justinb

It seems pretty apparent that Eric Berry - S- from Texas is a "sure thing"..typically QB's are 50/50 ( at best..probably more like 35/65)...but shouldnt teams be willing to give up there current 1st round ( lets take the Pats for instance) at 22nd, a 2nd rounder somewhere along the board, and potentially 2011 NEP 1st pick...FOR A SURE PICK??

If the scouts, player personell, and coaches feel they are a "cant miss"...isnt it worth it?

its the 1 in the hand, 2 in the bush, thought...thats all

SanAngeloState

He's from Tennesee and some people don't think he's a sure thing, from what I've read.

No, it's not really worth it, given that no one is a sure pick and that a #1 this year, #1 next year and 2nd round this year is a huge price to pay for a rookie who would be making 8M per year and is totally unproven in the NFL. But that's my opinion.

mayoclinic

1. There are no "sure things". Berry certainly isn't one. You can make an argument that Earl Thomas may end up being just as good, going around 15 picks later.

2. The cost of missing in the top 5 is exorbitant. The cost of missing at 22 is manageable.

3. We have a soid safety rotation, and don't need another one.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"OVER Loading at ANY position can create a Fatal Advantage. THAT is what interests ME. Attacking With Concentrated Force. THAT is what WINS. In the words ~ more or less ~ of General Patton: 'I'm fighting a WAR, here. Let the B*****ES worry about their FLANKS.' " - Off the Grid

"The key to any successful organization is to anticipate things, not react to them." - Michael Lombardi

ctpatsfan77

FWIW, I think he's talking about teams in general; he was (I hope) just using the Pats as an example of what they might give up to do it.

In any case, I agree with you that there's no sure thing, and safety is about the last position the Pats should trade up for.

__________________
"Momentum was quickly snatched away by New England, who once again proved that any Patriot, at any moment, can make a play." —Inside the NFL, Packers v. Patriots

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Metaphors

I remember I was travelling during the 2004 draft, listening to it on the radio. I was disappointed in 2003 that Wilfork went back to school. The Pats had a legit shot at getting him in 2003 and it was clear that DT play was the Pats undoing in 2002. Now the Pats would have no shot at him in 2004.

But as the day wore on, Wilfork didn't get picked. As he got to the 15-16 range, I actually started yelling at the radio for the Pats to trade up to get him. I seem to remember that there were teams immediately ahead of and behind the Pats that had needs at DT. I was worried I would end up in a ditch if Wilfork went at #19 or #20, particularly if someone traded ahead of the Pats to get him.

When the Pats finally got on the clock, I started breathing again. There was no doubt, absolutely zero, that Wilfork would be the pick. Wilfork was a sure thing at a position of need and the Pats didn't budge as he slipped into range.

While I don't have anything against trading up for an elite player, it doesn't seem like that is in Belichick's DNA. He did move up one spot to get Warren in 2003, so I suspect that type of cheap, defensive move would be the limit of what the Pats do in the 1st round.

mayoclinic

I partly agree with you.

The Pats have shown that they are willing to move up for a specific player at times, particularly if they believe someone else is targeting that player. They traded up from 50 to 48 in 2001 to get Matt Light, obviously because they heard that the Jets must have been interested in him. They traded up from 32 to 21 in 2002 for Dan Graham. They traded up 3 times in 2003: (1) from 14 to 13 in 2003 for Ty Warren even though that was considered high for Warren; (2) from 41 to 36 for Eugene Wilson; and from 50 to 45 for Bethel Johnson. In all 3 cases I assume they heard that someone else was interested, and that the player wouldn't have lasted till their original pick. They traded up from 52 to 36 in 2006 for Chad Jackson. And they traded up from 47 to 40 for Ron Brace last year, again, presumably because they had intel that Brace wouldn't last to 47. I have to say, their track record on these trade ups has not been impressive overall, but obviously they are willing to do so if necessary.

