3-4 DE Michael Brockers - Page 3 - New England Patriots Forums

ay-yo · 03-25-2012, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by manxman2601

The one question though is how does BB feel about these 5-techs now? Last year we passed on three supposed ideal ones in Cam Jordan, Heyward and Muhammed Wilkerson. Was that simply the lockout dictating that or has BB's priorities changed? The "need" has been there the last two years and BB hasn't addressed it. Is this year likely to be any different?

There are multiple "needs" every year so I won't disqualify a position based on what they did last year. In regards to the 3 you mention:

Cam Jordan weighed in at 287 lbs and wasn't available during our 2nd 1st.

Wilkerson was seen as a project.

Heyward is the only 1 of these 3 I see as ideal.

I guess they just liked Dowling more and viewed CB as a position of equal need. It is possible they got too cute and thought 1 of Wilkerson or Heyward would be there at 33.

I believe Poe and Brockers are both projects who would require a trade up. This combination takes them both out of consideration.

Cox will require a trade up although I view him as a day 1 starter and a better prospect than Jordan, Heyward or Wilkerson.

Still seems similar to Heyward to me. Not sure why we take him and not Heyward except for a different grade on the other players and different teams needs.

manxman2601 · 03-25-2012, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ay-yo

There are multiple "needs" every year so I won't disqualify a position based on what they did last year. In regards to the 3 you mention:

Cam Jordan weighed in at 287 lbs and wasn't available during our 2nd 1st.

Wilkerson was seen as a project.

Heyward is the only 1 of these 3 I see as ideal.

I guess they just liked Dowling more and viewed CB as a position of equal need. It is possible they got too cute and thought 1 of Wilkerson or Heyward would be there at 33.

I believe Poe and Brockers are both projects who would require a trade up. This combination takes them both out of consideration.

Cox will require a trade up although I view him as a day 1 starter and a better prospect than Jordan, Heyward or Wilkerson.

Still seems similar to Heyward to me. Not sure why we take him and not Heyward except for a different grade on the other players and different teams needs.

Nice reply, thank you. My only thought on this is that the 5-tech is a very important position for the Pats and yet we ranked a CB higher at the time? Especially as it was a position we'd dipped into regularly in previous drafts. My thought on this might be that in fact, contrary to popular belief, BB doesn't rate the 5-tech as all that important a position unless there is genuine Seymour like talent there and is happy filling it with the Loves, Deadericks et al. This year will be a good test. If Brockers or Still fall within reasonable range and he doesn't trade up, or he passes on Reyes, I think we can assume that the 5-tech is not an important player for his system as we thought.

Patriot Missile · 03-25-2012, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by manxman2601

Nice reply, thank you. My only thought on this is that the 5-tech is a very important position for the Pats and yet we ranked a CB higher at the time? Especially as it was a position we'd dipped into regularly in previous drafts. My thought on this might be that in fact, contrary to popular belief, BB doesn't rate the 5-tech as all that important a position unless there is genuine Seymour like talent there and is happy filling it with the Loves, Deadericks et al. This year will be a good test. If Brockers or Still fall within reasonable range and he doesn't trade up, or he passes on Reyes, I think we can assume that the 5-tech is not an important player for his system as we thought.

If a 5 tech is not drafted then I will have to agree that it is just not that important and he has true faith in the guys he brings in.

Merril Hoge's Tie Knot · 03-25-2012, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ochmed Jones

I have to agree with you on thinking the 4 DT's will be off the board by #27. A lot of draftniks have Reyes climbing into the bottom of the first round.

However I put Reyes in the same category as Barron. Second round grade, that could move up based on need.

If Carolina takes Cox at #9 it could start a mini run on the DT position.

Ideally Brockers would be available at #15 and I think Philly would jump at the chance for #31 and #48 for #15.

Seems like we've had Andy Reid programmed in #1 on the war room phone speed dial for the past decade. (Ha! Ha!)

What? I'm the opposite. I see Barron as a top 20 player that might only be available to us because of surgery, and Reyes as a late second round one gap player.

I haven't watched anything on Reyes for a long time, maybe I missed something. I don't have any UCONN games on DVD. I guess I'm off to watch the senior bowl for the 500th time.

Wilfork#75 · 03-25-2012, 10:58 PM

Over the past few days I've gone back and watched the top 4 DT's to see who fits this system the best. To me, Cox is clearly the top DL in this class. He's got a good combination of athleticism, skill set and production, and should be a top 10 pick. Dontari Poe is probably the most athletic of the DL, but he is also the most overrated. I think he is a fringe 1st round pick, but will likely be selected in the top 15. Devon Still arguably has the biggest upside and he has flashed elite skills as a 4-3 DT. But he is also very inconsistent, similar to Cameron Heyward last year. Brockers is the most raw as a pass rusher, but I think he is by far the best fit for this system. He not only has elite measurables, but his skill set fits perfectly as a two-gap 5-tech DE. He plays the run well, uses good leverage, anchors well and can hold up against double teams. He's not a 3 down DL early in his career, but I think he can start on early downs from day 1 and develop into a well rounded DE for this team.

