Charles
Benched
- Messages
- 3,408
- Reaction score
- 1
http://patriots.bostonherald.com/patriots/view.bg?articleid=193882&format=&page=2
By John Tomase
Boston Herald Sports Writer
Tuesday, April 10, 2007 - Updated: 05:36 AM EST
The Patriots [team stats] routinely confound the draft experts, who examine a need, project players to fill that need, and are then stunned when the Patriots ignore them.
Few expected them to use first-round picks to take a running back last year (Laurence Maroney [stats]), a guard in 2005 (Logan Mankins [stats]), or their second tight end in three years in 2004 (Ben Watson [stats]).
This year the belief is they’re targeting a linebacker with one of their two first-round picks because of age and a lack of depth at the position. Never mind that the Pats never have selected a linebacker on the first day, let alone in the first round, since Bill Belichick and Scott Pioli started calling the shots. The Pats need a linebacker, and a linebacker - whether it’s Mississippi’s Patrick Willis or Miami’s undersized Jon Beason - it shall be.
That actually may prove to be the case, since the Patriots are, after all, unpredictable. But their history says don’t bet on it.
Anyway, here’s a general look at some of the misconceptions and realities of the Pats’ draft philosophy, as gleaned from the seven drafts since Belichick arrived in 2000, as well as past interviews with the decision makers.
The Patriots won’t overdraft for intangibles.
There’s a rush to label someone a “Patriots kind of player” because they’re smart and work hard and assume the Pats will jump in the first round.
Their first-round picks have turned out to be high-character guys (Richard Seymour [stats], Daniel Graham [stats], Ty Warren [stats], Vince Wilfork [stats]), but first and foremost, they can play. The idea of the Patriots taking anything other than an A-1 athlete in the first round is not supported by their history.
Even Mankins, considered a reach in 2005, has turned out to be one of the most unique athletes on the team, with an ability to remain equally as aggressive in pass blocking as run blocking. He’s already a borderline All-Pro.
The time to gamble is the second round.
The cliche is that teams take a mid-round flyer on so-and-so, but the Patriots actually do most of their gambling in Round 2. Sometimes it pays off, like when they grabbed undersized Louisville wideout Deion Branch in 2002 or ignored a subpar senior season from Illinois cornerback Eugene Wilson in 2003.
Sometimes it flames out miserably, like when they rolled the dice on Texas A&M burner Bethel Johnson in 2003 or LSU behemoth Marquise Hill in 2004. The jury is still out on Chad Jackson, but he has all the tools to end up more like Branch than Johnson.
The Patriots are also aggressive here with players they believe fit their system but slid out of the first round. They traded up two spots to get tackle Matt Light [stats] in 2001, five spots each for Wilson and Johnson in 2003, and 16 spots for Jackson last year.
They do not value defense over offense.
Four of their seven first-round picks during the Belichick Era have been on offense. Same goes for 12 of their 20 picks in the top three rounds. They didn’t select a defensive player until the sixth round last year.
And yet the perception remains that Belichick’s history as a defensive mastermind means all things being equal, he’ll go defense in the draft. In our roundup of mock drafts (see graphic), all but four of the 20 picks were on defense.
Considering all the offense the Pats added through free agency and trades this winter (three WRs, RB, TE), as well as the seven picks they used on offense and special teams last year, it’s a logical assumption.
But if we’ve learned anything, it’s to assume nothing.
The Patriots do not draft for need.
This one should be obvious by now. Belichick and Pioli have mastered the art of the long view - a player who can help is a player who can help, regardless of position. Even if there’s no spot for him now, there will be eventually.
No one should be surprised if they take a tight end or a tackle, two positions that appear reasonably well stocked, over say, a safety and a linebacker, two positions that do not.
If the Pats had drafted for need, they wouldn’t have Watson or Mankins now.
Never overlook the college coaching connections.
There’s a reason Belichick likes Florida coach Urban Meyer - the two have developed enough of a relationship that Meyer knows the kind of players Belichick seeks.
Belichick and Pioli have very specific traits in mind when they draft for their system. It makes all the sense in the world that they’d want to deal with coaches who understand those traits - hence picks either from schools coached by Belichick disciples including LSU (Nick Saban) or Fresno State (Pat Hill), or situations like Florida’s, where Belichick has gotten to know Meyer.
The Patriots are on the leading edge when it comes to this approach, because it makes little sense to ask a coach if a potential draftee can play in the Patriots system if the coach doesn’t understand that system.
The Patriots like drafting at the bottom of the first round.
If there’s one quick way to hamstring a franchises’s finances, it’s by paying a top-10 pick like an established veteran superstar, and then watching him underperform.
The Pats have drafted quite well in the 20s and below without having to deal with the headache of huge contracts. Take last year’s draft. No. 10 pick Matt Leinart signed a six-year, $51 million deal with $14 million guaranteed from Arizona.
Compare that to Maroney, selected just 11 spots later, who landed a five-year, $8.735 million deal with a little over $6 million guaranteed. In the salary cap era, that’s a huge difference financially for two players who aren’t nearly that far apart in terms of ability.
