The Reach

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

    The Reach

    Many are saying NE reached, but what about Denver?  Bottomline: Teams select players they want.

    The reach. NFL personnel people like cornerback Kayvon Webster. He's confident, smart, fast (4.37 in the 40 at the combine) and a quality tackler.

    Yet even the Broncos may admit they reached slightly to snag him in the third round with the 90th pick overall. Many teams had a fourth- or fifth-round grade on him after a no-interception season in 2012 in a struggling defense at South Florida.

    But teams such as the Broncos, coming off a playoff season, always have to make a choice as they pick at the bottom of each round. Do they want to jump a little early to get the player they want, or wait and hope the player will still be there when they pick at the bottom of the next round?

    The Broncos strayed from their "don't reach" philosophy a bit with Webster, but they see him as a physical player who can contribute quickly. 

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ma6dragon9. Show ma6dragon9's posts

    Re: The Reach

    I said this on another thread:

    EVERY team reaches. Buffalo did it in the middle of the first, so what?

    I laughed when people kept typing "passed on all that talent!". You know, I would've thought the pick of Meriweather, and his abundance of 'talent' would've quieted that nonsense down. For me, I learned that lesson in 2001 when I DESPERATELY wanted a WR from Michigan...and BB took some trench warrior from Georgia named Seymour. WTH was that?! Oh, that's how you build a contender, year in and year out.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from patsbandwagonsince76. Show patsbandwagonsince76's posts

    Re: The Reach

    In response to ma6dragon9's comment:

     

    I said this on another thread:

    EVERY team reaches. Buffalo did it in the middle of the first, so what?

    I laughed when people kept typing "passed on all that talent!". You know, I would've thought the pick of Meriweather, and his abundance of 'talent' would've quieted that nonsense down. For me, I learned that lesson in 2001 when I DESPERATELY wanted a WR from Michigan...and BB took some trench warrior from Georgia named Seymour. WTH was that?! Oh, that's how you build a contender, year in and year out.



    That would be David Terrell, 5 seasons, 9 carreer TD receptions. Of course with Bledsoe probably would have had much better stats and we all might be citing him today as an exemple of a good pick. (of course Brady would have stayed a backup due to the butterfly effect.)


    Guess who got picked in between Seymour and Terell?
     in 2001?  Andre Carter

     

    (did some googling...)

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from patsbandwagonsince76. Show patsbandwagonsince76's posts

    Re: The Reach

    In response to BassFishingII's comment:

    In response to ma6dragon9's comment:

     

    I said this on another thread:

    EVERY team reaches. Buffalo did it in the middle of the first, so what?

    I laughed when people kept typing "passed on all that talent!". You know, I would've thought the pick of Meriweather, and his abundance of 'talent' would've quieted that nonsense down. For me, I learned that lesson in 2001 when I DESPERATELY wanted a WR from Michigan...and BB took some trench warrior from Georgia named Seymour. WTH was that?! Oh, that's how you build a contender, year in and year out.

     




     

    Have you noticed when it appears BB "reaches" the media coverage of it is always exaggerrated compared to any other perceived reach, though?

    It's happened two years in a row now and it seems to tie into wishful thinking of people who don't like the Pats.

    Just because Mel Kiper, a Ravens fan who has no idea why BB likes Harmon, calls it a reach, doesn't mean anything.




    This year the saying I see the most is "Since it is Bill Belichick we will give him the benfit of the doubt on that pick" ..seen this exact phrase from 3 different annalists.

    Their cool way of criticizing him now but hedging their comments so they don't look foolish in a couple years.

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from mia76. Show mia76's posts

    Re: The Reach

    Good thread - and if you look at the 'draft pick value chart' ...

