Nice discussion of the rookies from Scout.com (public article) - New England Patriots Forums

***JSn*** · 06-25-2009, 12:48 PM

Scout.com: Chung Is Good, But Not As Good As...

Nice long article/interview.

Excerpt:

Quote:

New England traded out of the first round after having ample opportunity to land an impact player at linebacker. One of those targets could have been Clay Matthews, who the Packers selected with the pick they acquired from New England. What kind of impact do you expect Matthews to have in Green Bay and would he have been a good fit in Foxboro?

SW: I think Clay Matthews would have been a great pick for New England in round one and I look for him to excel in the Packers new 3-4 defense. I was surprised to see the Patriots basically ignore the outside linebacker position in this draft but that just tells me they have a ton of confidence in Pierre Woods and Shawn Crable.

***ctpatsfan77*** · 06-25-2009, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSn

Scout.com: Chung Is Good, But Not As Good As...

Nice long article/interview.

Excerpt:

Then again, he has his quota of FAIL, too:

Quote:

When Bill Belichick was unable to land Pat White earlier in the draft he took a flyer on Edelman later.

Because he only passed on White, you know, three times before the LOLphins drafted him. . . .

***Mike the Brit*** · 06-25-2009, 02:49 PM

Wasn't that impressed. This guy seems to be one of those who thinks that a team's draft picks should be judged by how someone compares to the draftniks' ratings of where they "ought" to go (rather than having anything substantive to say about their particular talents and limitations). For example, he has very little to say about how good Sanchez is, but a lot to say about how (relatively) little the Jets had to pay to get him. But if Mangini really wants those players, why not?

PatsBoy12 · 06-25-2009, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike the Brit

Wasn't that impressed. This guy seems to be one of those who thinks that a team's draft picks should be judged by how someone compares to the draftniks' ratings of where they "ought" to go (rather than having anything substantive to say about their particular talents and limitations). For example, he has very little to say about how good Sanchez is, but a lot to say about how (relatively) little the Jets had to pay to get him. But if Mangini really wants those players, why not?

Um, Mangini doesn't coach the Jets anymore.

PatsChamp88 · 06-25-2009, 03:26 PM

Sub-par article at best, rehashing post-draft articles/analysis. Since we missed (passed?) on Pat White, Louis Delmas and Clay Matthews he feels the Patriots draft wasn't successful?

***Mike the Brit*** · 06-25-2009, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatsBoy12

Um, Mangini doesn't coach the Jets anymore.

But Mangini traded with the Jets to bring players to the Browns in return for the pick which the Jets used on Sanchez ...

HEY BRO! WHAT UP? · 06-25-2009, 03:52 PM

Quote:

I was surprised to see the Patriots basically ignore the outside linebacker position in this draft but that just tells me they have a ton of confidence in Pierre Woods and Shawn Crable.

It's either they have confidence in these two or the Pats just don't get it when it comes to LB's. Nobody will ever know why the Pats continue to ignore the glaring need at LB with the exception of drafting Jerod Mayo and Shawn Crable in 2008. In fact, the Pats have only drafted a LB in the 1st and 3rd round once since BB took over.

Quote:

SW: Patrick Chung was projected to be an early-to-mid second rounder so he was a good value at #34, although the Patriots just missed out on a much better player when Louis Delmas was selected one spot earlier (by the Lions).

I don't agree with this. First, not only is Chung bigger than Delmas, but he is a better hitter as well. Second, although Delmas might be a better cover guy than Chung, the Pats already have one of those in Merriweather. What the Pats desperately needed was a safety that can make plays with his hitting ability and the ability to play as a 8th guy in the box (think Bob Sanders). In the end, we will never know who the Pats would have taken if they had the choice between the two. However, because the Pats already have the "center fielder" in Merriweather, I'd take the hitter.

Quote:

SW: Ron Brace is a prototypical 3-4 nose tackle but he's no Vince Wilfork. There is no doubt in my mind that Brace was selected not only to provide depth but also as an insurance policy in case they can't re-sign Wilfork. With that said I think they will do everything in their power to hold onto Wilfork because he is arguably the most important player on that defense.

