Belichick Advised Dimitroff to Not Trade Up for Julio Jones

[auburnbillsbacker]

I don't get why he asked for his advice and then did the opposite anyways. Nevertheless, turned out to be the right move of course

I'm sure he got advice from several people and made a decision after considering all opinions.

[Gordio]

Whaley's copying of the Julio trade up did not make any sense. Not because Watkins is not a great player when healthy. Watkins is great but does not have the size to ascend to the game changing physical force level of a Julio or Calvin Johnson. Only a great receiver who can also be a physically dominant force is worth that kind of value.

 

 

I said this exact same thing when they made the trade. I said Watkins is a terrific talent but if you think you are getting Calvin Johnson, Fitz or JJ your going to be sorely disappointed. Watkins does not have the physical build as those guys do.

[TheFunPolice]

Now Julio Jones is going to REALLY TRY in the Super Bowl!

[atlbillsfan1975]

Now Julio Jones is going to REALLY TRY in the Super Bowl!

I am sensing some sarcasm here. Julio is a gamer, i am sure he already knows about this.

 

I do think it is a little premature to draft the great WR without a true NFL caliber passing QB. See what the Lions did during the 90's and into the 2000's. Which does not apply here because Ryan is a good to great QB.

Edited January 26, 2017 by atlbillsfan1975

[Mr. WEO]

 

I know that's a popular viewpoint here - KTD says the same about Sammy - but I disagree with it as a team-building approach. Yes, you need to collect star players. But no, you can't do so without considering the limited draft and cap resources you have, and the overall context of your roster. You also have to consider the value of the player in the context of the talent pool available at the time; BB wrongly believed there were other comparable options at WR in that draft (he was wrong); some of us rightly believed that the talent that Sammy possessed wasn't sufficiently unique considering the depth of receiver talent in that draft (OBJ, Evans, etc.) - we may have been right.

 

Scouting is about acquiring talent.

 

Team-building is about collecting the right talent at the right time, using the right amount of resources.

 

Doug Whaley is a good scout. He is a horrible team-builder.

 

If the Falcons made that trade without already having Matt Ryan on their roster, it would've gone from incredibly expensive to downright idiotic. See: Sammy Watkins.

 

 

Except in regard to QB and TE in particular.

[TheFunPolice]

Julio is great but he better not injure himself in practice like members of the Seahawks did right before the SB when NE won last time.

[PatsFanNH]

WR is an area of weakness for BB in the draft. Whether they have been high or low picks they are almost always misses.

Agreed. But, BB's eye for WR talent is poor in the draft. And, you can't argue BB doesn't value WRs in the draft because he fills those spots with FAs. The reason you can't argue that is because BB has swung and missed on WRs in rounds one, two and three and he wouldn't have picked WRs there if he didn't value the position there.

 

Anywho, BB is great and you can't be great at everything. Not bashing him, just saying it's not a strength of his.

He is not a great evaluator of WR I agree, but he has made a few hits in the draft. (Seeing the potential in Edelman to be a good WR in the 6th, Gibbons in the 7th, and SB MVP Branch I want say in the 2nd.) I don't think he has ever drafted a WR in the 1st though. At least I don't recall it.

[GunnerBill]

I don't think he has ever drafted a WR in the 1st though. At least I don't recall it.

He hasn't. A lot of 2nd and 3rd round picks but never a 1st.

 

I think you do have to consider though that it is difficult for any other team to "devalue" the WR position quite as much in their offense.

 

Devalue probably isn't the right word but what I mean is Belichick and Brady run an offense that is difficult for anyone else - even the teams with other elite QBs to run so they are naturally looking for different skill sets to other teams at the WR position. That allows them to let the bun fight over Julio and AJ Green and Watkins etc happen and then take a guy with a skill set that would not fit what those teams are looking for 2 or 3 rounds later.

[PatsFanNH]

He hasn't. A lot of 2nd and 3rd round picks but never a 1st.

 

I think you do have to consider though that it is difficult for any other team to "devalue" the WR position quite as much in their offense.

 

Devalue probably isn't the right word but what I mean is Belichick and Brady run an offense that is difficult for anyone else - even the teams with other elite QBs to run so they are naturally looking for different skill sets to other teams at the WR position. That allows them to let the bun fight over Julio and AJ Green and Watkins etc happen and then take a guy with a skill set that would not fit what those teams are looking for 2 or 3 rounds later.

