mgteich

There are lots of mocks out there (huddle has links to over 60).

I fail any mock that

1) has no DE or OLB (FOR THE PATRIOTS) in the first 2 rounds,
2) has no OL(FOR THE PATRIOTS) in the first 2 rounds,
3) has a WR (FOR THE PATRIOTS) not named Jones in the first 2 rounds, or
4) has a QB (FOR THE PATRIOTS) in the first 2 round.

FreeTedWilliams

Have the Pats taking Ingram at #17........................

__________________
The Jets look like a Super Bowl contender right now about as much as Rosie O’Donnell looks like a threat for the Miss America crown. -NY Post 12/19/2011


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

jeffbiologist

I think he assumed that those picks would be for the pats. I concur.

dryheat44

Ah...I get it.

I wouldn't bust a mock for a failure to get a specific position in a certain round, depending on where the pick went instead (and we're assuming the Pats make four picks). I wouldn't be stunned to see Belichick ignore OL in the first two rounds if he goes DE, OLB, DE, CB, for example, or trade, DE, trade, S.

__________________
When it's third and 10, you can have the milk drinkers and I'll take the whiskey drinkers every time. -- R.I.P. Max McGee

Patriot Missile

I doubt we are getting a wr named Jones, but I would be more than happy with a wr named Hankerson between 33 and 60.

Patriot Missile

I keep playing out those scenarios. No OLB or DE in first 2 rounds, or NO O-line in the first 2 rounds. Very unlikely but not out of the realm of possibility considering drafts in the past. Would say I would be a tad dissapointed if atleast 1 OLB/DE and 1 OT/G werent taken in the first 2 rounds. If he goes with a RB or WR I would not be dissapointed either.

It takes a lot of screwing up to get a fail from me I guess.

dryheat44

Where's the value when it's time to pick? I think that you can always justify picking a cornerback if he's the best value on the board. Same with OT. I do, however, think there will be good values at DE especially when we pick in the first two rounds.

__________________
When it's third and 10, you can have the milk drinkers and I'll take the whiskey drinkers every time. -- R.I.P. Max McGee

Patriot Missile

Yeah, there will be probably one of Wilkerson or Heyward there at 28 or 33. If you want to go back farther there is value there too.

CTHuskies

So you could live with something like this? [=points]

Trade down from #17 [950] to #25 [720] plus #82 [180] & #114 [66], trade #28 [660] for 2012 1st & 3rd , trade #60 [300] for 2012 2nd & 4th and trade #156 [29] 4th round pick in 2012

#25 - Muhammad Wilkerson DE Temple
#33 –Jason Pinkston G Pittsburgh
#74 – Brooks Reed LB Arizona
#82 – John Moffit C Wisconsin
#92 – K.J. Wright OLB Mississippi State
#114 – Delone Carter RB Syracuse
#124 – DeMarcus Love T Arkansas
#184 - Lazarius Levingston DE LSU
6-C - Jamie Harper RB Clemson
7-C - Steven Friday OLB Virginia Tech

mgteich

I did not mean to list all the ways a draft would fail. I just listed two my personal pre-conditions to considering any mock.

The mock listed does not fail any of the conditions I listed, so I would consider it on its merits. I don't like it at all because it trades our of the top 60 in a shallow draft. I would rather be trading into the top 60 that out of it. You start with 4 picks in the top 60 and end up with only two players, not a good result for me.

FOR EXAMPLE
I would take your 74 and 92 and trade for #55
I would keep the #28

So, I would still get Wilkerson, Pinkston, Moffitt

HOWEVER, instead of Reed and Wright, I would a top OT at 28 plus a higher rated OLB at 55, say Carimi and Beal.