Making the Case for Suh (Cons too)

[RobertWeathers]

I understand that it is a BIG gamble to trade up and go after an unproven talent at the NFL level, but I'll make the argument to trade up for this kid anyway.

Pros

1. Throughout the 2000s, the Pats not only had solid locker room guys, but had top-level talent in a number of areas. Adding Suh would give the D-line incredible talent for years to come that would be home grown.

2. He would be ready for an extension when Warren (2013) and Wilfork (2014) are up.

3. Schematically, in his prime Seymour meant a lot to this defense. (taking on double-teams, allowing OLBs and other DTs matched up 1:1 with players on the o-line, generated decent pressure, great vs the run). By adding a talent like Suh, the team would take a quantum leap forward in that department.

4. You have the 22nd pick this year. You have OAK #1 next year. You have 3 #2s. You have (budget & cap considerations in 2010 notwithstanding) the ability to dole out a good chunk of change to the kid without (provided the deal is structured properly) experiencing long term cap-ramifications. Not sure how many picks it would take, but IMO the Pats have the currency to do a deal.

Cons

1. With a deep draft, the team can fill a number or areas with high-quality talent.

2. He'd cost a ton and may limit the team in other areas

3. Already drafted Brace and Pryor. May be seen as a admission of "missing" on Brace (as if BB cares)

4. Suh's agent is Eugene Parker. Parker and the Pats have a rocky history. He is Seymour's agent too.

5. If the kid becomes the next Ken Sims, the team is screwed for years.


Looking forward to the thoughts....

RW

 

[tanked_as_usual]

way too much resources required between draft picks used and the $$ it would take to sign him

suh or odrick for 1/8th the price plus 4 other potential starters as well as $$$ to sign a FA

the pats would have been better off giving peppers 15M / yr

not to mention the fact that suh is not nearly as mobile as seymour is/was

 

[BelichickFan]

You can add to the Pros that Detroit really wants to move down and Jim Schwartz is a Belichick guy so there's a good relationship there and a team looking to move down. We could probably do it for our #1 this year and next IMO.

That said, it would just cost too much money.

 

[R_T26]

How would it make since to trade half your draft to get Suh, and pay him more guaranteed money then Peppers got, when you still wouldnt have any outside passrush.

Plus this would never happen.

 

[tobias funke]

In one of the deepest drafts in recent history, one in which the Patriots hold 4 valuable picks in the first two rounds, you really think that they ought to abandon it all to take one guy on the defensive line? Even with Wilfork, Warren, Wright, and Pryor under contract, with the possible emergence of Brace?

I'm sorry, I've thought about the Pats moving up to take McCoy or Suh, but there just doesn't seem to be any way to justify it.

 

[Sicilian]

If we were one good defensive lineman away from having no holes, this would be a consideration. But we have too many needs on offense AND defense to consider going all Ditka on this and trading away the farm for one player.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

In one of the deepest drafts in recent history, one in which the Patriots hold 4 valuable picks in the first two rounds, you really think that they ought to abandon it all to take one guy on the defensive line? Even with Wilfork, Warren, Wright, and Pryor under contract, with the possible emergence of Brace?

I'm sorry, I've thought about the Pats moving up to take McCoy or Suh, but there just doesn't seem to be any way to justify it.

I'm just curious here: if the Pats saw this draft the way they did the 2007 draft (a whole lot of meh), could you see them doing it?

 

[RobertWeathers]

All great points...

According to the NFL Draft Trade Value Chart, to acquire the #2 pick (2600 points), the Pats would either need to give up their first 4 picks this year and their 4th rounder) or give up their #1 this year, their #1 next year and either their 44th or 47th selection this year.

Very expensive to acquire picks. Very expensive for money. Very high-risk/reward.

http://www.draftcountdown.com/features/Value-Chart.php

 

[mgteich]

We entered the 2007 draft with one pick in the first three rounds. We drafted Meriweather.
If we do as well in our 2010 choices in the first three rounds, we could have an improved defense for the next four years.

I'm just curious here: if the Pats saw this draft the way they did the 2007 draft (a whole lot of meh), could you see them doing it?

 

[tobias funke]

Honestly, I don't. Belichick is clearly a value guy, and giving up what he'd have to just to get a single player who will require an enormous deal to sign goes against the very definition of 'value'.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I'm just curious here: if the Pats saw this draft the way they did the 2007 draft (a whole lot of meh), could you see them doing it?

There were certainly a number of misses in the 07 draft, but in hindsight, in looking at the players that were theoretically within the Pats striking distance (but Pats didn't have a lot to trade in terms of picks to move up), there were some pretty decent players to be had.

Revis
Leon Hall
Patrick Willis
Timmons
Bowe
Spencer
Meachem

All in all, BW was a fine pick. Can't really complain.

 

[RayClay]

Not in the top 5, but who's to say he won't drop? second question. Is he Seymour? He's 6'4", does he project as a 3-4 DE?

If the answer is yes and he drops to the level we can trade a 1 and a 2, I might go (haven't seen him).

Thing is, if he's a monster DE starter, a lot of pass rushers will look like all pros, plus our line collapsers and rush defense improve.