I agree with everything you said there. (If there was a like. Turin I would have clicked it)

[NoSaint]

 

Yep. I repeat this ad infinitum on this forum. It comes down to talent evaluation first and foremost. You can have all these rules about:

 

- trade up for this

- don't trade up for that

- don't pay this position more than $xm

- don't sign this type of player in FA

 

etc, etc, etc..... but if it was as simple as following 6 or 7 standard rules to build a franchise then everyone would be doing it. It isn't. It comes down to evaluating talent first and foremost. You can have a set of principles you use to underpin your strategy but if you are not getting your evaluations right they don't help you and if you are going to tie yourself too rigidly to them you will handcuff yourself.

 

Evaluate talent, do it well, trust your evaluations.

Perhaps better in smaller teams or more individualized sports. It there are many that would argue that if they are the right rules you will still come out ahead following them and getting reliable returns instead of chasing the winning lotto ticket. That the constant evaluation and perfecting of the 6 (or however many) rules will pay off as more than trusting the gut. If structured properly, someone that blows up your curve should be an option still with a strong philosophy underpinning everything. Edited January 27, 2017 by NoSaint

[GunnerBill]

Perhaps better in smaller teams or more individualized sports. It there are many that would argue that if they are the right rules you will still come out ahead following them and getting reliable returns instead of chasing the winning lotto ticket. That the constant evaluation and perfecting of the 6 (or however many) rules will pay off as more than trusting the gut. If structured properly, someone that blows up your curve should be an option still with a strong philosophy underpinning everything.

 

I don't really disagree with this. I think you should absolutely have a philosophy underpinning your decisions otherwise it is just random darts being thrown but you should also trust your evaluations. Your philosophy should be a guide not something you handcuff yourself too. Say I am sitting there this year with the 10th pick. I have what I am going to refer to as the Badol guide for the positions you should be looking to pick with first rounders (and I agree with him by the way) but my top 2 or 3 pass rushers are gone, my top 2 Quarterbacks are gone, my top 2 corners are gone and my top 2 receivers are gone. That leaves me sitting there with Foster and Hooker as the stand out BPAs on my board and they are multiple points higher than my next ranked player at a priority position. It is easy to say "don't pick trade back" but I think you have to trust your evaluations. If you think those 2 guys are so much better than everything else on your board then you should trust your evaluations and pick them.

 

I am not saying either will be there at #10 or that the gap is as big as I am portraying it in my scenario.... or even that I would love either of those picks (I probably wouldn't) but I just use that scenario as an example.

 

You can't treat trading up for Julio Jones like trading up for any other round 1 receiver if you have him rated so far ahead of any other receiver in that year or years prior.

 

 

EDIT: I can already presuppose the answer to this will be "you can make a case for going away from your principles every year" my answer would be if you are doing that your evaluations are probably wrong... those special cases - trading for Julio, picking Luke Kuechly in the top 10 do not exist every year.

Edited January 27, 2017 by GunnerBill

[NoSaint]

 

I don't really disagree with this. I think you should absolutely have a philosophy underpinning your decisions otherwise it is just random darts being thrown but you should also trust your evaluations. Your philosophy should be a guide not something you handcuff yourself too. Say I am sitting there this year with the 10th pick. I have what I am going to refer to as the Badol guide for the positions you should be looking to pick with first rounders (and I agree with him by the way) but my top 2 or 3 pass rushers are gone, my top 2 Quarterbacks are gone, my top 2 corners are gone and my top 2 receivers are gone. That leaves me sitting there with Foster and Hooker as the stand out BPAs on my board and they are multiple points higher than my next ranked player at a priority position. It is easy to say "don't pick trade back" but I think you have to trust your evaluations. If you think those 2 guys are so much better than everything else on your board then you should trust your evaluations and pick them.

 

I am not saying either will be there at #10 or that the gap is as big as I am portraying it in my scenario.... or even that I would love either of those picks (I probably wouldn't) but I just use that scenario as an example.

 

You can't treat trading up for Julio Jones like trading up for any other round 1 receiver if you have him rated so far ahead of any other receiver in that year or years prior.

 

 

EDIT: I can already presuppose the answer to this will be "you can make a case for going away from your principles every year" my answer would be if you are doing that your evaluations are probably wrong... those special cases - trading for Julio, picking Luke Kuechly in the top 10 do not exist every year.

 

i could see you falling for exceptions regularly -- but the direction i would actually go is that one would hope your "rules" would have some sort of accounting for that.

 

in the bellichek case they seem to try to find where those talent cliffs (where those large drops are that DE2 and DE3 are similar but DE4 gets a much lower grade) and target DE3 closely behind 2 coming off the board if you need the position, and its a spot where value makes sense.

