In response to seattlepat70's comment:
In response to ATJ's comment:
There will always be hits and misses in the draft, both by BB and any other GM. No matter what metrics are applied in the final analysis it will come down to what the decision maker thinks. This is true in the NFL and it is true in virtually every other business decision and that's exactly what a draft selection is - a business decision. Every executive relies to one degree or another on a variety of sources in making important decisions. I know of no executive in any field anywhere who hits on every decision that he or she makes. Does that mean it wasn't the correct decision at the time the decision was made? That is not always as easy an assessment to make as it appears. What does matter is whether or not the executive is effective at what he does to the extent that his or her organization is successful. That's the way I look at the draft.
We will always be able to identify and isolate a specific decision (i.e. draft pick) that did not work out. However measuring that in isolation is, in my opinion, not a valid measure of the decision maker's effectiveness. In the specific case of BB and his draft choices, I would assert that labeling him as a 'poor drafter' because he hits on (define 'hits' and pick a percentage) 40% of his picks without an objective benchmark is akin to labeling Ted Williams a poor hitter because in 1941 he only got a base hit in 40% of his at bats. Absent context such an evaluation is devoid of any meaning. In short, cherry picking draft selections is no valid measure, IMO.
My 2 cents.
A reasonable analogy/perspective. Here is another way to look at it.
Basically the picks are currency to acquire potential assets -- i.e, the talent. BB and his team decide how much of the currency is each talent worth. Other teams do the same. The thing is, every year it seems that a lot of teams' valuation of the talent converges -- establishing a "market" value. In the first round, that market valuation is historically very good. BB seems to refuse to recognize that. Because of it, I believe he had overpaid for some of the talent acquired, and missed on some.
Or is it because the difference in draft position of 25-31 and mid 2nd round is not as great? Meaning, he feels like the talent level between those 2 areas is not as great as the money committed and the amount of extra picks he can acquire by trading down.
If we drafted in the top 15 every year, I don't think we would trade down nearly as much. The talent or interpretation of talent is a broad spectrum after the 1st 15-20 picks in most years imo.
Anyway, i don't think he refuses to recognize there is talent in the 1st round, I just think that as we go 12-4 or 13-3 on average it is prudent to trade down and acquire picks(from that draft postion) to draft guys like Rob Gronkowski and Julian Edelman etc...If BB made all his picks the last 6 years we would be missing some pretty important players, and perhaps not made any of our last 3 afc championships in a row.
Then fans would actually have something to complain about.