If he's even iffie as a Seymour replacement, why are we even talking about this?

 

[hawk]

I think Suh will be a great player and would be a tremendous addition to the Patriots. I also think we would have to give up far too much to get him. Years ago I thought Steve Emtman would be a great pro lineman, but due to injuries he didn't pan out. The risk to trade up for Suh is too great regardless of the potential reward.

 

[RobertWeathers]

According to many draftniks, hes the best DL prospect in 10 years.

Not in the top 5, but who's to say he won't drop? second question. Is he Seymour? He's 6'4", does he project as a 3-4 DE?

Supposedly, Suh can play the 1, 3 and 5 technique. He'll need some coaching and he'll make some mistakes, but it seems b/c he was asked to play several techniques, he could make the transition to a 3-4 DT/DE

If the answer is yes and he drops to the level we can trade a 1 and a 2, I might go (haven't seen him).

The answer seems to be a yes.

Thing is, if he's a monster DE starter, a lot of pass rushers will look like all pros, plus our line collapsers and rush defense improve.

He can do it all. Run, Pass rush. Collapse the pocket...

If he's even iffie as a Seymour replacement, why are we even talking about this?

IMO every top pick is iffy.

Another reason that I throw this out here is that the Pats will have 2 #1s next year (OAKs and their own). As I said, they have the currency to do this.

 

[JFK]

If he isn't gone in the first 5 picks, we should try to get him.
The kid can play

 

[ctpatsfan77]

We entered the 2007 draft with one pick in the first three rounds. We drafted Meriweather.
If we do as well in our 2010 choices in the first three rounds, we could have an improved defense for the next four years.

Ummm. . . . The Pats started the draft with 24, 28, and 93(?).

 

[RobertWeathers]

If he isn't gone in the first 5 picks, we should try to get him.
The kid can play

He won't slide. He'll be gone in the top 3 (I think?)

Another concern is that he has had two knee surgeries already. One was an ACL and the other a meniscus tear. Seems to have come back fine, but it's a concern...

 

[VJCPatriot]

Sorry, not going to pay top 2 money for a position that is already manned by the best 3-4 NT in the business right now. The cost in picks and financial committment is way not worth it. If 2011 does usher in the age of the ROOKIE CAP, then picks in that draft are a LOT more money efficient than 2010 picks, although this looks to be a bumper crop year in terms of depth and talent, thanks to all the Juniors coming out who are thinking the same thing -- I come out in 2011 and I'm not getting those insane 1st round contracts and signing bonuses.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

I understand that it is a BIG gamble to trade up and go after an unproven talent at the NFL level, but I'll make the argument to trade up for this kid anyway.

Pros

1. Throughout the 2000s, the Pats not only had solid locker room guys, but had top-level talent in a number of areas. Adding Suh would give the D-line incredible talent for years to come that would be home grown.

2. He would be ready for an extension when Warren (2013) and Wilfork (2014) are up.

3. Schematically, in his prime Seymour meant a lot to this defense. (taking on double-teams, allowing OLBs and other DTs matched up 1:1 with players on the o-line, generated decent pressure, great vs the run). By adding a talent like Suh, the team would take a quantum leap forward in that department.

4. You have the 22nd pick this year. You have OAK #1 next year. You have 3 #2s. You have (budget & cap considerations in 2010 notwithstanding) the ability to dole out a good chunk of change to the kid without (provided the deal is structured properly) experiencing long term cap-ramifications. Not sure how many picks it would take, but IMO the Pats have the currency to do a deal.

Cons

1. With a deep draft, the team can fill a number or areas with high-quality talent.

2. He'd cost a ton and may limit the team in other areas

3. Already drafted Brace and Pryor. May be seen as a admission of "missing" on Brace (as if BB cares)

4. Suh's agent is Eugene Parker. Parker and the Pats have a rocky history. He is Seymour's agent too.

5. If the kid becomes the next Ken Sims, the team is screwed for years.


Looking forward to the thoughts....

RW

I think you are spot on with this analysis. Quality trumps Quantity.

Suh is the best player in this draft and he is more than capable of playing the one position on our defense that is in desperate need of a PLAYMAKER. Let's face it, playmaking 3-4 DE's are very rare. Rarer than pas rushers if you do the numbers.

BB was a genius in the last decade because he always had a DE and NT that both commanded double teams. That left the remaining Pats 9 defenders to account for 7 opposing offensive players.

There are other DE's in this draft, but NONE are playmakers, all are second tier type players, like Warren, Green or Wright.

I would trade our 2010 #1, and the Raiders 2011 #1 for a chance to jump up and take Suh. And I think with as weak as this QB crop is, that if Bradford goes #1, the teams at #2 or #3 would go for this trade in a heartbeat.

Does BB have the stomach and the wallet to be this bold?

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I think you are spot on with this analysis. Quality trumps Quantity.

Except that BB's philosophy isn't about quality or quantity per se. It's about added value.

If Wilfork were still holding out around draft day, I could see it happening. But with Wilfork in the fold, I'm just not at all convinced that Suh would add enough value to this team to justify the cost.