upstater1

Looking at all the mock drafts, it seems to me that this is a really strong draft in the first round, throughout the first round actually.

Then it falls off a cliff in the second round.

Knowing that you have the #33 pick which, given a reach or two in the first round, will be a highly marketable/tradable pick between the first and second days, i have to think the Belichick will strongly think of moving up.

I know Belichick would never do this, but if he feels Mike Pouncey is a surefire 10 year guard, then I would trade up to get him.

Trade up you say? What about our late second, our late third, and next year's #1. Look at the draft value chart: those three picks equal about 700, or right where Pouncey projects.

I then take a 3-4/OLB at #16 AND a DE at #28 (or vice versa).

I get three first rounders this year.

Then, I trade down from my #33 pick. If I trade down to 52, I can pick up a 3rd rounder like the one I traded for Pouncey. I might go Marvin Austin, Robert Quinn, or an OL like Moffitt there.

So, I come out of the first two rounds with 3 #1s, 1 #2, and I still have 2 #3, 1 #4.

I'd be tempted to trade the rest of the picks into next year because I'll be missing a #1.

Fencer

Just going by early mock drafts, doesn't that seem to be the case every year?

Anyhow, supposing this year is truly different:

1. Sure, BB could use our three top picks, trade up a bit, trade out with what's left over, and otherwise pull in his horns until the late rounds. We have plenty of returning depth at just about every position except guard and RB, and it's not obvious draft is the way to go at RB. (The Pats' last successful uses of a highish draft pick on an RB were during the Clinton Administration).

Thus, doing a quality-not-quantity draft, for once, would not be ridiculous, if BB happens to agree that's how the value falls out.

2. I didn't pay much attention to your scenario of trading a #1 next year, because that's something that would make sense to BB (or me) in only the most extreme of scenarios. Almost every time a team trades a future 1st in a deal for a rookie, they shaft themselves.

3. It's widely agreed that #33 is a good slot from which to trade down. Therefore, it's also a good slot from which to trade up, because who ever gets it while trading down themselves should be optimistic about being able to trade it down further.

__________________
"To lose one parent may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness." -- Oscar Wilde

upstater1

Agreed on what you wrote, and of course I did say "if it were me" and "Belichick would never do this..."

The way I look at it, if Pouncey is there, I would trade next year's #1. It's just as big a risk to take a guard next year as this year.

The key though is that the Patriots would not be trading a #1 next year for a second rounder this year. They would be packaging picks for quality.

Usually, when teams trade first rounders, they are in the second round of that draft.

Essentially, all I'm saying is that the Patriots move up next year's first rounder to this year, but of course that would entail squandering the late round 2nd and 3rd rounders.

ctpatsfan77

Not sure if Pouncey is the right guy here; among other things, wasn't his shotgun snapping rather atrocious?

__________________
"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.

BelichickFan

I think he's looking at him as a Guard where he's supposed to be a lot better. Personally I have had it with out interior line and would be fine taking Pouncey for G and Wisniewski for Center. If we could re-sign Mankins we'd have an all new and improved interior line.

Sfpat

"Then, I trade down from my #33 pick. If I trade down to 52, I can pick up a 3rd rounder like the one I traded for Pouncey. I might go Marvin Austin, Robert Quinn, or an OL like Moffitt there."

I think Robert Quinn is projected to go top 10

upstater1

To be honest, I have not been paying close attention beyond looking at a couple drafts like Walter and Countdown that have him in the middle of the second round.

WelshPat

I'm seeing a lot want us too draft a guard high in the draft. Not that i'm against the idea totally, but wasn't Kaczur practicing at guard last year before his injury?

BelichickFan

He was but that was likely due to Mankins' holdout. Maybe Kaczur can be a several year (he's not that young) improvement at Guard but more likely he's just a very versatile backup. However we do it, Kaczur, draft, whatever, we need to fix the G,C,G area especially if Mankins leaves.

mgteich

Aren't you really saying that you don't recognize the second rounders? If indeed this draft has a big dropoff early, then we (and everyone else) will be looking to trade up. My suspicion is that the drop won't occur until at least 40, giving us at least 3 red-chip picks.
==================
My paradigm is that we have

blue chippers (1 through 9-12 depending on the draft)

red chippers (9-12 through 25 to 75, or even later, depending on the draft)

nfl contributers (sometimes this group ends very early as in 2007; sometimes it goes all the way through the 7th round as in last year's draft)

the rest
==============

Obviously, a team can find that diamond in the ruff late, as we did last year with Hernandez.

I would note that scout had our 53 through 113 pick rated very close to each other.


[QUOTE=upstater1;2455633]Looking at all the mock drafts, it seems to me that this is a really strong draft in the first round, throughout the first round actually.

Then it falls off a cliff in the second round.