What if the first 4 picks can be traded for proven young NFL players? Would you?

[DW Toys]

Cousins, I have grown weary of this constant banter between the Sports talking heads discussing the Draft and who we should take and why. Fact is the Draft is just a huge gamble and sometimes I think certain teams like the Pats, out think themselves.

Our First round picks from 2000 (no 1st pick that year) until 2009 (no first last year)have had some success and some mediocrity. 2001 Graham (we miss him), 2004 Watson and 2006 Maroney were nothing more than serviceable and questionable as far as actual first round value. Many others had Pro Bowl seasons and were top tier players. We had a 66% success rate of high quality picks (not saying these three or the 33% were not quality but I don't know if you can truthfully say first round quality) in the first round of the Drafts.

Our bigger misses have been in the second round. Since 2000 we have had 13 second round Draft picks. To date only 38% of the Pats second round picks can be classified as being anywhere near top tier NFL players and that is giving a pass to Volmer, Butler and Eugene Wilson because he had one or two outstanding years here and has become NFL dependable but surely not elite.

So we go into the 2010 Draft with one first, and three second rounders that our track record has said will be 38% successful. Are we all happy about the Draft saving our 2010 Team?

Cousins, I am not a gambler. Just for fun I have explored possibilities of removing the temptation of taking these "sure thing" first four picks and turn them into viable trades. Now contracts do take a part in this I understand but most will be reasonable. I would like your feedback and ideas. They will all fill our needed holes with quality players with NFL experience and will be no worse and more than likely better than any combination of Draftees we can take....plus NFL READY!

I think that this platform can change four picks to five as well.

#22 RFA pick to Minn. for DE/OLB Ray Edwards. 11 Sacks in the last 11 games including Playoffs. That is 11 more sacks in the NFL than Ordick or Dunlop etc. have. He is only 25. They dis him because he plays on a great D-Line but are Wilfolk and Warren not top D-Line mates too? This will cost us a bit more but again NFL ready. You pay for that curve and the battle tested ability. This is a no-brainer. Who is better at #22 in the NFL Draft?

#44 to Carolina for WR Steve Smith. The Panthers have no first round pick. They need to reboot and rebuild around a young QB. Smith doesn't have that time at 31. He is perfect for the Pats. A Pro Bowl type player who can still stretch the field and take over a game. He makes Moss a better player in 2010 and a luxury for TB. He has a present contract of about $5m-$6m and it is up in 2012. He still has some gas in the tank. Moss may be gone after 2010 which Smith solves another issue.

#47 to Philadelphia for OLB Chris Gocong and their third round pick #87. This 26 year old kid was mis-cast in a 4-3 defense from day one. His true position is rush OLB in a 3-4. We will have to contend with three other teams for his services. He is 6'2" and 263lbs so he can set the edge. His pass rushing abilities were wasted in the Philly 4-3. His contract was just resigned for one year at reasonable money. 35 NFL starts. I can see a possible Vrabel scenario.

#53 to Chicago for 26 year old Greg Olsen and his 70 2009 receptions. We would spend a second rounder for Gronkowski or Hernandez or the 25 year old Pita but not take this kid now? Why not? Neither one of those will light it up blocking. Olsen is still young. You have to admit the Pats made Watson a better blocker. You have Crumpler as your blocking TE. This is another no brainer. We needed a TE anyway. His contract is still reasonable.

#87 from the Eagles would be a gamble but I feel this could be THE STEAL. 25 year old former first rounder Adam Carriker DE from the Rams. He had a decent rookie year in 2007 but added 20 lbs to play DT and was dinged in 2008 and 2009. Now healthy if he can play at his best weight at about 6'5" and 292 lbs and get back his great speed, his NCAA measurables were terrific. AND he has NFL experience. The Redskins would like him as well. I think and third rounder #87 (+player?) might spring him to be our starting 5 technique DE. His contract is realistic by today's standards.

O.K. I would match these guys up to anyone's "mock" picks of #22,#44,#47 and #53. Fire away!

I am not a fan of some of these guys. I just think there is a fit here. Most are still young and they are all ready for 2010 while a Draft pick no so much. The success curve goes up.
DW Toys

 

[JackBauer]

Adam Carriker is a bust. He sucks. Period.

Who cares if he has "NFL experience." So did Steve Martin.

 

[upstater1]

No, I wouldn't make these trades. It's just bad strategy.

The reason that any of these guys are available is because they are approaching the last years of their contracts and their teams cannot lock them up.

