Apparently Brandon Graham wants the Pats to draft him

[BradyManny]

Most of the guys you listed were not first round picks. Many weren't even drafted in the second or third round. Only a few of them were first round value after the fact even if they weren't taken in the first round.

The Pats can get a WR in the later rounds. The Pats don't need to spend a first on a WR. WR depth was the problem this year and you don't get WR depth in the first or second round. With Welker a question mark, a starter may be needed, but Edelman with a year under his belt and an offseason working with Brady might make him 90-95% of Welker in year two.

I still think the Pats' top priority is the front seven of the defense. They need a DE, two OLBs, and an ILB. The Pats need to stop relying on the offense to win games.

I agree - we don't need the first two rounds to address wide receiver, but if the right guy comes across (Gilyard, Tate) in an area we deem good value, I'd be all for it. Our #3 WR - or lack thereof - ultimately is what did us in this year. Don't get me wrong, the defense needs huge improvements, and our offense - as a whole - put up great #'s. But if our 2007 offense played with this 2009 defense, I think there's a decent chance we're playing this Sunday. If the difference between scoring 38 points a game and in the mid 20's is finding a couple more adequate wide receivers, then I say do that at all costs - whether its draft, free agency, or whatever it is.

Again, I agree with the notion that we can find that in rounds 3-5, or even beyond. But I consider WR3 as big a need as any position on this squad.

And don't forget: Edelman, as good as he looked, is a bit of an unknown, as is Tate. Moss' contract is up at the end of 2010, and Welker's future is cloudy. This team needs to invest in wide receiver long-term, not just short-term.

 

[MaineMan]

In recent years, some wideouts have had success in their rookie years. Desean Jackson, Eddie Royal, Jeremy Maclin, Percy Harvin, Donnie Avery, Johnny Knox, Austin Collie, Hakeem Nicks, Mike Wallace, Davone Bess, Michael Crabtree, Mohammed Massoqui...just to name a few. These are all guys we could've drafted, and MOST of them (except for Crabtree) share one thing in common - which is that they aren't your prototypical #1 wideout in terms of size or 40 speed, but are known for their ability to separate. They are quick, they can run routes and get open.

The Patriots will have plenty of opportunity to draft a guy like that this year who could come in and be a huge improvement over Aiken. Heck, Tate - if he didn't get hurt again - might've been just that. I like how Gilyard looks, and if he's there with one of our 2nd rounders, I might hope we pull the trigger on that.

Precisely. To Gilyard, I'd add Shipley, Jeremy Williams, Andre Roberts, Freddie Barnes, Blair White and a few others. I say, take 'em when you can get 'em. Shipley or Gilyard in the 2nd; one of the others in the 4th.

As, Rob0729 wrote, we need depth at WR. You look at Peyton, Brees, Rodgers, etc. and they all have a bunch of guys who can seriously perform at #3 (not just ST studs who can, maybe, catch occasionally in a pinch). Whether they line up outside, in the slot, wherever - all these QBs always have multiple legitimate receiving threats - not just two - on the field at all times.

If we can sign Boldin in FA in addition, I'm all for it, but the more's the merrier and Boldin alone doesn't solve the problem of depth no matter how well he works out.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

we definitely need a game breaking receiver. Moss plays when he wants to play. Welker is not going to be back for a while. After that, we don't have anyone really. Just watching DeSean Jackson last night made me a bit jealous. He's the kind of guy that could get 10 TDs in a season.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

It's exactly like rookies can't come in and play well. When have we had a rookie WR as a major contributor? Julian Edelman and Deion Branch have been the most successful.

We already have 2 young WRs in Edelman and Tate. We don't need more youngsters. And we have other needs to address with the draft.

I have to agree. Edelman is best suited for slot duty so asking a rookie to come in and start at the X or the Z (realizing that Moss can play either) is just asking too much.

We need a veteran. I would love for Branch to be that guy.

 

[mayoclinic]

I have to agree. Edelman is best suited for slot duty so asking a rookie to come in and start at the X or the Z (realizing that Moss can play either) is just asking too much.

We need a veteran. I would love for Branch to be that guy.

I think Branch is a great low-cost option. He knows the system and has rapport with Brady. I'd go with Antonio Bryant as my #1 option IF the Pats check out his character issues carefully, only because I think he has the talent to be an ideal #2 opposite Moss. But if he doesn't check out, or the cost is too high, then Branch is my preferred backup right now.

 

[BradyManny]

I have to agree. Edelman is best suited for slot duty so asking a rookie to come in and start at the X or the Z (realizing that Moss can play either) is just asking too much.

We need a veteran. I would love for Branch to be that guy.

I'd love to see Branch back in a Patriots uniform, and I've felt that way for quite a while.

I hope that it doesn't end the same way my desire to see Ty Law back in a Pats uniform did, of course.