    Oakland trade pick #3 to Miami for #12 and #42 so 2200 points for 1200 and 480 net loss to Oakland 520 points

    Buffalo picked Manuel at #16 who was a consensus 2nd rounder (ESPN had him rated #77) but lets use #34 so 1000 points for a player available for 560 points - net loss 440 points

    Washignton trade #18 (900) to San Fran for #31 (600) and #74 (220) so net loss of 80 point, but then they used #31 for a player rated as a top of round three or back of round two selection (ESPN had him #71) so say 270 so a second loss of 330 points for a total loss of 410 points of draft value.

    I have heard a little curfuffle over some of these moves, but a lot of - Oakland need more picks so good move, and Dallas needed OLine help and they liked him so good move, And Buffalo had to get a QB so ...what do you expect.

    And you compare that to the reactions when BB totally destroyed his whole draft when he lost his mind, drafted a nobody and threw away (or flushed) a total of 136 points of draft capital (value of pick #91.) All of these teams flushed away the equivalent of pick #50 or more.

    Now I don't live and die with draft value charts but they are generally accepted as a good indicator of importance picks and equality of trades.

    And just a note - Buffalo is listed above but their first trade #8 & #71 to St Louis for #16, 46, 78, and 222 was dead on the draft value chart 1635 to 1642.6 and that shows how dreadful the Oakland trade was - Buffalo got just about as much for their #8 pick as Oakland got for the #3 pick.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: The Reach

    Personally I think that value chart needs to be adjusted, now with he rookie wage scale having a bust isn't near the cost of what it was. Did you ever envision BB trading up in to the first round twice ?

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

    Re: The Reach

    In response to mia76's comment:

    Good thread - and if you look at the 'draft pick value chart' ...

    Oakland trade pick #3 to Miami for #12 and #42 so 2200 points for 1200 and 480 net loss to Oakland 520 points

    Buffalo picked Manuel at #16 who was a consensus 2nd rounder (ESPN had him rated #77) but lets use #34 so 1000 points for a player available for 560 points - net loss 440 points

    Washignton trade #18 (900) to San Fran for #31 (600) and #74 (220) so net loss of 80 point, but then they used #31 for a player rated as a top of round three or back of round two selection (ESPN had him #71) so say 270 so a second loss of 330 points for a total loss of 410 points of draft value.

    I have heard a little curfuffle over some of these moves, but a lot of - Oakland need more picks so good move, and Dallas needed OLine help and they liked him so good move, And Buffalo had to get a QB so ...what do you expect.

    And you compare that to the reactions when BB totally destroyed his whole draft when he lost his mind, drafted a nobody and threw away (or flushed) a total of 136 points of draft capital (value of pick #91.) All of these teams flushed away the equivalent of pick #50 or more.

    Now I don't live and die with draft value charts but they are generally accepted as a good indicator of importance picks and equality of trades.

    And just a note - Buffalo is listed above but their first trade #8 & #71 to St Louis for #16, 46, 78, and 222 was dead on the draft value chart 1635 to 1642.6 and that shows how dreadful the Oakland trade was - Buffalo got just about as much for their #8 pick as Oakland got for the #3 pick.



    Excellent post. Really like all the facts. So in the end, bb's pick was not that absurd. 

    I think bb is held to a different standard as well he should when compared to the messes like the oak lands of the world And the fact he fields a competitive team every year. 

    I liked the read this morning on dallas studying the pats and what they do. The red headed Jesus said the pats set the trend and other teams copy or mimic. if your a trend setter, you may not always be initially popular, but you only have to look as far as you W-L record to see if it works. Bb gambles and takes risks, but I always feel he has a backup plan should door 1 turn out to be a brick wall.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from mia76. Show mia76's posts

    Re: The Reach

    In response to Philskiw1's comment:

    Personally I think that value chart needs to be adjusted, now with he rookie wage scale having a bust isn't near the cost of what it was. Did you ever envision BB trading up in to the first round twice ?



    Agree, but the adjustment goes both ways - it used to be very difficult to trade out of the top 10 because the guaranteed money at that end was ridiculous. And while the financial cost has been greatly reduced, the opportunity value of those picks in terms of quality of player may have increased. I actually think the value of a top 4 or top 10 pick is now possibly understated. I think the values later are still fairly accurate.

