Re: gasoline to the
posted at 10/31/2013 8:03 PM EDT
In response to pcmIV's comment:
Pezz: I looked up the source of that graph you posted about the 2006 draft. It uses pro football reference's career AV statistic to gauge a player's value.
I don't think anyone denies that the 2006 draft was bad. 2007 was below par as well, but was slightly made up for by the acquisitions of Moss and Welker.
Since 2008 the players the Patriots have drafted rank 4th in the NFL in total AV. They are 1st in the NFL in both combined pro bowls and the first team all pro teams.
Since 2010 the players the Patriots have drafted rank 1st in the NFL in total AV. They are 2nd in the NFL in combined pro bowls and 1st in combined first team all pro teams.
In addition there have been multiple analyses posted on this board that demonstrate that in BB's full tenure the Patriots rank highly in the NFL in terms of total AV drafted and pro bowls and all-pro teams.
That is hardly bottom tier drafting. Particularly when you consider that the Patriots haven't had the benefit of high draft picks because of their consistent winning. Learn the game.
Actually you are wrong.
I clearly posted a ROI chart (return on investment) not an AVE (value above expectation chart) They are entirely different.
ROI simply means, are your picks performing to expectation. In the case of the Pats 2006-9, the Answer is a resounding NO!
It is possible to be rated highly in both comparisons but not entirely true. Tom Brady rates higher in ROI than he does in AVE, although high in both.
One measure is the longevity of the player and what he contributed for the duration and where he is picked in the draft. high round player underachieving rated low and low round player overachieving, rated high. RETURN ON INVESTMENT
For example; Tom Brady rated best in ROI(all time) due to his draft position, longevity and contribution since 2001. OVERACHIEVER
Chad Jackson is rated an F because he had no longevity, or contribution. UNDERACHIEVER
Underachievers need to be replaced, overachievers don't. Not for a long time.
I'm not even talking about super stars, just 1st round picks playing like first round picks, ect.
The team as a whole has not rated highly because high draft picks are not playing to their expectation. Unfortunately there are many more underachievers and you have to go to late picks and UDFA's to find overachievers. There are a few... Sey, wilfork, maybe mayo but the vast majority of (mostly second round picks) are not good picks.
You want your meat and potatoes to stick around a little bit. 2 and 3 year marginal starters don't cut it. The average longevity for top ROI players is 10.5 years, not 2 years and a bunch of dead money and several replacements until you get it right.
Players like Gronk, Jones and all the others in the drafts 2010-12 are yet to be determined.
They may currently rate high in AVE but the problem is, would you give Gronk the same high ranking now, compared to 2010/11? How bout hernandez?
Do you not believe that high draft picks, under performing or busting is a problem?
And I really don't give a flip how the gm rates to other GM's. I care how he improves this team or not. There is obviously room for improvement, especially when you have the reigning ROI of all times on your team.
2007-10, bad defensive drafts='s 2010-2012 bad defense. Those bad drafts catch up to you.
That's the only measure that makes sense.