If we franchise Mankins, how does that impact our draft? - Page 2 - New England Patriots Forums

patfanken · 02-12-2011, 12:15 PM

I think the best way to go with Mankins is the following -

1. By Franchising him you can put off your final decision on him for a few months. It lets the Pats have more control of where he goes, and it is their best opportunity to maximize his value in any trade scenario. Hopefully it would be resolved by the draft in late April. He'll either sign or be traded.

2. I'm thinking that Mankins will stay firm on Maximizing his contact and will ultimately leave. I'm OK with this because I think we will be fine.

3. First thing I do is resign Light to a hometown discount and move him to LG. There he will flourish. He is already a top run blocker and most of his weaknesses vs speed rushers, will disappear with the move. At LG, Light would play at an all pro level.

Disclaimer: it should be noted that I have been saying this for over 5 years and he has yet to play a snap at LG

4. You move Volmer to LT and have Kazcur/LaVoir/1st or 2nd round draft pick play on the right side. It seems the value in the draft is at RT more than the interior OL. I think we will be OK at RG with a combination of Connolly/Neal/3rd or 4th round draft pick

5. I'd love to keep Mankins, but frankly the money would be better spent on an impact defensive FA. Its not personal, Logan, just business

Fencer · 02-12-2011, 01:48 PM

I think they try drafting a tackle, on the theory that he might:

1. Eventually replace Light.
2. Immediately bump Light to guard.
3. Immediately move to guard himself ala' Mankins.

If Mankins were going for sure the need for guards would be so dire that drafting a pure guard would be more in the cards.

***mgteich*** · 02-12-2011, 03:52 PM

THE NEED AT GUARD
Apparently you are just fine with Neal and Connolly as our future right guards, and fine with Orhnberger as our backup LG. IMHO, we need at least one pure guard. Depending on whether Mankins stays, we need another OG or an OG/C (could be a pure center).

For 187th time on this board, Light is playing LT, backup OT or is playing for another team. Dante will not move Light to another position. I haven't a clue why anyone would think that Light will be re-signed at $5M a year to start a new career as a guard.

If we draft a stud OT and Light is also re-signed, the draftee will sit on the bench as Vollmer did. Perhaps you think that we will draft an OT who will better than Vollmer?

MY BOTTOM LINE - We have FOUR needs on the OL quite a lot for the #1 OL in the nfl.
We need a LT (could be Light).
We need a LG (could be Mankins)
We need to develop a C at least to compete for a spot in 2012.
We need a RG, at least to compete with Connolly for the starting spot in 2012.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fencer

I think they try drafting a tackle, on the theory that he might:

1. Eventually replace Light.
2. Immediately bump Light to guard.
3. Immediately move to guard himself ala' Mankins.

If Mankins were going for sure the need for guards would be so dire that drafting a pure guard would be more in the cards.

kurtinelson · 02-12-2011, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ochmed Jones

Interesting that PFW has us taking Boling at #28. I have been a fan of Boling's for our offense since October and still think we take him at #60.

Wow. Ochmed, you were the one who put me on the Boling band wagon over a month ago. His stock has been rising like the national debt ever since. I liked him in late round 2, thinking that would be perceived as a reach by the pundits, but #28? Really? I would much rather he stay under the radar.

***SanAngeloState*** · 02-12-2011, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patfanken

I think the best way to go with Mankins is the following -

1. By Franchising him you can put off your final decision on him for a few months. It lets the Pats have more control of where he goes, and it is their best opportunity to maximize his value in any trade scenario. Hopefully it would be resolved by the draft in late April. He'll either sign or be traded.

2. I'm thinking that Mankins will stay firm on Maximizing his contact and will ultimately leave. I'm OK with this because I think we will be fine.

3. First thing I do is resign Light to a hometown discount and move him to LG. There he will flourish. He is already a top run blocker and most of his weaknesses vs speed rushers, will disappear with the move. At LG, Light would play at an all pro level.

Disclaimer: it should be noted that I have been saying this for over 5 years and he has yet to play a snap at LG

4. You move Volmer to LT and have Kazcur/LaVoir/1st or 2nd round draft pick play on the right side. It seems the value in the draft is at RT more than the interior OL. I think we will be OK at RG with a combination of Connolly/Neal/3rd or 4th round draft pick

5. I'd love to keep Mankins, but frankly the money would be better spent on an impact defensive FA. Its not personal, Logan, just business

I said the EXACT SAME THING as #3. I was told I was comedic relief by one of the village homers around here. He says Todd Light will get 10M a year here or somewhere else as he is one of the top LTs in the league. Laughable. Light would be a good guard. Carimi would be a great RT and a good LT. Aldon SMith, Carimi, LeShoure, Watkins (with dallas #2 got for mankins), Ballard....that's my first 5 picks.

