Carriker and a Safety

[mgteich]

I would be happy with Carriker and a safety in Round 3 and 4, presuming that we have signed Samuel long-term.

[sebman2112]

Originally Posted by mgteich

I would be happy with Carriker and a safety in Round 3 and 4, presuming that we have signed Samuel long-term.

I would rather this happen:
Trade 24 and 28 to GB for 16 and 47 (I was talking about this on ESPN two weeks ago)

With 16th overall take either: 1-Willis, 2-Carriker, 3-Nelson, 4-Lynch, 5-Moss, Revis, or Meachem.

With 47th overall take either: Harris, Meriweather, Woodley, Bush, Leonard, Spencer, gonzo, McCauley, Weddle, an O-Linemen (basically whomever is there, and is the best value.) This would be much better than reaching for any of these players in the first, or taking an O-Linemen at 28, in my opinion.

With 92 take Either Wendling, Josh Wilson, Desmond Bishop, Earl Everett, Craig Davis, Lorenzo Booker, or an O-Linemen. (basically whemever is there, and is the best value.)

With 124th overall take Zak DeOssie, Gattis, Booker (if he falls), or BPA.

In the fifth (comp expected) take DeOssie if he falls (doubt it), Dwayne Wright, or BPA.

In the sixth take either Daren Stone, JD Nelson, DeAndre Jackson (if he falls), David Ball, or Abbate (if he last) with one of the picks, and then draft BPA with the remaining picks.

NE is going to have ten draft picks so they should be able to draft a lot of talent. They could probably even give up a sixth, or even both sixth to move into the 12-14 range, and still have 8 draft picks.

[BelichickFan]

I wouldn't be happy with it. Just like I wouldn't be happy if those who want to trade our #1s for Willis get their way.

I like Carriker. I like depth. I like DL. But we have some aging groups on defense, I don't want to spend two #1s on a guy who will be behind (and rotate in, I know) Warren and Seymour for at least two more years.

After 2007 we dont have a single Safety on the roster I like back for sure. And I dont want to pin my hopes on a low #3 pick.

After 2007 we only have Hobbs at CB. And even if Samuel signs, we only have two.

Give me, say, Aaron Ross and Brandon Merriweather any day - you can still draft a Safety (or one of the LB) in the third round.

[sebman2112]

Originally Posted by BelichickFan

I wouldn't be happy with it. Just like I wouldn't be happy if those who want to trade our #1s for Willis get their way.

I like Carriker. I like depth. I like DL. But we have some aging groups on defense, I don't want to spend two #1s on a guy who will be behind (and rotate in, I know) Warren and Seymour for at least two more years.

After 2007 we dont have a single Safety on the roster I like back for sure. And I dont want to pin my hopes on a low #3 pick.

After 2007 we only have Hobbs at CB. And even if Samuel signs, we only have two.

Give me, say, Aaron Ross and Brandon Merriweather any day - you can still draft a Safety (or one of the LB) in the third round.

What do you think about the 2 for 2 deal I have in mind? I think that might be the best option right now.

[BelichickFan]

Originally Posted by sebman2112

What do you think about the 2 for 2 deal I have in mind? I think that might be the best option right now.

It's viable although the guys you list as options after the trade up don't excite me. Lynch, Moss, Meachem . . . shrug.

It depends who's there. Willis maybe. Carriker maybe (not trading 2-1 for him but if I get a #2 back). But not for some of those guys.

[Fencer]

What's the point of drafting Carriker? To let Warren walk?

I don't get it.

I don't mind rotating expensive LBs, but this seems like an even bigger investment.

Unless you think that the Seymour or Warren should rotate inside for Wilfork's breathers. Then having a fourth super-expensive DL would make sense. (And yes, a high 1st is a super-expensive asset.)

[Jimke]

One sad fact of life in the NFL is that most of your good players are

going to walk away. You can only franchise one player per year and

the cost is quite high. This is why you have to hold on to as many of

your high draft choices as possible. I would rather aquire as many

good players as possible instead of one or two early draft picks.

[BelichickFan]

Originally Posted by Jimke

One sad fact of life in the NFL is that most of your good players are going to walk away

Two #1s at a position where the players can't walk away for 2+ years is overkill especially with our LB and Safety situations.

[Box_O_Rocks]

Originally Posted by Fencer

What's the point of drafting Carriker? To let Warren walk?

I don't get it.

I don't mind rotating expensive LBs, but this seems like an even bigger investment.

Unless you think that the Seymour or Warren should rotate inside for Wilfork's breathers. Then having a fourth super-expensive DL would make sense. (And yes, a high 1st is a super-expensive asset.)

Assume BB drafts BPA (Best Patriots' Player Available) in round one, we each have our chosen player, but mine is Carriker since I believe he is capable of making the transition to OLB (failing that he's not a wasted pick since he can play DE). You have a guy bigger than Willie McGinest who has better change of direction measurables than Posluszney or Willis coming in with at least a 5 year contract to learn behind Vrabel, Colvin, and Thomas. With first round talent you could see him taking some reps as a rookie and being part of a regular rotation by 2008.

But assume the worst and he can only play DE. Wright is a RFA after this season, pretty decent chance the Pats can get a second round pick for him and he can land himself a fat contract. Win-Win for the team and player. Assume Carriker isn't a Seymour but more of a Warren. Ty took two years to blossom, he's a UFA after 2008; Carriker gives the team a ready-made option at DE, taking him now addresses long term issues as well as upgrading depth in a very critical unit. That's good value in round one.

[sebman2112]

Originally Posted by Box_O_Rocks

Assume BB drafts BPA (Best Patriots' Player Available) in round one, we each have our chosen player, but mine is Carriker since I believe he is capable of making the transition to OLB (failing that he's not a wasted pick since he can play DE). You have a guy bigger than Willie McGinest who has better change of direction measurables than Posluszney or Willis coming in with at least a 5 year contract to learn behind Vrabel, Colvin, and Thomas. With first round talent you could see him taking some reps as a rookie and being part of a regular rotation by 2008.

But assume the worst and he can only play DE. Wright is a RFA after this season, pretty decent chance the Pats can get a second round pick for him and he can land himself a fat contract. Win-Win for the team and player. Assume Carriker isn't a Seymour but more of a Warren. Ty took two years to blossom, he's a UFA after 2008; Carriker gives the team a ready-made option at DE, taking him now addresses long term issues as well as upgrading depth in a very critical unit. That's good value in round one.

This is partly (I'm not sold on the LB stuff) why I would take him in the first, but I would take Willis first. If you think Carriker can motor downfield like Willis you're nuts, and he can't play ILB. Willis specializes at ILB. I'm a big time Nebraska fan, have been since childhood, but even I don't think Carriker can cover the field from sideline-to-sideline like Willis.