    The value chart really hasn't change from prior to the monster contracts/monster guarantees through those times and now into the saner world of the rookie cap. So it might actually be back to being more accurate.

    I think the biggest problem is the variation of value at the very top. If there is a QB like Luck or RGIII the numbers are to low, if the top is beef (OL and DL) then the numbers are a bit high. Picks 1, 2, 4 were all very highly rated LTs in almost a 'pick em' grading - but the value for pick #1 is 3000 and for #4 is 1800

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: The Reach

    In response to Philskiw1's comment:

    Personally I think that value chart needs to be adjusted, now with he rookie wage scale having a bust isn't near the cost of what it was. Did you ever envision BB trading up in to the first round twice ?




    Forget the whole value chart nonsense!  Does it even work anymore?  What ever happened to drafting the best available person for the biggest need and work down the list of needs? Smile

     
  11. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The Reach

    Good thread, guys.  Really interesting, factually based read with some well-grounded perspective.  Thanks.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from sportsbozo1. Show sportsbozo1's posts

    Re: The Reach

    How can one person with basically no knowledge of a teams perceived needs within an organization determine what a reach is? In the case of New Englands needs before the draft here at BDC.com we all discussed what we thought were the needs of the team, and pretty much we all had differring opinions,some said DT but i thought that with the signing of Tommy Kelly that the Patriots had filled that need,then comes WR I agreed wholeheartedly however I saw the biggest need infinding a guy who could cover receivers in the short areas from the linebacking position and I think they got the guy they were looking for in Jamie Collins he wasn't the guy I had rated number 1 as I liked Alec Ogletree and Kiko Alonzo but he is a very good player and BB does know a heck of alot more than I do,especially the needs of his team!! He did address the other needs at WR and DBackfield and in UDFA's he added three DT's with varying degrees of skill level. So in all he grabbed the players that best fit his teams needs from his perspective. Each year we all want player X and BB drafts player Y they are both similar but because we wanted X BB is the idiot for taking Y. Like I've said before there are a bunch of different reasons why a player is drafted by BB and his formula is different then most other teams formulas. Double dipping at positions of need is one of his ideas as to how to get it right, grabbing multiple player from the same college is another of his ideas for keeping continuity amongst his players for obvious reasons. We all knew we needed a group of WR's he didn't run out and draft the beauty queen he drafted the guys he thought would fit the teams needs. Cripes he even brought in two more TE's just because of Gronk and Hernandez's offseason setbacks. Both the guys that he brought in to compete are just pieces but they both were leaders on their respective college teams and both could open up the defenses downfiled, Sudfield and Ford caught between them 93 passes last season and 17 TDs! These are UDFA's? They sound more like the guys that could have been drafted....

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

    Re: The Reach

    The Vikings "reached" with all three of their 1st round picks, but because they chose in the first round the pundits and meatballs here think they did great.  

    This is the same team that reached to take Christian Ponder with the 12th pick in the first round, this year they get A+ draft grades and years of mediocrity to look forward to, the Pats will keep on winning...

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

    Re: The Reach

    In response to jjdbrasil's comment:

    Many are saying NE reached, but what about Denver?  Bottomline: Teams select players they want.

    The reach. NFL personnel people like cornerback Kayvon Webster. He's confident, smart, fast (4.37 in the 40 at the combine) and a quality tackler.

    Yet even the Broncos may admit they reached slightly to snag him in the third round with the 90th pick overall. Many teams had a fourth- or fifth-round grade on him after a no-interception season in 2012 in a struggling defense at South Florida.

    But teams such as the Broncos, coming off a playoff season, always have to make a choice as they pick at the bottom of each round. Do they want to jump a little early to get the player they want, or wait and hope the player will still be there when they pick at the bottom of the next round?

    The Broncos strayed from their "don't reach" philosophy a bit with Webster, but they see him as a physical player who can contribute quickly. 