Any team that gives up the possibility of bringing in young talent inexpensively for proven expensive talent is going to lose in the end. It's not a winning strategy. Sooner or later, you will kill your salary cap by doing this, especially in a year in which the draft is loaded.

Randy Moss
Wes Welker
Derrick Burgess
Alex Smith
Duane Starks
Greg Lewis

The track record is questionable, and really the only guy that really worked out in terms of salary is Welker.

If you can pick pocket a team like the way the Patriots picked up Welker, then yes, trade a pick for a proven player. but you have to assume that the guy on the other end of the deal is totally clueless. As a strategy, it's a loser.

 

[patchick]

So you're counting all of those players agreeing to contract extensions without testing free agency?

 

[DW Toys]

No, I wouldn't make these trades. It's just bad strategy.

The reason that any of these guys are available is because they are approaching the last years of their contracts and their teams cannot lock them up.

Any team that gives up the possibility of bringing in young talent inexpensively for proven expensive talent is going to lose in the end. It's not a winning strategy. Sooner or later, you will kill your salary cap by doing this, especially in a year in which the draft is loaded.

Randy Moss
Wes Welker
Derrick Burgess
Alex Smith
Duane Starks
Greg Lewis

The track record is questionable, and really the only guy that really worked out in terms of salary is Welker.

If you can pick pocket a team like the way the Patriots picked up Welker, then yes, trade a pick for a proven player. but you have to assume that the guy on the other end of the deal is totally clueless. As a strategy, it's a loser.

You have also had Vrable, Dillion, Fauria, Harrison, Phifer and to a lesser extent Gaffney and Colvin et al that haven't been too shabby. Some were FA's but other trades. We even got a decent year and a half from AD. I can't see why you say Randy Moss? Smith and Lewis were lower picks. I have to differ with this with you.
DW Toys

 

[DW Toys]

So you're counting all of those players agreeing to contract extensions without testing free agency?

The only one that you will have to contract is Edwards. The others are trades and not FAs. Smith has a contract to 2012, Olsen and Carriker have contracts and Gocong just signed his one year tender.

So yes.
DW Toys

 

[DW Toys]

Adam Carriker is a bust. He sucks. Period.

Who cares if he has "NFL experience." So did Steve Martin.

So you approve of the others as a basic scenario?

You are positive Ordick (etc. at a 5 tech) is better than Carriker?
DW Toys

 

[patchick]

The only one that you will have to contract is Edwards. The others are trades and not FAs. Smith has a contract to 2010, Olsen and Carriker have contracts and Gocong just signed his one year tender.

So yes.
DW Toys

Ah, ok -- so you don't count on extending players whose contracts are up after this year, meaning you're trading your entire draft for one year of the players on your list. Do you keep doing this every year, then?

 

[CheeseMonkeys]

Nooo, bad idea. Rookies are much cheaper to sign than Prooven NFL players and our salary cap would be hurting. Plus, I like drafting new guys to watch play. I don't want other teams players.

 

[DW Toys]

Ah, ok -- so you don't count on extending players whose contracts are up after this year, meaning you're trading your entire draft for one year of the players on your list. Do you keep doing this every year, then?

Fair response. Good points. I see where you are going. We have a couple of years with three of them. Carriker 2012 (and other teams have interest), Smith 2012, Gocong 2011. Olsen 2012. You might not want to sign them to extensions if they do not perform (see Watson). You will be locked in with four of them for another two years at least (pending Edwards extension which will be multi-year).

Second round picks have usually four year contracts. But can get cut after two (see Chad Jackson).
DW Toys

 

[DW Toys]

Nooo, bad idea. Rookies are much cheaper to sign than Prooven NFL players and our salary cap would be hurting. Plus, I like drafting new guys to watch play. I don't want other teams players.

Decent truthful response.
DW Toys

 

[DW Toys]

Ah, ok -- so you don't count on extending players whose contracts are up after this year, meaning you're trading your entire draft for one year of the players on your list. Do you keep doing this every year, then?

We can trade players as well. Dated March 19th.

The Chicago Sun Times suggests Greg Olsen is still a possibility to be traded.
Though GM Jerry Angelo denies Olsen is on the block, he's expected to listen to offers. The Sun Times connects him to the Patriots again, noting that James Sanders could be expendable to help the Bears at safety. The Pats also possess three second-round picks while the Bears have zero. If anything happens, it will likely go down on draft weekend.

