Originally Posted by mayoclinic

That's the difference between us. You see English as a nice player but drop him like a hot potato for Butler, when we don't even have a need at CB. I put Connor Barwin as my favorite 3-4 OLB prospect since 2005 and would take him over Butler and English together. (That's pushing it, but I'm trying to make a point here.)

Originally Posted by JoeShmoe

I'll stick to my guns and take Beatty at #23, Barwin/Delmas at #34, OLB/S at #47 (depending who we got at #34) and Unger/Wood at #53, Brinkley at #89

With Jason Taylor maybe coming and 4 OLB's on the roster, 2 young in Woods and Crable, in I just don't see the NE FO being all over Barwin as others here do. I think its been said (a lot!) that he has a great ceiling but were not sure of the floor and I woudn't want to base my entire draft strategy around one guy and potentially lose a lot of flexibility. In a deep draft I think we have to be really sold on the guy to trade up for him - but I like the NYG trade idea although I cant see it happening

Of course we may end doing something no-one saw coming like getting Peppers trading into the top 15 or most likely be led by what others do on the day and who's left.

My bet is quite a few teams will look to trade down and into the second (where there's a lot of value) and look to NE with all the picks they have as a possible partner

Originally Posted by mayoclinic

Good scenario and good bet. Your logic is quite reasonable.

Regarding trades, I can realistically see 3 first day trades which appeal to me right now:

1. Trade #23 and 58 to the Giants for #29 and 45. This would work if the Giants have someone to move up for (my guess is WR Hakeem Nicks, with Miami rumored to like him) and if the Pats see a good chance of Beatty or Barwin lasting to #29.

2. Trade #47 and 89 to St. Louis/Cleveland/Seattle for #35-37. In your scenario, if Beatty and Barwin are taken at 23 and 34 and Delmas is still on the board then I think a move up to secure him is quite reasonable, if the Pats end up liking him more than the other safety prospects.

3. Trade #45 for a 2010 1st round pick. There will still be borderline 1st round talent at pick 45, and some team may well want to get their guy and be willing to give up a 2010 1st. My best guess is New Orleans, who has no 2nd and 3rd and needs a safety badly, but there are other possibilities.

Originally Posted by mayoclinic

Some ideas to toss around:

1. If we take a 3-4 OLB (Barwin, English, Matthews, Sintim, etc.) at 23 and then find that both William Beatty and Louis Delmas are on the board at 34, should we take Beatty at #34 and then try to package #47 and 89 to trade up into the 35-37 range and get Delmas? I would.
I wouldn't. I would rather take Beatty at 34 and then see who's available at 47. I want to use all of our picks, either this year or as trades into next year. I'm generally not a fan of 2-for-1s.

2. Do we really need an SILB as a high priority from this draft? I understand that Bruschi is aging and Guyton may not be a full-time solution, but do we really expect any rookie to be a starting SILB? Maualuga may have the physical tools but I could see him having a lot of difficulty getting BB's complex defense down. I think that the probability is that even if we draft a rookie SILB our main group for 2009 will consist of Mayo + Guyton/Bruschi. If we draft an OLB prospect at 23 or 34, there is a good chance they should be ready to start by 2010. Shawn Crable has the talent to emerge as a starting-caliber 3-4 OLB by then, plus there's always Woods and even still possibly signing Jason Taylor. Any of those would leave Adalius Thomas free to move inside to SILB in 2010. Plus there are several strong SILB candidates in the 2010 draft, both early on (Brandon Spikes, possibly Rolando McClain) and after the 1st round (Eric Norwood), Micah Johnson).
There doesn't appear to be many strong candidates at SILB in the top-100, unless you are willing to gamble that one of the OLB/DEs (Sintim, Cushing, English) can transition to that position. I have serious doubts about anybody's ability to change from playing in space in college to playing inside a tornado in the pros.
By drafting an OLB/DE early, the depth that pick would provide at OLB could allow Adalius to play SILB this season, esp. if the other OLBs (Woods, Crable, TBC, Redd, Craig, and - I hope - Jason Taylor) show during MC & TC that they are capable of providing acceptable pass-rush w/o Adalius on the outside.
I am still frustrated that the FO didn't sign Andra Davis, and hasn't signed any decent SILB whatsoever.

3. The more I think about it, the more I hope that we can trade #23 and #58 with the Giants for #29 and #45. The only way I wouldn't do it is if there was someone I desperately wanted at #23 who I didn't think would last to 29. But there is much more value in the mid-40's in this draft than at #58. The Giants might conceivably do it if they wanted someone specific - my best thought at this point is WR Hakeem Nicks, who would be perfect for them and whom Miami is said to covet. Picks at #45 and #47 might allow us to get another impact player - a potential pro-bowler like Jarren Gilbert - as opposed to a potential solid starter at #58. Plus an extra mid-round pick would give us more flexibility to trade one of them into 2010, possibly for a 1st round pick. I really want impact players out of the first day of this draft, and the ones I think are potential impact players in our system at positions that I could see us targeting and who could realistically be available to us are Barwin at OLB, Beatty at OT, Delmas at S, and Gilbert at 3-4 DE.
If the Jints offered us 29 & 45 for 23 & 58, I would do it, too, because most of the guys I would consider taking at 23 should still be available at 29.

4. If we did somehow end up with Jarren Gilbert out of this draft, should we (heresy) consider trading Richard Seymour this year? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me to get Gilbert unless we are planning on him eventually starting, as we could get a backup DE replacement for Jarvis Green much more cheaply. Gilbert starting implies Seymour leaving after 2009, or after 2010 at the latest. If that is the case, then why not try to trade him for 2010 picks while he still has value, and use the cap space to extend Wilfork or Mankins? I know it's controversial, but I thought I should at least raise the possibility.