - 38 catches 649 yards 4 TDs  

    Player AV = 11

     

    Julian Edelmann - 2009 7th round pick

    career - 174 catches 1770 yards 10 TDs

    Player AV = 10




    I don't know where you're getting this.

    Edelman's career AV is 20, not 10.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share