But the Pats have also showed that they will often stand "pat". The Wilfork example is the best one. It would have been quite reasonable for the Pats to try and move up a few spots to assure that they would get Wilfork once he started to fall. Obviously, they gambled that he would last to 21, and they won that gamble. But in other cases things haven't worked out so well. The Pats were reportedly interested in Stewart Bradley in 2007, but didn't go after him. He went to Philadelphia 4 picks before the Pats 3rd round choice, and the Pats subsequently traded out of the round. There were rumors that the Pats were enamored with Percy Harvin last year and the Vikings were reportedly also intereted. The Pats apparently made no effort to move up a couple of spots to get him. (Eric Mangini would probably have traded back from 21 to 23 as he was in fire sale mode, and Alex Mack would almost certainly have been available at 23.)

I think that there's a good chance the Pat's sit tight at 22 and see who falls. This is a deep draft, and they have a lot of needs. There's no need to trade up for one specific guy unless they fall in love with someone who slips (Rolando McClain) or whom they believe another team will target.

But I also think Atlanta at #19/20 is a possible trade-up partner with our 2nd round picks. Atlanta has no 2nd round pick by virtue of the Tony Gonzalez trade. Their biggest need is CB, and Joe Haden is likely to be long gone, with no other CB currently projecting to be worth the 19/20 pick. I could see Tom Dmitroff trading back for 42 and 47, where he could fill 2 needs, instead of reaching for a CB in the 1st round. If there is more than one guy on the board who BB covets, the possibility of getting 2 such guys at 19/20 and 22 might be too good to pass up.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"OVER Loading at ANY position can create a Fatal Advantage. THAT is what interests ME. Attacking With Concentrated Force. THAT is what WINS. In the words ~ more or less ~ of General Patton: 'I'm fighting a WAR, here. Let the B*****ES worry about their FLANKS.' " - Off the Grid

"The key to any successful organization is to anticipate things, not react to them." - Michael Lombardi

mayoclinic

I could see a couple of scenarios, with Atlanta on the clock at 19:

- Scenario 1: BB really loves a specific player on the board, and has heard that Houston or Cincinnati loves that guy. I could see a move up from 22 to 19.

- Scenario 2: BB wants a pass rusher, and he likes 2 guys equally (Carlos Dunlap and Jason Pierre-Paul, for example; substitute other names if you prefer). He hasn't heard anything specific to suggest that Atlanta, Houston or Cincinnati is in love with either, though all 3 teams could go DE. He stands pat at 22 and gambles that one or both will be available. I could especially see this if there are other guys available at other needs who BB likes.

- Scenario 3: Two or more guys at different positions that BB really likes are available. Then I could see BB trading 42 and 47 to move up to 19, to try and snag both of them.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"OVER Loading at ANY position can create a Fatal Advantage. THAT is what interests ME. Attacking With Concentrated Force. THAT is what WINS. In the words ~ more or less ~ of General Patton: 'I'm fighting a WAR, here. Let the B*****ES worry about their FLANKS.' " - Off the Grid

"The key to any successful organization is to anticipate things, not react to them." - Michael Lombardi

Box_O_Rocks

I'd heard there were no trading partners for the move up to get Stewart, which sucks because he was the ideal replacement for TJ.

__________________
"Avert thine eyes! You're not hot enough to be looking at me."
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

mayoclinic

I find that hard to believe. No trading partners at the right price, however, I can believe.

Bummer. Bradley would have been great.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"OVER Loading at ANY position can create a Fatal Advantage. THAT is what interests ME. Attacking With Concentrated Force. THAT is what WINS. In the words ~ more or less ~ of General Patton: 'I'm fighting a WAR, here. Let the B*****ES worry about their FLANKS.' " - Off the Grid

"The key to any successful organization is to anticipate things, not react to them." - Michael Lombardi

bigcountry75

Back to the OP if we were going to trade our 1st and 2nd this year plus our 1st in 2011 we better be getting SUH as he is as close to a safe money bet as there is this draft....