mgteich

I have our 92 slated to being pushed into 2012.

I think that we might want to package 60 and 74 and move up into the 35-45 range. This would give us four impact players and the requisite extra pick in 2012.

Alternatively 60 and 92 would move us into the top 50. We would then trade 74 into next year.

We would still have the 4th round and later to try to find the diamonds in the ruff.

PatriotDynasty_12

Is it just me, or is this THE draft where BB has been waiting to unload and officially get his team and start the run at another dynasty. 14-2 this year and rebuilding...if we hit on the draft this year, the next 5 years could be very scary for the rest of the NFL. It's going to be one interesting draft. The time for IMPACT PLAYERS is now...Brady isn't getting any younger

__________________

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


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

Sciz

I like that ideal. 92 is close enough to the magical 89.

ATippett56

That will depend if Logan Mankins and Matt Light sign contract extensions. If Matt Light departs via unrestricted free agency I'm not sure I would trade any draft picks into 2012.

__________________
The End of the Chad Ochostinko Era!

patsfaninpittsburgh

I read an article saying that they expect the new CBA to have two franchise tags.

A franchised Mankins/Light trade could produce 2012 picks. I doubt Mankins will stay. However, he does have value that should translate.

carolinatony

I couldn't agree with you more but it will never happen. How long before we draft that pass rusher?
One is too tall, this one too light. We need anyone who can rush the passer.

I hope I am wrong but I bet BB trades back 2 of the first 6 picks. If he trades back more that we are in trouble next year.

MaineMan

I seriously doubt that BB drafts "a pass rusher" per se - probably just another Cunningham or Ninkovich type 3-down OLB with some TFL/sack stats in college.

In 2010, sacks were up 20% over 2009 and 2008 - 36 distributed among 16 different front seven players. If BB gets a guy in this draft who's the real deal at RDE, a distinct possibility given that there are a number of legit candidates in this draft (for a change), I'd guess that 2011 sack totals hit 43-46, distributed among 12 or more guys (with one or two of them getting 6-8), and we won't be talking about drafting "a pass rusher" anymore for awhile.

greerre

I don't know if you are both hoping and expecting or just expecting BB to draft a 3 down OLB, but I think that would be a huge mistake. This year, the Defense was really effective on 1st and 2nd downs only to give it all up on 3rd because there was no pass rush in sure fire passing situations. These 3 down OLBs are not fast enough anymore given the how much the game has evolved over the past few years. I really want BB to draft a maniac like Mathews who's thought process consists exclusively of "run as fast as I can at the QB...slaughter anything that gets in my way."

patsfaninpittsburgh

Since this debate has been going on for years, the real question is....do posters want a "pass rush" or a "pass rusher"?

As this team develops, I would much prefer a "pass rush".

It's amazing all the Cameron Wake love here. In the game in Miami, he gets some early sacks, is diefied, and then everybody forgets he basically helped lose the game because he got run over.

I also don't get the Clay Matthews love. In the Packer games I have seen, I don't ever remember him not gettting a "coverage" sack. Likewise, Jaime Dukes made a great point in their Giants game. Matthews was getting all the love on the Jacobs fumble. Dukes then pointed that this occurred 40 yards down from the line of scrimmage.

Here's my take and questions.

Is Bodden coming back?

Based on all info, it appears Bodden should be good to go. As such, another stud CB in the mix with Bodden/ McCourty forms a great basis. Likewise, Butler should be developed into a slot corner. That fits his skillset best.

Arrington received much undeserved flack this year. He's a special teamer and 5th CB. He only played due to Bodden on IR. As 5th CB's go, he's pretty good and could hybrid to safety.

With the picks, returns, and FA's this year, it's certainly feasible to have a 2011 secondary that exceeds anything the Jets and Packers produced in 2010. Adding in Guyton and Fletcher only makes coverage more effective.

Is T Warren coming back?

If he is, my first question is can G Warren be resigned. It's interesting this year how Vince seemed to enjoy playing DE. Likewise, with G Warren, a Warren, Warren, Wilfork base is pretty beefy. Likewise (assuming they return), Pryor and Wright are "Jarvis Green" roll guys with Deaderick, Brace, Love, rotation guys.

At this point, you can add based on value and potential and trade.

ILB's look pretty good. Ofcourse, this assumes Spikes and Fletcher stay on the same projection.

OLB is then the open question. Based on our picks, early selection team needs, and players "available" for trade; it's appears we have enough value to go get a stud BB covets.

2011 plan

Secondary- second to none.

If there is a front seven guy- go get him.

Draft/trade for maximum flexibility.

MaineMan

That's the debate in a nutshell - an effective pass rush v. "a pass rusher".

To me, one of the basic principles of the 3-4 is that non-blitz pressure can come from any set of front seven positions on a given play. This also means that almost any front seven player might be dropping back into coverage on a given play. It's a "disguise" thing that works two ways to the advantage of the defense. Basing your pass rush on one premier guy takes both those advantages away by giving the offense someone to key on.

Anyway, the Pats' best pass rush years have been those in which sacks ended up being widely distributed across the front seven. Yeah, I know, I know - "McGinest". The truth is that, the Pats' first season without McGinest, sacks went UP from 33 to 45 and were more widely distributed.