Four Top Draft Picks Seems Unlikely

[mgteich]

We often talk about using our top 4 picks to meet our needs. It seems very likely that one of the seconds will be traded into 2011 or traded down for a 3rd and 5th so that we can picks in those rounds.

 

[mayoclinic]

Why do you say that?

We had 4 top draft picks last year, and drafted 4 day 1 players. Yes, we moved around, but only a net total of 11 picks (back 18 from 23 to 41, up 7 from 47 to 40), while picking up 2 3rd round picks.

I wouldn't be surprised to see us move around this year, but I think it's quite possible that we use all 4 picks in 2010. It's a very deep draft, and we already have 3 2011 picks in the first 2 rounds. Given how deep the draft is, BB may just chose to take the values that come to him.

I don't think we can draw any conclusions about what is "likely" at this time.

 

[BillBelichickFan79]

Good points by both of you. BB is a master of wheeling and dealing on draft day. He's got the job security so he has no problem trading 2010 2nd's into 2011 1st's and 2010 3rd's into 2011 2nd's. He takes advantage of the teams that need to win now to save their jobs and will mortgage the future to add a guy this year.

You have to love BB's ability to stay focused on winning now and winning in the future. His approach of one game at a time, take care of what is in front of us now and don't look ahead or behind, combined with his preparation for future drafts and his long term outlook on the team is amazing. That's usually why a coach can't assume GM responsibilities. He can't separate the coaching mentality of winning now with the GM mentality of being competitive now while also preparing to be competitive in the future. BB has the rare ability to do it, and that's why he is so great at what he does.

 

[mgteich]

Yes, we could trade down our of the first again and use four top picks as we did in 2009.

I nderstand that this is very early and we are all guessing. My guess is that we will draft three players in the first two rounds. Obviously we won't know until after draft.

This is a fine draft with great value in the 25-65 sweet spot that Belichick seems to like. But then so was 2009 and we traded forward from 2009, twice.

Why do you say that?

We had 4 top draft picks last year, and drafted 4 day 1 players. Yes, we moved around, but only a net total of 11 picks (back 18 from 23 to 41, up 7 from 47 to 40), while picking up 2 3rd round picks.

I wouldn't be surprised to see us move around this year, but I think it's quite possible that we use all 4 picks in 2010. It's a very deep draft, and we already have 3 2011 picks in the first 2 rounds. Given how deep the draft is, BB may just chose to take the values that come to him.

I don't think we can draw any conclusions about what is "likely" at this time.

 

[mayoclinic]

This is a fine draft with great value in the 25-65 sweet spot that Belichick seems to like. But then so was 2009 and we traded forward from 2009, twice.

But we didn't trade out of the 25-65 sweet spot last year. We traded back 18 picks to pick up two extra 3rds, and traded 2 of our 4 3rd rounders for 2010 2nd round picks. Also, at one point we had 8 picks in the first 3 rounds last year (34, 40, 41, 58, 73, 83, 89 and 97). Right now we have only 4.

You could well be right. I just think it's too early to make "it's likely" statements.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Given how deep the draft is, BB may just chose to take the values that come to him.

The next time he does that will be the first: not once in the years he's been running the Patriots draft have the Pats stood still through the first two rounds.

FWIW, BB once explained Jimmy Johnson's advice to him in the draft: have a list of 25 or so guys, across all rounds, that you want to get, and then work the board so you can grab as many of them as possible. [In other words, it's likely that the Patriots had already decided they wanted to grab Edelman and/or Richard in the 7th round if they had those picks available.]

 

[Jimke]

If the Patriots did not stand to lose any starters to free agency,

it would seem quite reasonable to do what mgteich suggests. The

trouble is that the Patriots could lose Bodden, Mankins, Neal,

Watson, and Wilfork to free agency. I'm sure that Wilfork will be

franchised and Mankins tendered as an RFA but there is no guarantee

they will be back with the team. If you were the Colts, wouldn't you

give up a late 1st and 3rd pick for Mankins? The Patriots may not

have enough early picks to fill all the holes.

 

[mgteich]

1) If someone gives us a 1st and 3rd for Mankins, we will draft two of the best two guards in the draft to compete for the starting spot. We already expected to use one of the top picks for an OG. So, while I want to keep Mankins, losing him doens't really hurt the draft. If anything, we would have an extra third after using the first for a guard.

2) We will pick up one or two free agents in free agency to add to Springs, Butler, Wilhite and Wheatley. I certainly hope that we re-sign Bodden. It not, the answer to finding a veteran corner is in free agency, not the draft. We have plently of kids. Again there is no effect on the draft.

3) I expect us to use a top draft pick on an OG, regardless of whether Neal is re-signed.

4) Not re-signing Watson would indeed affect my projected draft. I would then expect us to draft a TE early.

