PATSNUTme

Last night I was looking over some mocks and some material in draft guides.

All the trade talk has been about the Patriots trying to trade down out of #7. But let me present the following possible senario:

1.Miami takes Jake Long
2.St. Louis takes Dorsey
3. Atlanta take Ryan.

So now that leaves both C. Long and Gholston on the board. If the Patriots trade up to #5 they will get one of them. If the Patriots trade to #4 they will have their choice between them.

Trading to #5 will cost the Patriots the #7 and #62. We could get the 4th rounder of KC if we give them our 6th rounder.

The same cost would apply to #4 only we would get the 5th rounder instead of the 4th rounder.

Would it be worth it?

PonyExpress

They may not have to trade up.

It could go

Mia: J. Long
StL: Dorsey
Atl: Ryan
Oak: McFadden
KC: Ellis

then the Pats will get one of either Gholston or C. Long. The only player I would consider trading up to #5 for is C. Long. Otherwise I'd just as soon trade down.

PATSNUTme

It could work that way but after #3 picks and it is clear that one of these will be there at #5, do you risk the Jets taking him?

RussFrancis

Wow. Very interesting question. Chris Long has an unbelievable motor and every possible characteristic you'd want in a football player. Im not sure he's even the perfect fit as OLB for our system, but Id lean toward saying move up to that 4 spot if he falls that far. I think Gholston is tremendous as well. I just love the energy and intensity of Long better than any other player Ive seen in a while. He did alot at a school like Virginina. Imagine how much he can do surrounded by some actual talent?

JoeSixPat

Well that's pretty much the idea I made in the thread making the case for trading both up and down

The possibilities of trading either up or down

Up in that we can leapfrong the Jets and grab Gholston

And back in that if McFadden is available we've got an interested partner in Dallas who just so happens to have two first round picks that generally equal the trade value of #7 when one factors in the increased cost of the rookie contract.

It all comes down to how the draft shakes out - and whether Belichick believes Gholston is the read deal, as some see him actually slipping in the draft.

But assuming Gholston is viewed to be the LB with the skills and smarts for our system? Yes - I would quickly trade up. Aside from the contract $ it would cost only 200 trade value points to go from #7 to #5 - that is a mid 3rd round draft pick.

__________________

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

PATSNUTme

That was a good post and I'm sorry that I didn't see it. Thanks for reposting it.

Metaphors

Aside from the landing, falling from 50,000 feet without a parachute is a pretty sweet ride.

Seriously, the cap hit at the top of the draft is scary. I'm worried about what #7 is going to cost. I'd feel much better at #10 or below. The cap numbers are dramatically different once you get to the 9/10 range.

If you can get a transcendent player, you don't worry so much about the cap hit. I don't see CLong as that type of player and would need some convincing that Gholston could consistently reach that level.

So count me in for:

• Trading down to #10 (NO would bite if Ellis is available), getting NO's 3rd round pick
• Selecting Harvey/Groves/McKelvin/DRC/etc. at #10
• Packaging a 3rd to trade up in the 2nd round to get Cason
• Selecting Goff with the other early 3rd
• Dancing happily

Ochmed Jones

I'm starting to see more mock drafts and chatter on the radio that suggests Miami is moving toward J Long as opposed to C Long.

I do not know what is driving this shift, however I think Atlanta and St. Louis need to re-examine Dorsey and Ellis. Both had decent pro days and both are need areas for those teams.

Then if Oakland does take McFadden and KC takes either Ryan or Clady, we could be in fantastic positon.

IF Miami takes C Long and J Long slides to #5, it would be worth a 3rd rounder to trade up and take J Long and stick him at ROT for the next decade. (Slide Kazcur over to ROG if Neal can't go by opening day.)

BradyManny

That's not a bad plan, but what I keep coming back to is value. Wouldn't there be more value in trading down and grabbing Chris Williams and have him be your starting right or left tackle for years to come. As another poster eloquently pointed out in another thread - and forgive me to whichever one of you did, I've forgotten - the typical delineation between left and right tackle does not really exist on the Pats. Their right tackle needs to be as adept at dealing with edge rushers as the left, as a) our TE lines up on the leftside quite often b) we pass the ball so damn much.

So, I'd rather have Williams in a trade down than Jake Long in a trade up.

And you might find me applying that logic for Groves v. Gholston as well. I change my mind daily, and am really anxious for draft day just to see how all these plots play out. It should be pretty interesting to say the least.

drew4008

Chris Long will be gone before pick three if you ask me.

__________________

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.

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