Pats waisting draft picks in trades

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

    Pats waisting draft picks in trades

    It made me mad today when I saw that the patriots released Prescott Burgess just six days after trading a seventh rounder for him.  I didnt expect him to play that much but I thought that he would last at least a week.  It seems like it is a new trend for the patriots to trade for a player and then release him.  they did the same thing with Alex Smith and Greg Lewis.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from laterdays20. Show laterdays20's posts

    Re: Pats waisting draft picks in trades

    this one is different from the other ones, the pic for burgess was conditional, which means the pats get that pick back, he had to be on the active roster for a certain amount of time. just to clear that up
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Paul_K. Show Paul_K's posts

    Re: Pats waisting draft picks in trades

    In general, sometimes a successful NFL team manager has to be courageous with those pennies and nickels.  BB got some dink and dunk guy named Tom Brady with a sixth rounder and "never played a game" Matt Cassel with a seventh rounder.  Wide receiver Julian Edelman was a seventh rounder who had never played as a WR.  Steve Neal came to the Patriots undrafted and had never played football in his life. 

    More to the point, Jabar Gaffney was speed-dialed and picked up in midseason, and he worked out fine.

    Anyways, BB got his seventh rounder back, and the Patriots payed about one game's pay to P. Burgess.  Cheap!
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Pats waisting draft picks in trades

    Smith and Lewis was BS... plus trading 5th rounders for Hobbs... here's an idea.. just keep Hobbs, David Thomas and Jabar Gaffney and have an extra pick, a kick returner/4th-5th CB, a 3rd string TE better than the nothing we have behind Watson/Baker and a veteran WR who knows our system better than Galloway and wasn't dumped like Lewis
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from artielang. Show artielang's posts

    Re: Pats waisting draft picks in trades

    scouting for next sunday's game, thats it.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from earlWilson. Show earlWilson's posts

    Re: Pats waisting draft picks in trades

    In Response to Pats waisting draft picks in trades:
    [QUOTE]It made me mad today when I saw that the patriots released Prescott Burgess just six days after trading a seventh rounder for him.  I didnt expect him to play that much but I thought that he would last at least a week.  It seems like it is a new trend for the patriots to trade for a player and then release him.  they did the same thing with Alex Smith and Greg Lewis .
    Posted by nickelbean[/QUOTE]

    HEY  BEANBRAIN...stop all this sophomoric nonsense about losing picks that we ain`t gonna lose. if you want to read a  really good thread that has some INSIGHT...read " BELICHICKS ONLY HOPE". i wrote it on september 15, and yesterday it was executed with precision by brady and belichick.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from LazarusintheSanatorium. Show LazarusintheSanatorium's posts

    Re: Pats waisting draft picks in trades

    In Response to Re: Pats waisting draft picks in trades:
    [QUOTE]Smith and Lewis was BS... plus trading 5th rounders for Hobbs... here's an idea.. just keep Hobbs, David Thomas and Jabar Gaffney and have an extra pick, a kick returner/4th-5th CB, a 3rd string TE better than the nothing we have behind Watson/Baker and a veteran WR who knows our system better than Galloway and wasn't dumped like Lewis
    Posted by rameakap[/QUOTE]

    rameakap and ALL:

    Hobbes was our best CB at the time, and he (I believe) was in a contract year and...well, got burned on most every series he was out there (good KR though, BUT we have MULTIPLE young CBs and WRs and a guy, now on the IR we drafted solely to return kicks, waiting in the wings); Thomas showed flashes of great hands as a rook (but never did nor would ever have the size to be even a decent TE blocker...so that means he was a 3rd down "obvious-to ALL" pass-catching option-save for multiple TE sets)- Then along with EVERY other pic in '05, took up space on the IR for...well, years; Gafney, I liked, BUT at the time, left for a decent sized payday that we at that point couldn't trump for a #2 wideout (but he was Brady's #3 Target)-who dropped MANY key passes over his tenure with the team (including a sure-fire one at Indy which would have given us a playoff birth)....

    Look guys, Getting a Tom Brady or a Matt Cassel with later 6th and 7th rd picks are much, Much more the exception rather than the norm (these are guys that BB and Co. should take credit for "coaching up" more than they should for having some sort of a "elite pedigree" in College before they came to N.E.)... 

    A Few Extra Points here:  Pats have a deep roster of Vets, so It's next to impossible for these later rd picks to make the team as it is... Pats have MULTIPLE 1st and 2nd rd picks (these are the one's Belichick seems to "hit on", at least the 1st rders, most often), so there's going to be an even MORE limited number of spots for the Later Rd guys than there was in the first place... Finally, BB's drafting prowess hasn't been what it was earlier in his time with the team (or at least, again, what it is with that 1st pick or 2), so since the Pats haven't been hitting these days on 4th/5th rders, WhoTHeck cares about 6th/7th rd guys?!? 

    Overall, I'm glad Belichick takes the time to nit-pick EVERY NFL squad for guys that are riding that team's bench, No-name Vets that the Patriots just might be able to utilize and develop better than the team they're currently on (rather than the usual "no-name" rookies EVERY Fan, including MOST Coaches and GMs, well-wish and pipe dream their teams around come draft time)... 

    In the end, IF You need more convincing, ask yourself this: "Would I rather gush over the 'potential' of a 6th or 7th rd College Rookie next year that'll take 2-3 years of physical development (to get on par with most NFL players), 2-3 years to develop mentally and digest a Belichick Defense/ and/or extremely Complex Offense, And 2-3 years to move up the depth chart (barring multiple injuries) on a team knee deep in Veterans," OR "Would I rather have a Better Chance of Celebrating the Lombardi being brought home to New England THIS year, by POTENTIALLY losing the last pick or 2 in next year's draft ("Potentially", because these have been 'conditional picks' which warrant these Vets for draft trades, seeing action in games/staying on the team)?"

    Thoughts ANYONE
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from ROWDYRODRUST. Show ROWDYRODRUST's posts

    Re: Pats waisting draft picks in trades

    Laz, I like where your head is at.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Pats waisting draft picks in trades

    Hmmm

    well Laz I'd rather have Hobbs, Thomas, Gaffney and a pick than Galloway and NOTHING... so if their performances were worse than I described so be it, i stand by what I said
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mungomunro. Show Mungomunro's posts

    Re: Pats waisting draft picks in trades

       Those players where cut because they didn't give the Patriots the best chance of winning.

     Since we keep winning, I'd say BB is doing a great job with all his roster moves.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from WCPatsFan. Show WCPatsFan's posts

    Re: Pats waisting draft picks in trades

    waisting?
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from BrooklineRob. Show BrooklineRob's posts

    Re: Pats waisting draft picks in trades

    I agree that the Pats seem much more willing to to part with their draft picks these days.  Maybe it's a change is philosophy from Pioli to Cesario, and maybe BB lets Cesario operate in the personnel realm while he coaches.  It seemed that the Pats used to hoard their draft picks in order to move up and get the guys they were targeting in the draft.  That strategy worked sometimes (Dan Graham, Eugene Wilson(?) & others), but it failed on occasion too (Chad Jackson).  They have also had some good success using draft picks to leverage vets (Moss and Welker anyone?).      

    I know Prescott Burgess was conditional, but Smith, Lewis and the D. Burgess seem to be questionable transactions, esp. when the guys they were replacing seemed to be decent (Vrabel, Gaffney, Thomas).  I think a lot of this has to do with getting 90% of the player for 50% of the $.  Plus, roster turnover is inevitable and I'm sure Bill knows who is worth their salary.   
     

Share