Earlier in the off season I thought he was overrated and wasn't impressed with him at the combine. He looked overweight and I wasn't impressed with his athleticism. On tape however I think he looked very good, and he apparently slimmed down for his pro day and improved his athletic numbers. I think one positive for the Pats is he doesn't fit a lot of defensive schemes, which could cause him to drop. I don't think he is a great fit for a 4-3 because he doesn't offer a lot as a pass rusher as yet. And despite what Charley Casserly may think, he isn't a 3-4 NT and he isn't a great fit for more aggressive 3-4 defenses. Because of this I think he could fall into the 20's, where I wouldn't mind a trade up. In my next mock I have him dropping into the 20's and the Pats moving up from 31 with Cleveland at 22 to take him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merril Hoge's Tie Knot

What? I'm the opposite. I see Barron as a top 20 player that might only be available to us because of surgery, and Reyes as a late second round one gap player.

I haven't watched anything on Reyes for a long time, maybe I missed something. I don't have any UCONN games on DVD. I guess I'm off to watch the senior bowl for the 500th time.

I've got to agree with Ochmed here. I think Barron is a fringe 1st round player who is being pushed up because of an extremely weak safety class. If he is there at 31 I would take him, but I think he is going to be overdrafted by someone like the Jets who still have a huge need at safety. I could even see the Eagles taking a shot at him, which I think would be a huge reach.

doesntmatter1 · 03-25-2012, 11:18 PM

My favorite de in order are fletcher cox, billy winn, and jerel worthy. I've never been a fan of still and for some reason I have never been high on brockers. As for poe, I watch a crapload of college ball and don't recall seeing a single game of his so I have no idea what he's about.

Off The Grid · 03-26-2012, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patsderoer

Still and his 50% motor?

No thanks.

He was absolutely owned by the Wisconsin OLiners, pushed back and taken out of play 1on1 numerous times vs average college OLs from Illinois.

Off The Grid · 03-26-2012, 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by manxman2601

The one question though is how does BB feel about these 5-techs now?

Very discerning, Sir.

It's part of something I've given a great deal of thought to, of late...

For those of us who're convinced that "34" is the way we're headed back to ~ at least as our alleged "Base" Defense ~ one can't help but wonder about how WANTONLY Mad Bill slung Richard Seymour to the Wind, how EASILY he cut Warren loose, how FANATICALLY he's REFUSED to draft "34" Flankers ~ OLB's, to your Earthlings!! ~ and, indeed, how CASUALLY he's ignored our lack of FirePower at "34" End AND "34" Flanker in the Draft, ere these last few years.

Looking at our roster, it seems clear to me ~ despite the way we finished the year ~ that he's EMPHATICALLY favoring the "43"...and assorted Derivatives.

SeymourTrophies · 03-26-2012, 01:02 PM

Interesting, sir.

There's too much unknown because of the lockout and unusual offseason last year to be sure of anything. Big Sey and Ty were gone no matter what IMO, and we have replaced them with lesser big uglies. Carter and Anderson may have been anomalies, but BB re-learned the wonders of the specialist this year. I have to think no matter what base he uses, there will be a pass rusher brought in, and there will be a do-it-all project brought in.

The way things are, we are poised to go either way with the DL, but I maintain that a duo of Spikes-Mayo behind big Vince should make him lean 3-4.

Ochmed Jones · 03-26-2012, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Off The Grid

Very discerning, Sir.

It's part of something I've given a great deal of thought to, of late...

For those of us who're convinced that "34" is the way we're headed back to ~ at least as our alleged "Base" Defense ~ one can't help but wonder about how WANTONLY Mad Bill slung Richard Seymour to the Wind, how EASILY he cut Warren loose, how FANATICALLY he's REFUSED to draft "34" Flankers ~ OLB's, to your Earthlings!! ~ and, indeed, how CASUALLY he's ignored our lack of FirePower at "34" End AND "34" Flanker in the Draft, ere these last few years.

Looking at our roster, it seems clear to me ~ despite the way we finished the year ~ that he's EMPHATICALLY favoring the "43"...and assorted Derivatives.

Well there is no doubt in my mind that BB likes having players that are flexible enough to play either the 3-4 or the 4-3.

It seems to me that the front we play, should be predicated to some degree on the strength of the LBers. And to the end, our LBer's scream 4-3. But ever since Willie and Vrabel left, they have screamed 4-3, yet for years BB played 3-4 with miscast veteran LBers.

But maybe instead of looking at it as 3-4 vs. 4-3, maybe we should ask is if BB is collecting guys that can play both 1 gap and 2 gap defense? Because it seems to me these guys offer him the most scheme versatility.