Branch, I can see being a realistic option, and it would be a nice way of the Pats FO showing Brady some support in a year when he could potentially reach free agency. I'm sure Brady has to be jealous of Manning's situations - they draft an offensive skill player in the first round every year, they retain every good wideout and offensive weapon they have - unless they've already found his replacement via the draft. The continuity Manning has had is insane.

The last time Brady had that same level of continuity in his receiving group, we won back to back championships. And that was back when we were 5 deep at wideout. We need to get that deep at the position again.

 

[BradyManny]

I think Branch is a great low-cost option. He knows the system and has rapport with Brady. I'd go with Antonio Bryant as my #1 option IF the Pats check out his character issues carefully, only because I think he has the talent to be an ideal #2 opposite Moss. But if he doesn't check out, or the cost is too high, then Branch is my preferred backup right now.

How about both? Really, if I were the Pats, as I said above, I'd want to get 5 deep at wideout this year. And I mean 5 guys who can really play the position, and who aren't on the roster for ST purposes (sorry Sam Aiken, I know you do the best you can...)

Right now, you have Moss (outside) & Edelman (slot). You can't plan for Welker or Tate. To me, that leaves the Patriots in need of 3 wide receivers.

And to me - its all about value. What could possibly be better value for the Patriots than increasing production from their #3 wideout? When they had Stallworth/Gaffney as a 3/4, this offense set damn near every record there is. We're talking about a difference of 10-14 points a game in making ONE or TWO personnel moves. Sure, the defense has major holes, but at best, they only shave a few points per game off of last season's performance.

Legitimate #3 and #4 wideouts make this team better faster than any other move they can make. I hope BB realizes that and doesn't go into the season with unknowns at the position. The upside of Brady & Moss with 3 other guys who can catch the ball is just too damn high to not shore up this spot!

 

[BradyManny]

Precisely. To Gilyard, I'd add Shipley, Jeremy Williams, Andre Roberts, Freddie Barnes, Blair White and a few others. I say, take 'em when you can get 'em. Shipley or Gilyard in the 2nd; one of the others in the 4th.

As, Rob0729 wrote, we need depth at WR. You look at Peyton, Brees, Rodgers, etc. and they all have a bunch of guys who can seriously perform at #3 (not just ST studs who can, maybe, catch occasionally in a pinch). Whether they line up outside, in the slot, wherever - all these QBs always have multiple legitimate receiving threats - not just two - on the field at all times.

Agree 100%. I was impressed with both Williams and Roberts this past weekend, also.

 

[Kontradiction]

I'm more interested in the part about the Bucs being willing to let Antonio Bryant test the waters as a UFA.

Sign Bryant and Karlos Dansby as UFAs, resign Wilfork and Bodden, and tender or re-sign Mankins and Goskowski. Then add a couple of pass rushing DE/OLBs through the draft. I prefer Dunlap, but Graham would be fine. Who we get will be much more effective if we shore up the middle of our defense first.

Same here. Graham would be a good "thumper" type of OLB.

 

[MaineMan]

we definitely need a game breaking receiver. Moss plays when he wants to play. Welker is not going to be back for a while. After that, we don't have anyone really. Just watching DeSean Jackson last night made me a bit jealous. He's the kind of guy that could get 10 TDs in a season.

Yeah. Here we go. Or maybe he was playing hurt all year. Whatever. In a "down" year, Moss got 13 TDs, the 5th most receiving yards and had a higher completion percentage than Roddy White, Michael Crabtree, Chad Ochocinco or . . . DeSean Jackson.

The "we don't have anyone really" part is the most important issue. We don't necessarily need a game-breaker right now, we just need a bunch of guys who can consistently catch and move the chains - true #3WRs, NOT just some special teamers who MIGHT be able to come up with a reception once in a blue moon. If we've got that covered, with Brady throwing, ANY of them could become a game-breaker at any time. Even Aiken had a couple long ones, remember?

 

[MaineMan]

I have to agree. Edelman is best suited for slot duty so asking a rookie to come in and start at the X or the Z (realizing that Moss can play either) is just asking too much.

We need a veteran. I would love for Branch to be that guy.

Branch, Boldin, Bryant. Any of them would be fine by me for exactly the reason you state. But no ONE of those guys is going to fix the depth problem by himself unless he can be on the field in two positions at the same time. We still need to draft a couple guys. And, if we get one of those three, that's all the more reason NOT to go for a WR the 1st or early 2nd.

 

[mayoclinic]

Branch, Boldin, Bryant. Any of them would be fine by me for exactly the reason you state. But no ONE of those guys is going to fix the depth problem by himself unless he can be on the field in two positions at the same time. We still need to draft a couple guys. And, if we get one of those three, that's all the more reason NOT to go for a WR the 1st or early 2nd.