5) No matter what we do with Wilfork, I see no effect on the first three rounds of our projected draft.

BOTTOM LINE
The only players I see affecting the draft by going to free agency are Watson and perhaps the unmentioned Faulk.

If the Patriots did not stand to lose any starters to free agency,

it would seem quite reasonable to do what mgteich suggests. The

trouble is that the Patriots could lose Bodden, Mankins, Neal,

Watson, and Wilfork to free agency. I'm sure that Wilfork will be

franchised and Mankins tendered as an RFA but there is no guarantee

they will be back with the team. If you were the Colts, wouldn't you

give up a late 1st and 3rd pick for Mankins? The Patriots may not

have enough early picks to fill all the holes.

 

[carolinatony]

There are 2 good points but imo

BB will NOT take 4 players in the first 2 rounds.
We need to draft some solid players this year and future picks won't help Brady and Co for another year. Brady will only be with us so long and I hope I am wrong next draft.

 

[fester]

There are 2 good points but imo

BB will NOT take 4 players in the first 2 rounds.
We need to draft some solid players this year and future picks won't help Brady and Co for another year. Brady will only be with us so long and I hope I am wrong next draft.

Not quite sure what you are getting at.

Brady just turned 32. He is probably approaching the end of his prime in the next season or two, but he could potentially have another six to eight years of above-average (Top 10 instead of Top 4) play in him. The time window is not closing soon or at least Brady's play is not the binding constraint.

Anyways, the Patriots system is to play the odds by being a good team every year and not selling out the future for a short-term run at the Super Bowl. That philosophy has sent the Pats to 5 AFCCG, 4 Super Bowls and 3 Lombardi Trophies this decade; it works. 4 picks in the top-64, or 4 picks in the top 75 or 3 picks in the Top 64 + a vet trade or another 2011 1st Day pick would be entirely consistent with the Pats taking a long term view and not selling out to win in a single season. 4 picks in the Top 64 should produce at least 1 above average starter and 1 competent starter in 3 years. Anything more is an excellent draft instead of a good draft, and that implies the Patriots drafted "solid" players.

 

[sg14]

Does this mean 25 guys per round??

Or was it meant to mean 25 guys from the whole draft??

The next time he does that will be the first: not once in the years he's been running the Patriots draft have the Pats stood still through the first two rounds.

FWIW, BB once explained Jimmy Johnson's advice to him in the draft: have a list of 25 or so guys, across all rounds, that you want to get, and then work the board so you can grab as many of them as possible. [In other words, it's likely that the Patriots had already decided they wanted to grab Edelman and/or Richard in the 7th round if they had those picks available.]

 

[fester]

Does this mean 25 guys per round??

Or was it meant to mean 25 guys from the whole draft??

As I remember from Patriot Reign (don't have it in front of me), it was 20 to 25 guys for the entire draft. So my guess is that going into the 1st round, there are 4 or 5 guys the Pats think are good value, 4 or 5 guys in the 2nd round etc.

And the objective would be to move around to maximize the number of those guys picked.

For instance, if the Pats are drafting at #44 (from Tennessee) and there were still four out of their five guys that they liked in the second round (as they got one at #42 from Jacksonville), they may be very willing to trade down to #59 and pick up a 3rd rounder as they would be betting they could pick up one of "their guys" at #59 and also at # 88. However if there was a run on "their guys" so by the time the Jacksonville pick came up, so the highest rated "their guy" was a 4th round grade, then look for the Pats to trade to 2011. Or, even better, if they saw the run coming, or a 1st round "their guy" falling to the mid-30s, look for a trade-up.

The idea is that the 7 to 10 picks the Pats have every draft will produce 7 to 10 of "their guys" from every round.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

As I remember from Patriot Reign (don't have it in front of me), it was 20 to 25 guys for the entire draft. So my guess is that going into the 1st round, there are 4 or 5 guys the Pats think are good value, 4 or 5 guys in the 2nd round etc.

Said more accurately, the idea is that even if you think there are 20 good values in a given round, you focus on ~4 of them. If you don't think there are even that many, then you consider trading down/up/out.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

It does seem like NFL team turnover is spiraling out of control. Soon something like 25% of a roster could turn over yearly. That is ridiculous, but that is today's NFL.

It is kind of strange/funny/frustrating how BB the draft master is so adept at moving around the board and securing extra picks, that BB the GM wastes on guys like Burgess and spygate.

 

[Marqui]

It is kind of strange/funny/frustrating how BB the draft master is so adept at moving around the board and securing extra picks, that BB the GM wastes on guys like Burgess and spygate.

Burgess actually has been playing decent lately.

 

[Warren94]

Neal can go IMO...

 

[ctpatsfan77]

It does seem like NFL team turnover is spiraling out of control. Soon something like 25% of a roster could turn over yearly. That is ridiculous, but that is today's NFL.

I believe that's about what it is now.