The Patriots have not traded into the top 10 since Belichick arrived.
jtomase@bostonherald.com.
By John Tomase
Boston Herald Sports Writer
Tuesday, April 10, 2007 - Updated: 05:36 AM EST
The Patriots [team stats] routinely confound the draft experts, who examine a need, project players to fill that need, and are then stunned when the Patriots ignore them.
Few expected them to use first-round picks to take a running back last year (Laurence Maroney [stats]), a guard in 2005 (Logan Mankins [stats]), or their second tight end in three years in 2004 (Ben Watson [stats]).
This year the belief is they’re targeting a linebacker with one of their two first-round picks because of age and a lack of depth at the position. Never mind that the Pats never have selected a linebacker on the first day, let alone in the first round, since Bill Belichick and Scott Pioli started calling the shots. The Pats need a linebacker, and a linebacker - whether it’s Mississippi’s Patrick Willis or Miami’s undersized Jon Beason - it shall be.
That actually may prove to be the case, since the Patriots are, after all, unpredictable. But their history says don’t bet on it.
Anyway, here’s a general look at some of the misconceptions and realities of the Pats’ draft philosophy, as gleaned from the seven drafts since Belichick arrived in 2000, as well as past interviews with the decision makers.
The Patriots won’t overdraft for intangibles.
There’s a rush to label someone a “Patriots kind of player” because they’re smart and work hard and assume the Pats will jump in the first round.
Their first-round picks have turned out to be high-character guys (Richard Seymour [stats], Daniel Graham [stats], Ty Warren [stats], Vince Wilfork [stats]), but first and foremost, they can play. The idea of the Patriots taking anything other than an A-1 athlete in the first round is not supported by their history.
Even Mankins, considered a reach in 2005, has turned out to be one of the most unique athletes on the team, with an ability to remain equally as aggressive in pass blocking as run blocking. He’s already a borderline All-Pro.
The time to gamble is the second round.
The cliche is that teams take a mid-round flyer on so-and-so, but the Patriots actually do most of their gambling in Round 2. Sometimes it pays off, like when they grabbed undersized Louisville wideout Deion Branch in 2002 or ignored a subpar senior season from Illinois cornerback Eugene Wilson in 2003.
Sometimes it flames out miserably, like when they rolled the dice on Texas A&M burner Bethel Johnson in 2003 or LSU behemoth Marquise Hill in 2004. The jury is still out on Chad Jackson, but he has all the tools to end up more like Branch than Johnson.
The Patriots are also aggressive here with players they believe fit their system but slid out of the first round. They traded up two spots to get tackle Matt Light [stats] in 2001, five spots each for Wilson and Johnson in 2003, and 16 spots for Jackson last year.
They do not value defense over offense.
Four of their seven first-round picks during the Belichick Era have been on offense. Same goes for 12 of their 20 picks in the top three rounds. They didn’t select a defensive player until the sixth round last year.
And yet the perception remains that Belichick’s history as a defensive mastermind means all things being equal, he’ll go defense in the draft. In our roundup of mock drafts (see graphic), all but four of the 20 picks were on defense.
Considering all the offense the Pats added through free agency and trades this winter (three WRs, RB, TE), as well as the seven picks they used on offense and special teams last year, it’s a logical assumption.
But if we’ve learned anything, it’s to assume nothing.
The Patriots do not draft for need.
This one should be obvious by now. Belichick and Pioli have mastered the art of the long view - a player who can help is a player who can help, regardless of position. Even if there’s no spot for him now, there will be eventually.
No one should be surprised if they take a tight end or a tackle, two positions that appear reasonably well stocked, over say, a safety and a linebacker, two positions that do not.
If the Pats had drafted for need, they wouldn’t have Watson or Mankins now.
Never overlook the college coaching connections.
There’s a reason Belichick likes Florida coach Urban Meyer - the two have developed enough of a relationship that Meyer knows the kind of players Belichick seeks.
Belichick and Pioli have very specific traits in mind when they draft for their system. It makes all the sense in the world that they’d want to deal with coaches who understand those traits - hence picks either from schools coached by Belichick disciples including LSU (Nick Saban) or Fresno State (Pat Hill), or situations like Florida’s, where Belichick has gotten to know Meyer.
The Patriots are on the leading edge when it comes to this approach, because it makes little sense to ask a coach if a potential draftee can play in the Patriots system if the coach doesn’t understand that system.
The Patriots like drafting at the bottom of the first round.
If there’s one quick way to hamstring a franchises’s finances, it’s by paying a top-10 pick like an established veteran superstar, and then watching him underperform.
The Pats have drafted quite well in the 20s and below without having to deal with the headache of huge contracts. Take last year’s draft. No. 10 pick Matt Leinart signed a six-year, $51 million deal with $14 million guaranteed from Arizona.
Compare that to Maroney, selected just 11 spots later, who landed a five-year, $8.735 million deal with a little over $6 million guaranteed. In the salary cap era, that’s a huge difference financially for two players who aren’t nearly that far apart in terms of ability.
The Patriots have not traded into the top 10 since Belichick arrived.
jtomase@bostonherald.com.