 

[upstater1]

You have also had Vrable, Dillion, Fauria, Harrison, Phifer and to a lesser extent Gaffney and Colvin et al that haven't been too shabby. Some were FA's but other trades. We even got a decent year and a half from AD. I can't see why you say Randy Moss? Smith and Lewis were lower picks. I have to differ with this with you.
DW Toys

I'm all in favor of signing FAs. I have no problem with that.

Most of the guys you just listed are FAs. I have no problem signing them.

I should have listed Dillon on my sheet.

Also, I didn't include Moss in my post above because of his contract. He is clearly a special case. But you can't build a team on Moss and Dillon deals.

The only guy that sticks out on that entire list of players we traded for is Wes Welker. We got a proven player and he came cheap. If you can pull that off, then of course you should trade your picks.

But trading picks to pay top dollar is not a great strategy.

 

[fester]

I would not object in principle to one or two draft picks traded away for young vets/RFA talent. However I do object to your strategy as it is an idea taken to its logical extreme and thus has a couple of flaws in it.

First, the bust-rate for 2nd rounders (not in league after 4 years) approaches 50%, so using your argument, the Pats draft slightly worse than league average in the 2nd round. Most teams will draft around the league average so a 2nd round pick is a crapshoot to the team receiving the pick in trade. If these players are THE Answer for the Pats, then giving up 2nds for them means they are getting very good players dirt cheap in terms of draft value.

Second, this plan blows up the Pats salary/talent structure (cap or no cap) by the 2012 season as there are few players from the class of 2010 who should be NFL competent starters or better who are still playing on their rookie deals and lots of players who are looking for their 2nd or 3rd contracts which means big money. If the Pats are operating on a budget with a realistic budget constraint, that means several players will be lost to FA, a few resigned for big money, and their replacements will be at best JAGS if not 6th, 7th and UDFAs who should either by on special teams only, the street or the practice squad instead of seeing regular duty.

So we go into the 2010 Draft with one first, and three second rounders that our track record has said will be 38% successful. Are we all happy about the Draft saving our 2010 Team?

Cousins, I am not a gambler. Just for fun I have explored possibilities of removing the temptation of taking these "sure thing" first four picks and turn them into viable trades. Now contracts do take a part in this I understand but most will be reasonable. I would like your feedback and ideas. They will all fill our needed holes with quality players with NFL experience and will be no worse and more than likely better than any combination of Draftees we can take....plus NFL READY!

I am not a fan of some of these guys. I just think there is a fit here. Most are still young and they are all ready for 2010 while a Draft pick no so much. The success curve goes up.
DW Toys

 

[JackBauer]

So you approve of the others as a basic scenario?

You are positive Ordick (etc. at a 5 tech) is better than Carriker?
DW Toys

No. Trading a bunch of draft picks for players is very rarely an effective strategy, which is why you never see any of the "good" NFL teams doing it.

 

[dryheat44]

Sure I would. For DeMarcus Ware, Mike Wallace, Ryan Clady, and Dustin Keller.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

2 Things about your scenerio....

I think Carriker has yet to bring ANYTHING to the table and trading for him is beyond risky,a guy has to do something special or notable to be used in a trade with NE.

I think Steve Smith is still a good WR but I don't put him up there like he used to be,I would rather see the team take a chance on a young WR and have this team build up for the coming years than to take a chance on a WR who has been with ONE team and ONE system for MANY years and could very well NOT adapt to this style of offense or getting in sync with Brady.

I really would like to see this team add some quality youth,even if that meant being more inexperienced,it might pay in the long run (Harvin,DeSean Jackson is an example of the fact that rookie WR talent is out there EVERY year).

 

[Marqui]

I think Steve Smith is still a good WR but I don't put him up there like he used to be,I would rather see the team take a chance on a young WR and have this team build up for the coming years than to take a chance on a WR who has been with ONE team and ONE system for MANY years and could very well NOT adapt to this style of offense or getting in sync with Brady.

I'm pretty sure he was talking about the Giants Steve Smith.

 

[DW Toys]

I'm pretty sure he was talking about the Giants Steve Smith.

No. Panthers Steve Smith.
DW Toys

 

[VJCPatriot]

Is Steve Smith even on the trading block? I don't see why Carolina would give up their best receiver for just a 2. And that's about the only trade you mentioned that I would see as appetizing from the Pats point of view. Moss + Smith + Welker (when he comes back) + Edelman, would be absolutely deadly for a year or so.