    Read more: Broncos' draft Class of 2013: A pick-by-pick look - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_23134422/pick-by-pick-look-at-broncos-draft-class#ixzz2Rze1gIqo




    Good thread. On the same topic, The anti BB guys don't understand that when a team wins as much as we do, it is difficult for draft picks to stick. If all of our 2nd and 3rd rd players "stuck" for the past 5 years then who's spots would they take? Our team is made up primarily of 1st and 2nd rd talent top to bottom. I understand the defensive statistics on passing yards allowed could be better but that doesn't mean we don't have atalented roster.  We have won more games then any team in the LG for 13 years running. 5 SB's and 7 damn AFC championship games.

    We only have a 53 man roster, is it possible that we may be drafting good players but there is just no room for them to develop on what is already a championship caliber roster? I say absolutely yes.

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

    Re: The Reach

    You've got to remember we didn't have a 5th or 6th round pick this year. And we already drafted the deep threat WR in Dobson. So Belichick wanted to make sure he got his guy and didn't want to chance him still being around in the 7th round. I will bet if we had a 5th or 6th this year he would have taken him in one of those rounds and there is no controversy.

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from mia76. Show mia76's posts

    Re: The Reach

    I agree with the 'questioning' of the draft value chart, but it is the standard everyone uses to evaluate trades and the relative value of picks. And it has always 'been out of whack' - because the universe has changed first with top10 picks become incredibly expensive (it was created before the $50M all guaranteed era) and now because of the rookie cap. And it never took into account the actual talent available in a given year.

    Another issue was the number of picks - I checked and based on the chart Pick #12 is worth more that all seven of the 29th picks in each round combined. But having 7 picks is clearly worth more than having a single pick no matter how good (possible exception is an absolutely guaranteed franchise QB, a very rare thing)

    But - all the talking heads and most of the fans used the Value chart to justify pans and praise. But they ignore the value chart when doing the same over mid/late round picks. Based on the value chart if you get your pick in the first round dead on, anything else you do in the draft doesn't matter. And based on history, a very small number of third and fourth round picks EVER make a meaningful difference to any team.

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

    Re: The Reach

    People considered Vollmer a reach as well. I think that turned out ok.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: The Reach

    In response to TFB12's comment:

    In response to Philskiw1's comment:

     

    Personally I think that value chart needs to be adjusted, now with he rookie wage scale having a bust isn't near the cost of what it was. Did you ever envision BB trading up in to the first round twice ?

     




    Forget the whole value chart nonsense!  Does it even work anymore?  What ever happened to drafting the best available person for the biggest need and work down the list of needs? Smile

     



    No it does not. The value charts will reflect the values as determined by several drafts after the rookie scale is implemented. First tier picks will get geometrically more expensive than the rest of the class. From second tier on values will decline more slowly. It may take 5 drafts though.

     

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The Reach

    Just wanted to add this blog article analyzing the Harmon pick comparing him to other safeties.  The other comment that I thought relevant was that NE builds its draft board independently not relying on mainstream sources. Decent read.

    http://davebreaksdownfilm.blogspot.com.br/

     

     
  23. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The Reach

    Very helpful link jjdbrasil; thanks for posting it.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from ma6dragon9. Show ma6dragon9's posts

    Re: The Reach

    Just wanted to mention that this thread was great. It never got 'polluted' and people were able to bounce different ideas around without anyone taking offense.

    Too rare around here these days.

    dfitzp - EXCELLENT point about the lack of 5/6th rounders. That's exactly what I thought. He wanted the guy, he got him...rather than hope to steal him in the 7th only to have someone take him in the 6th...then you're left with a player you didn't want as much.

    And Bass - Yes, I absolutely notice that. BB has long hated ESPN, and the feeling is certainly mutual at this point. BB doesn't pay tribute to the high and mighty ESPN, and they can't take that. "F you Tom Jackson" sums it up pretty well.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share