 

if you have set up for various scenarios well, you can be less emotional and more analytical in the pick. football being SO many positions and hard to grade guys in a vacuum though makes it hard compared to baseball and basketball though so the "rules" may be more "guides" but if you keep refining in evaluation things and extra data points through the years i imagine you can minimize the impacts of the human

[QCity]

The Patriot Way: Do You Want to Win a Super Bowl or Not?

 

Belichick would never give a RB like Shady $40M, he'd find a guy that gets 75% of his production for 10% of that price. Trading up in the 1st for a WR? Never happen.

[PatsFanNH]

The Patriot Way: Do You Want to Win a Super Bowl or Not?

 

Belichick would never give a RB like Shady $40M, he'd find a guy that gets 75% of his production for 10% of that price. Trading up in the 1st for a WR? Never happen.

As someone earlier said, when you have not only a Franchise QB but a HOF lock QB it makes it a lot easier to do. In the Patriots O I bet Shady would get almost 2k total yards between carries and receptions And stillnwouldnt be the focal point of the O.

[GunnerBill]

if you have set up for various scenarios well, you can be less emotional and more analytical in the pick. football being SO many positions and hard to grade guys in a vacuum though makes it hard compared to baseball and basketball though so the "rules" may be more "guides" but if you keep refining in evaluation things and extra data points through the years i imagine you can minimize the impacts of the human

 

Exactly. Which means you are doing your evaluations well and can trust in them. Evaluations are about much more than the human element "does this guy pass the eye test?". If you are evaluating right you are building the analytics in.

As someone earlier said, when you have not only a Franchise QB but a HOF lock QB it makes it a lot easier to do. In the Patriots O I bet Shady would get almost 2k total yards between carries and receptions And stillnwouldnt be the focal point of the O.

 

This.

 

If you remember Bill's mentor Parcells paid big cash to Curtis Martin. I know it was a different era, but the idea that Belichick finds running backs off the scrapheap for fun has to be seen in the prism of the offense he and Brady are able to run.

 

I actually think Belichick is that good that if you took Brady a way and he didn't have a franchise QB he'd adjust his principles around relative draft values and positional importance. He understands football and if he has to go build an immense run blocking line and let a Blount or someone pound it in there 30 times a game he'll do that and pay accordingly.

[PatsFanNH]

 

Exactly. Which means you are doing your evaluations well and can trust in them. Evaluations are about much more than the human element "does this guy pass the eye test?". If you are evaluating right you are building the analytics in.

 

 

This.

 

If you remember Bill's mentor Parcells paid big cash to Curtis Martin. I know it was a different era, but the idea that Belichick finds running backs off the scrapheap for fun has to be seen in the prism of the offense he and Brady are able to run.

 

I actually think Belichick is that good that if you took Brady a way and he didn't have a franchise QB he'd adjust his principles around relative draft values and positional importance. He understands football and if he has to go build an immense run blocking line and let a Blount or someone pound it in there 30 times a game he'll do that and pay accordingly.

He actually did that in 2001. It was run, rin, pass punt and let the D stop the other teams O. Brady wasn't Brady till 2003 or 2004 season.

[GunnerBill]

He actually did that in 2001. It was run, rin, pass punt and let the D stop the other teams O. Brady wasn't Brady till 2003 or 2004 season.

 

True

[hondo in seattle]

if you're questioning whether belichick is the greatest football mind of all time, you're wrong.

 

I still think Bill Walsh needs to be in that conversation. As I recall... He transformed a 2-14 into a Super Bowl winner. He won 3 SBs as head coach. The staff and team he built won 2 more SBs after Bill retired from the HC position but stayed on with the 49ers.

The Patriot Way: Do You Want to Win a Super Bowl or Not?

 

Belichick would never give a RB like Shady $40M, he'd find a guy that gets 75% of his production for 10% of that price. Trading up in the 1st for a WR? Never happen.

 

This is true. But isn't it partly true because the Pats have so much money invested in their passing game? Brady earns a big paycheck and even Hogan's something like the 8th highest paid player on the team. Then there's Gronk, etc.

Edited January 27, 2017 by hondo in seattle

[PatsFanNH]

 

I still think Bill Walsh needs to be in that conversation. As I recall... He transformed a 2-14 into a Super Bowl winner. He won 3 SBs as head coach. The staff and team he built won 2 more SBs after Bill retired from the HC position but stayed on with the 49ers.

 

 

This is true. But isn't it partly true because the Pats have so much money invested in their passing game? Brady earns a big paycheck and even Hogan's something like the 8th highest paid player on the team. Then there's Gronk, etc.

The fact that Hogan is the 6th highest paid player tells you they don't over pay on O either. Gronk is on what most consider a "steal" of a contract and Brady makes a lot less than most other Franchise QBs.