Raiders' pick scenarios - significant movement still possible - Page 5 - New England Patriots Forums

robertweathers · 12-29-2010, 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haley

I am not sure but I think this is close to the mark. Can someone doublecheck me please? (note that there is still movement in some of these that I didn't mark)

Code:

Pick # 15, 1st Round (OAK – Richard Seymour) [movement from 12-17]
Pick # 32, 1st Round 
Pick # 33, 2nd Round (CAR – 2010 3rd Round)
Pick # 64, 2nd Round
Pick # 78, 3rd Round (MIN – Randy Moss)
Pick # 96, 3rd Round
Pick # 98, 4th Round (DEN – Laurence Maroney)
Pick #160, 5th Round
Pick #187, 6th Round (NO – David Thomas)

Seeing that they will finish the year 13/14 wins and SB favorites, having 6 picks in the first 100 is equvilent to Donald Trump finding $100k on the street.

The Gr8est · 12-29-2010, 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RayClay

The equivalent ( within a few picks) of three 1sts and three 3rds, thanks to putrid seasons by Denver and Carolina. it just isn't possible to milk that draft board any better.

We are not worthy.

Actually we don't get Denver's #4. Seattle gets it's choice of our #4 picks for Branch. I don't have a link but have read that a few times.

RayClay · 12-29-2010, 09:00 AM

As to the importance of the top pick placement? Very important, this year. Outside of a QB (ha ha we got one with a 6th) there's only one position we value enough to really want a high pick if needed.

That's a massive agile DL that can take on double teams all day and still generate a pass rush. A Seymour, in other words.

For comparison, I believe Suh was the prototype last year, had we only had that need and the pick.

Was McCoy not enough at #3? BB will not invent a player if one isn't there, so I ask draftniks, is there a dominant 3-4 end available? that will likely decide what we do and a trade up could very well be in the offing, if so IMO.

By the way, don't know if Suh would be considered "that guy" or not.

RayClay · 12-29-2010, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Gr8est

Actually we don't get Denver's #4. Seattle gets it's choice of our #4 picks. I don't have a link but have read that a few times.

Hmmm. Just going off the posters estimate, but i vaguely remember something like that now that you mention it.

Of course we got our top receiver for that 4th, if that's the case. Still not worthy.

Wretch · 12-29-2010, 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 37Harrison

All the players in bold aren't exactly lighting up the league. In fact, Hobbs was criticized here and in Philly for not being able to cover very well, Kaczur was and is in jeoppardy of losing his starting job, Dave Thomas has become more of a bit/role player than anything else in N.O. (their rookie TE Graham is out playing Thomas), and Meriweather... well do I really need to get into him?

Sanders isn't anything spectacular but he is solid and does make some nice contributions. However, I don't think that he would be missed all that much if he weren't on the team.

I wouldn't put too much into the "starter" title (e.g. Duane Starks ring a bell?), all it means is that team doesn't have anyone any better at that position currently on their roster for one reason or another.

Not every player drafted can be an all pro. Do I wish they could be? Of course but we need to keep expectations realistic. If a team get 3 starters out of a draft that is an above average draft. Some drafts had been better than others, but all in all the Pats are a superior drafting team when compared to the NFL as a whole. When you look at a larger sample, not just 3 years, BB and staff are one of the best teams at using the draft to fill needs, either through drafting a player or trading for veterans.

Sanders is a solid starter and would start on most teams, as would Meriweather.

Hobbs was a solid nickel corner and good ST player, and outplayed his draft position. He was also a very tough player that played through injuries and had a solid career until the injuries this year.

Thomas is OK, but he is an undersized receiver TE on a team (NO) with 3 good to very good WR's, Reggie Bush and Pierre Thomas. He has had a solid career so far, not bad for a mid round pick not great either just solid. Kevin Faulk is a role player, that doesn't make him a bad football player.

I would agree with your starter comment for a team with a losing or .500 record, but starter on a perennial playoff team and SB contender is something else entirely.

aabtec · 12-29-2010, 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strngplyr

Who cares about this pick, given our history who the hell sees us using it this decade? Call me back when it's moved #1 overall in 2023.

I think this might be the year that we use most of draft choices. We have alot of holes to fill.

bucky · 12-29-2010, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haley

I am not sure but I think this is close to the mark. Can someone doublecheck me please? (note that there is still movement in some of these that I didn't mark)

Code:

Pick # 15, 1st Round (OAK – Richard Seymour) [movement from 12-17]
Pick # 32, 1st Round 
Pick # 33, 2nd Round (CAR – 2010 3rd Round)
Pick # 64, 2nd Round
Pick # 78, 3rd Round (MIN – Randy Moss)
Pick # 96, 3rd Round
Pick # 98, 4th Round (DEN – Laurence Maroney)
Pick #160, 5th Round
Pick #187, 6th Round (NO – David Thomas)

I was under the impression that Seattle gets the higher of the Pats' 4th rounders in the Branch deal. So the 98 becomes something like 128. There's also the question of what the Pats gave up for Paige. I'm guessing it was a 5th or 6th rounder.

The Minnesota pick is too hard to figure out and I don't want to spend the time for a 3rd round pick. It'll fall somewhere between 70 and 80.

The Gr8est · 12-29-2010, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aabtec

I think this might be the year that we use most of draft choices. We have alot of holes to fill.

I doubt it. This year won't be any different. BB will use his knowledge of value and take that and other team's inability to resist impulse buying and once again get us some players for use now as well as push a couple of picks into next year for higher value.

Pats have a 13-2 record and the top AFC seed and are not looking at any major FA losses. We are getting a couple of gr8 players back from IR next year too.

We have "wants", even significant ones, but no crying "needs" that MUST be filled in the draft. We'll come out of the draft with some useful players and even more picks in future years. These draft day trades are how the Pats have been able to stay on top and STILL have extra high picks every year.

robertweathers · 12-29-2010, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RayClay

As to the importance of the top pick placement? Very important, this year. Outside of a QB (ha ha we got one with a 6th) there's only one position we value enough to really want a high pick if needed.

That's a massive agile DL that can take on double teams all day and still generate a pass rush. A Seymour, in other words.

For comparison, I believe Suh was the prototype last year, had we only had that need and the pick.

Was McCoy not enough at #3? BB will not invent a player if one isn't there, so I ask draftniks, is there a dominant 3-4 end available? that will likely decide what we do and a trade up could very well be in the offing, if so IMO.

By the way, don't know if Suh would be considered "that guy" or not.

Just from reading a few of the 2011 NFL Draft scouting reports, there seem to be some decent 3/4, 4/3, DE/OLB prospects available in the 1st round.

Seeing that TBC leads the team w/ 22 hurries (17th in the NFL), a consistent pass rush is still a need IMO.

Haley · 12-29-2010, 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bucky

I was under the impression that Seattle gets the higher of the Pats' 4th rounders in the Branch deal. So the 98 becomes something like 128. There's also the question of what the Pats gave up for Paige. I'm guessing it was a 5th or 6th rounder.

The Minnesota pick is too hard to figure out and I don't want to spend the time for a 3rd round pick. It'll fall somewhere between 70 and 80.

Thanks. I was going by this list: 2011 Patriots Draft Picks | NE Patriots Draft which must be incorrect. It is so hard to find this information presented clearly.