Right now we have Moss (signed through 2010), Welker (likely out for most or all of 2010), Tate (injury status uncertain though likely to play in 2010), Edelman, Aiken and Stanbeck. Edelman should be able to play the slot adequately in Welker's absence based on his 2009 performance. Moss will hopefully be better in 2010 given the story that he played much of last year with a separated shoulder. Add a solid #2 and Tate for depth and our WR corps should be much stronger than last year.

I'm not sure why we need to still draft a couple of guys given that scenario, and I certainly don't see the need to draft one high. I'd love to pick up an Eric Decker or a Freddie Barnes at a discount if they are available at the right point, but I wouldn't necessarily go into the draft needing a WR who can contribute for 2010.

I'm personally looking to 2011 to draft a long-term successor to Moss, with talents like AJ Green, Michael Floyd, Julio Jones and Jonathan Baldwin likely coming out. I think all of those guys are in a different league than any prospect in the 2010 draft, including Dez Bryant.

I'm also hoping that the silver lining to Welker's injury will be that TB will go back to spreading the ball around more and targeting the open receiver instead of focusing on Welker all the time.

 

[MaineMan]

Right now we have Moss (signed through 2010), Welker (likely out for most or all of 2010), Tate (injury status uncertain though likely to play in 2010), Edelman, Aiken and Stanbeck. Edelman should be able to play the slot adequately in Welker's absence based on his 2009 performance. Moss will hopefully be better in 2010 given the story that he played much of last year with a separated shoulder. Add a solid #2 and Tate for depth and our WR corps should be much stronger than last year.

I'm not sure why we need to still draft a couple of guys given that scenario, and I certainly don't see the need to draft one high. I'd love to pick up an Eric Decker or a Freddie Barnes at a discount if they are available at the right point, but I wouldn't necessarily go into the draft needing a WR who can contribute for 2010.

I'm personally looking to 2011 to draft a long-term successor to Moss, with talents like AJ Green, Michael Floyd, Julio Jones and Jonathan Baldwin likely coming out. I think all of those guys are in a different league than any prospect in the 2010 draft, including Dez Bryant.

I'm also hoping that the silver lining to Welker's injury will be that TB will go back to spreading the ball around more and targeting the open receiver instead of focusing on Welker all the time.

I think we're pretty much in agreement. I'd be very happy to pick up one of the Three Bs free agents being kicked around here. That would give us Moss, a "B" and Edelman. Can't count on Welker or Tate. Aiken and Stanback simply aren't anything like real receivers. So, I'd at least go for Barnes or White or someone similar in the 4th.

IF we sign Wilfork and Bodden and don't lose Neal to retirement,
AND IF we can pick up a decent defensive player in FA (I like the Dansby idea and think it's entirely possible. I'd prefer Kampmann over Taylor over Peppers, but I doubt any of those happen.)
AND IF we pick up solid defensive players with our first three picks, THEN I could also see splurging on someone like Gilyard or Shipley with our #53.

That would give us three fairly reliable WRs, two rookies who have at least demonstrated that they can get open and catch and two injured guys, either of whom might return to the lineup later in the season as high-end guys. We could end up with everyone healthy and ready for Week One - seven pretty decent pass-catchers - and have to decide which one of the promising rookies to try to slide through waivers to the practice squad. I'd love THAT dilemma for a change.

 

[carolinatony]

I think defense, defense, and more defense is the Pats top priorities. Few WRs make an impact their rookie season and by the time they might, Welker will be back.

The Pats need to rebuild their LB corp which was the best part of their team during the Super Bowl years and a weakness now. If the Pats could somehow swing it (not likely) I would like to see the Pats add Peppers, Dansby, and another OLB with the first pick.

:ditto: What he said. We need some MOJO in our defense

 

[MaineMan]

Teams tend to prefer WRs with great speed, height, Combine numbers - but especially speed (4.35-4.45) - who they can teach to run routes, etc. over guys with lesser measurables who can already run routes (You can't teach a guy to be tall, fast, etc.). So the magnificent physical specimens waiting to be filled with great NFL skills go early, in the first 35 - 45 picks. Then they have to take a year to learn the skills - IOW, no immediate impact. But quite often (just slightly under 50% of the time), these guys simply can't pick up the necessary skills and they bust. Anyway, I think THIS is where the adage about WRs taking a year before they contribute comes from - because everybody's watching these high-profile guys.

Meanwhile, the other guys - the ones who are much slower (4.50-4.55, say) but who may already have the skills - go later in the 2nd, early in the 3rd (often even later). These guys have a far lower bust rate (only about 35%) and more often make very good contributions right out of the gate, though that depends a lot on the specific depth chart and QB situation they're drafted into. But, y'know, nobody's really paying a lot of attention to them or their solid, immediate #3-level contributions - unless one of them turns out to be a stud and then everyone's surprised.

I think, with Brady at QB and at least two or three essentially open WR spots to start the season, the Pats would be much better served taking a guy or even two from this second group rather than going for a WR earlier.