Snake Eyes

How do you know he'll be lighting up the league? How do you know our QB will stink?

That's nothing more than speculation, what is not speculation is that we'll have to spend a LOT of money and draft capital on a guy who won't be playing, how does that help maximize your chances of winning when you have a HoF QB on the roster?

Our current system works fine, we draft no-name QBs, develop them, and either trade them or keep them, what's wrong with that?

Hoyer looks very solid maybe we grab Stanzi, Dalton, or McElroy, or maybe Johnny McEntee next year, the point is there's no reason to fix what isn't broken, and there's less reason to BREAK WHAT ISN"T BROKEN.

Grabbing Luck would set this team back.

__________________
"The secret of steel has always carried with it a mystery, you must learn it's riddle, Conan, you must learn its discipline, for no one in this world can you trust, not men, not women, not beasts...this you can trust"


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

dryheat44

Well, looks like you nailed that part.

__________________
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

townes

Just for you...........................


5th/6th Grade Pembroke and Prospects! | Purnell Swett High School Middle School Football Photos | iHigh.com

dryheat44

Frankly, I'd be shocked if #33 isn't traded. If Belichick actually makes picks at 17 and 28, there's no doubt about it. There are several teams drafting before #40 that need a QB, and one of them could want to get to the front of the line. One of them might be desperate enough to offer their 2012 1st round pick in a package.

__________________
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

townes

Pretty much how I see it. That pick is gold because teams now have all night to redo their draft boards and will likely have a player or more they want badly and will move to get them. It's hard to see how anything less than a 2012 first would get it unless they have already used their 2nd and 3rd round picks to move up for players and need to replenish them.

ctpatsfan77

The key, I think, is going to be what happens with Buffalo. If (A) they don't take a QB at 3, and (B) teams think they plan to take a QB at 34, then welcome to Wild Bill's Trade-for-that-Quarterback Emporium.

__________________
"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.

dryheat44

Well, drafting from 34-43 are the Bills, Bengals, Cardinals, Titans, Redskins, and Vikings - all of whom probably want to get a QB in the draft as it stands now. Kolb will probably get traded to one, and possibly Orton, and maybe 1 or 2 QBs go in the first round....but there should be a real possibility of a team wanting to get to the front of the line.

My dream scenario includes a trade to the Cardinals as part of a Larry Fitzgerald deal. I just might mock that when I get around to mocking the draft.

__________________
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

RIP#40

IMO, it's also how you fail to win a playoff game in 3 years. I'm getting tired of the value over talent philosophy. It has been written on this board that Pats were loading up for this year and the rookie salary cap. If the CBA is worked out and there is a rookie cap, I say trade what it takes to get a third first rounder this year. I'd be happy with 3 "McCourtys" this year.

__________________
Jim Colclough was the man.

ctpatsfan77

Just to be clear: the Patriots do not trade down simply for the sake of trading down.

If they can get the player they want and pick up extra ammo in the draft, they will. If it's one or the other, they'll take the one they feel helps them more. [With McCourty, that was clearly the player; in 2008, they took a 2009 2 from San Diego over Shawn Crable.]

__________________
"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.

the wrothbroughterer

I very much agree and when I'm arguing with friends over the merits of trading down this always comes up, but to me these are special circumstances. The team is entering what is in all probability the end of their run. I'm not saying that in 2 years they'll be a shell of their former self at all, but the window in which to realistically win the Super Bowl(s) is probably going to be closed within the next 6 years. That number might even be a little optimistic with Brady's deal up in 2014.

With the exception of the really special players (the McCourty's and Mayo's of the world) it takes a season, maybe even 2 or 3 in some cases, for most players to reach their full potential. If the 2012 draft is weak, and it probably will be, you're likely looking at 1) a smaller ratio of the players you draft becoming starters, and 2) probably waiting until the 2013-2014 seasons for them to become reliable players. At that point we have 1-2 years of a Brady led team and for all we know his performance may be slipping. I don't think it will but you can't deny the possibility.

Now if you move say a 2012 2nd rounder back into the 2011 draft as part of a package for a higher pick you are simultaneously improving the odds that the player you selected will both develop into a reliable starter and lengthen the window for the team to contend in. In the mock I'm constructing I have them making trades that net them 3 first rounders(21, 24, and 28), 2nd rounders(57 and 60), and 92. The only sacrifice is a 2nd round pick in a weak draft class.