With Wilfork in the lineup, the Pats run defense was not that great last season allowing 106 yards per game. In 2007, teams wouldn't even attempt to run the football against the Pats because they were down by so much. However, their run defense was pretty solid in 2006 allowing only 94 yards per game. Lastly, in Wilfork's first year as a full time starter in 2005, the run defense really struggled until late into the season. In conclusion, the Pats run defense has been good consistently for 2 out of the last 4 seasons with Wilfork as a starting NT.

So this could mean one of two things. First, the Pats run defense has struggled because their LB's are really that slow and are unable to fill the gaps in time. Or, Wilfork and their entire D-line are overrated.

So what am I trying to say? I'm saying that if Brace is able to show anything that gives the Pats coaching staff confidence he can be a full time starter, Wilfork is gone. If there's a big time stud pass rushing LB available in FA in 2010, I would imagine the Pats finally addressing that.

bunzoburns · 06-25-2009, 04:09 PM

What are Scott Wight's credentials and why should I give a sh*t about his analysis?

***N.Eman*** · 06-25-2009, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatsBoy12

Um, Mangini doesn't coach the Jets anymore.

HAHA thats the second time i've seen people say Mangina is still with the Jets. We still hate the Rats , only now its Ryan.

AzPatsFan · 06-25-2009, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HEY BRO! WHAT UP?

It's either they have confidence in these two or the Pats just don't get it when it comes to LB's. Nobody will ever know why the Pats continue to ignore the glaring need at LB with the exception of drafting Jerod Mayo and Shawn Crable in 2008. In fact, the Pats have only drafted a LB in the 1st and 3rd round once since BB took over.

I don't agree with this. First, not only is Chung bigger than Delmas, but he is a better hitter as well. Second, although Delmas might be a better cover guy than Chung, the Pats already have one of those in Merriweather. What the Pats desperately needed was a safety that can make plays with his hitting ability and the ability to play as a 8th guy in the box (think Bob Sanders). In the end, we will never know who the Pats would have taken if they had the choice between the two. However, because the Pats already have the "center fielder" in Merriweather, I'd take the hitter.

With Wilfork in the lineup, the Pats run defense was not that great last season allowing 106 yards per game. In 2007, teams wouldn't even attempt to run the football against the Pats because they were down by so much. However, their run defense was pretty solid in 2006 allowing only 94 yards per game. Lastly, in Wilfork's first year as a full time starter in 2005, the run defense really struggled until late into the season. In conclusion, the Pats run defense has been good consistently for 2 out of the last 4 seasons with Wilfork as a starting NT.

So this could mean one of two things. First, the Pats run defense has struggled because their LB's are really that slow and are unable to fill the gaps in time. Or, Wilfork and their entire D-line are overrated.

So what am I trying to say? I'm saying that if Brace is able to show anything that gives the Pats coaching staff confidence he can be a full time starter, Wilfork is gone. If there's a big time stud pass rushing LB available in FA in 2010, I would imagine the Pats finally addressing that.

Bro,

I disagree with every point that you made. To say that the Patriots, ie Bill Belichick, doesn't know what he sees in LBs is laughable, as a proposition. I think no one is more realistic of what unvarnished reality is, regarding Football than Belichick. I subscribe to the Scout's opinion that we have not seen the real Woods or Crabel yet, and Belichick has.

IMHO, Chung is a better fit for this team than Delmas. Belichick's teams play situational football and adapt. You need smarts at certain Defensive positions principly LB, and Safety. You don't have that with Delmas, who has all the smarts of your basic Block of Granite. I doubt that he could diagnose the coming Offensive play, hide Defenses and switch on a moments notice, depending on what he sees in the few moments before a snap.

Why is it that you finally get a suitable backup for a position, that they were exposed for a long time, and suddenly the starter is being run out of town. Seymour and Warren have had suitable backups since Jarvis Greene showed up. It hardly meant they were fitted for a railroad job out of town. The team was merely getting deeper. Did it ever occur to you that there were often two rookies playing the run behind Wilfork in 2008? Do you think it just might have been possible that allowing all of 106 yards per game, were possibly the fault of rookie mistakes, and not chargeable to Wilfork?