Watkins could come in here and be better than mankins DAY ONE.

ps...yes I know it's "matt light"...."todd" until pats win the SB again. As punishment for the strip sack from suggs.

MaineMan · 02-12-2011, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mgteich

THE NEED AT GUARD
Apparently you are just fine with Neal and Connolly as our future right guards, and fine with Orhnberger as our backup LG. IMHO, we need at least one pure guard. Depending on whether Mankins stays, we need another OG or an OG/C (could be a pure center).

For 187th time on this board, Light is playing LT, backup OT or is playing for another team. Dante will not move Light to another position. I haven't a clue why anyone would think that Light will be re-signed at $5M a year to start a new career as a guard.

If we draft a stud OT and Light is also re-signed, the draftee will sit on the bench as Vollmer did. Perhaps you think that we will draft an OT who will better than Vollmer?

MY BOTTOM LINE - We have FOUR needs on the OL quite a lot for the #1 OL in the nfl.
We need a LT (could be Light).
We need a LG (could be Mankins)
We need to develop a C at least to compete for a spot in 2012.
We need a RG, at least to compete with Connolly for the starting spot in 2012.

I agree with all this, except - didn't Vollmer actually start a few times at both RT and LT to cover for injuries?

kurtinelson · 02-12-2011, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeffbiologist

Its safe to say we will still be needing 2 new bodies on the OL, most likely one T and one G/C. I might be in the minority but I think Neal will be back for his last year and Connolly played decent last year...and in more games than any other G on the team. We spent a 4th a few years ago on Ohrnberger(sp?), wonder if he is in the plans at C, Koppen was the weak link inside IMHO. If we bring back a FA OL my guess it would be Light taking a home town discount. Vollmer can surely play LT and replacing Kazcur with a draft pick is relatively easy.

Although the prospect of losing Mankins, Light and Neal is a little bit troubling, I am comforted by:

The flexibility the number of high round picks in the draft gives us (Thanks BB and FU to all the *****ers and complainers who hate to see BB trade down)

The relatively few needs we have in the draft. (OLB, OLine, and DE).

The fact that we have a starting caliber LT in Vollmer. If we resign Light, great. If another team values him more, so be it. The good news is we don't have to reach in the draft for a starting caliber LT. Give me Cameron Jordan, Aldon Smith or JJ Watt over Nate Solder, Tyron Smith or Anthony Costonzo all day long (from a needs standpoint.)

MaineMan · 02-12-2011, 05:28 PM

Thanks BB and FU to all the *****ers and complainers who hate to see BB trade down.

I know. We could conceivably get a DE, and OLB, an OT and 2 OG out of the top 100 and still have at least a 3rd-rounder left over for .... whatever.

After a 14-2 season.

That's some seriously mind-boggling stuff right there. I mean, if anyone had suggested, back when the Seymour trade was made, that things would work out like this for the 2011 draft, the guys in the white coats would've been on them like dog fur on our couch (we have three).

kurtinelson · 02-12-2011, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaineMan

That's some seriously mind-boggling stuff right there. I mean, if anyone had suggested, back when the Seymour trade was made, that things would work out like this for the 2011 draft, the guys in the white coats would've been on them like dog fur on our couch (we have three).

The only rain on our parade is the fact that Oakland was able to cobble together a mediocre season leaving us with a mid first rounder. I blame the ineptitude of the AFC west.

Patriot Missile · 02-12-2011, 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kurtinelson

The only rain on our parade is the fact that Oakland was able to cobble together a mediocre season leaving us with a mid first rounder. I blame the ineptitude of the AFC west.

I'm ready to give the pick back to them and go double or nothing for next year.

Seriously, I want a re-do,they played well and got lucky sweeping their division. This years schedule is brutal and 5-11 sounds closer to the mark.

Home =chiefs, broncos, chargers, bills, dolphins, packers, vikings, browns.

away=chiefs broncos, chargers, Patriots, jets, bears, lions, texans

This team will get waxed almost every Sunday imo