Michael Smith: Pats wanted Hardesty

[emoney_33]

Hardesty went in the 2nd, a round earlier than our traded 3rd.

And the next RB didn't go until the 4th. If Cleveland didn't select him with their late 2nd, he'd probably be available in the 3rd. The Patriots may have moved up to get him if that were the case and they felt he would go before their turn in the 3rd.

 

[PatDaPatriot]

They had a private work-out with Hardesty, so it doesn't surprise me they wanted him. However, if they truly had to have him they would've grabbed him at 58, and not have traded down with Houston. Unless, as stated earlier in the thread that he was a player targeted for round 3. I'm not at all disappointed with how things turned out. Hardesty's injury history is a big concern. Furthermore, he was not particularly productive until his final season...

However, it is good to see that BB isn't necessarily satisfied with the RB situation. I can definitely see them possibly making a move for a veteran down the line...

 

[fair catch fryar]

I've always liked and respected Michael Smith. Since he went to the 4-letter network I tend to take his "reports" with a little salt and wonder if he's as credible an insider as he used to be? On that note, I wouldn't doubt if the Jags heard that the Pats wanted Alualu so they took him with the 10th pick

 

[Underdog]

I call shenanigans on this one. I find it hard to believe they would've traded out of 58 with a team desperate for a RB (HOU) and with two more teams they had to believe could go RB picking right behind them (CLE & SEA). If they really wanted Hardesty, they would've just stayed at 58, no?

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Where exactly was he picked and where was he projected?

Seems he provided "value" in the 3rd round. I'd be upset if someone took my value in the 2nd round.

BB said we would have selected McCourty if they HAD to draft at 22. So trading back and getting added ammo is great- IF YOU CAN GET YOUR GUY.

No doubt Jax would have loved to trade back to get their pick. However, if nobody wants to trade......

 

[BUSTAMOVE]

I am psched over our draft. One of the big reasons being Spikes. Spikes was projected in all early drafts going in the top 15. His 40 time scared people, but watching tape on him the hell with 40 times in regard to ILB. I'll take him over the RB anyday. You can't get them all

 

[BradyFTW!]

Re: Michael Smithats Wanted Hardesty

This is encouraging news. If BB was willing to use a 2nd round pick on a RB, it shows he doesn't think the core is "fine", like many hear believe.

Huh? He used a first on a CB, does that mean that our CBs weren't fine? He used a 1st on a RB when we had Corey Dillon- does that mean that Dillon wasn't fine? He used a 2nd on a NT last year, does that mean that Wilfork wasn't fine? He was using 2nds on defensive linemen like Marquise Hill back when we had an absolute dream team put together on the DL.

Bottom line, Belichick picks for talent and likes a stable of RBs. If you think the fact that he liked Hardesty is an indictment of our RBs, then I dunno what to tell you, but I think you're reading way too much into it.

 

[Mike the Brit]

Re: Michael Smithats Wanted Hardesty

Huh? He used a first on a CB, does that mean that our CBs weren't fine? He used a 1st on a RB when we had Corey Dillon- does that mean that Dillon wasn't fine? He used a 2nd on a NT last year, does that mean that Wilfork wasn't fine? He was using 2nds on defensive linemen like Marquise Hill back when we had an absolute dream team put together on the DL.

Bottom line, Belichick picks for talent and likes a stable of RBs. If you think the fact that he liked Hardesty is an indictment of our RBs, then I dunno what to tell you, but I think you're reading way too much into it.

Dead right! I read no criticism of Bodden and Butler into the McCourty pick.

In his ideal world, BB would just draft BPA every time. He said once that the team has needs every year at every position. What that means (of course) is that you hope that the needs aren't so much greater at one position that they can't be ignored. Apart from anything else, his as-little-as-possible for needs strategy keeps him inscrutable. You know he loves it when the GM at the other end of the line says "It's Belichick on the phone and he wants to trade. I haven't the slightest go**am idea who's he's after, though."

 

[cornhuskers_2002]

i was waiting to see if he'd fall to the patriots 3rd round pick. oh well.

 

[spacecrime]

Re: Michael Smithats Wanted Hardesty

This is encouraging news. If BB was willing to use a 2nd round pick on a RB, it shows he doesn't think the core is "fine", like many hear believe.

not really. he drafted a QB in the third round and he thinks Brady if fine. He either had the guy highly rated OR he want to get him late and was upset that the Browns reached for him.

Our RB core is fine. It was a very highly ranked unit last year in the NFL. People just want flash and sizzle instead of blue-collar production.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: Michael Smithats Wanted Hardesty

Huh? He used a first on a CB, does that mean that our CBs weren't fine? He used a 1st on a RB when we had Corey Dillon- does that mean that Dillon wasn't fine? He used a 2nd on a NT last year, does that mean that Wilfork wasn't fine? He was using 2nds on defensive linemen like Marquise Hill back when we had an absolute dream team put together on the DL.

Bottom line, Belichick picks for talent and likes a stable of RBs. If you think the fact that he liked Hardesty is an indictment of our RBs, then I dunno what to tell you, but I think you're reading way too much into it.

Good point, wrong question, because our corners were NOT fine.

 

[AJY the Jets troll]

The Pats also wish Gerald Mccoy was available.

It's the draft, it was the second round, there are at least 40 players the Pats would've rather had, just like every single other team that didn't have 32 first round picks.

 

[VJCPatriot]

Re: Michael Smithats Wanted Hardesty

Our RB core is fine. It was a very highly ranked unit last year in the NFL. People just want flash and sizzle instead of blue-collar production.

Unfortunately that 'blue collar production' fizzled against the tough run teams and in the playoffs. The Pats were essentially forced to become a passing team and without Welker, they couldn't quite pull that off. Thus the Ravens' drubbing.

I think this shows that BB was aware that the runningbacks could be improved but he had a certain value for Hardesty, and that's why he traded back. If Hardesty had still been there in the third or late second, he might be a Patriot today. Fortunately the RB quality looks better in the 2011 draft anyways.

Regardless, I'm happy with the Spikes selection as it really changes the look of our defense. There was some bad tackling last season, and lack of enthusiasm and fire. Hopefully Spikes helps fix that because leadership and tackling appears to be his strong points.

 

[emoney_33]

Re: Michael Smithats Wanted Hardesty

Unfortunately that 'blue collar production' fizzled against the tough run teams and in the playoffs. The Pats were essentially forced to become a passing team and without Welker, they couldn't quite pull that off. Thus the Ravens' drubbing.

Sounds like a little bit of revisionist history. First of all, good run teams are good for a reason. Secondly the Ravens allowed something silly like 3.4 YPC during the regular season. Thirdly and most importantly, abandoning the run in the playoffs had absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the running backs. It was 24-0 before the offense ran their 11th play. Hell it was 14-0 before the offense could run their 4th play.

 

[PatsFanStnfrd]

Better to have picked Spikes. The central aspect is that the Pats linebacking corps needed reinforcement much more so than the running game.

 

[efin98]

This smells similar to the Patriots' claimed interest in Percy Harvin last year...

I don't buy it for a minute that he was targeted by them in that round as a possible draftee, I buy that they may have had interest if he slipped to them in the 3rd round as a "best player available" selection with the pick they traded to Carolina but not before then.


And if the running game were really a problem bad enough to address in the draft that they would go targeting running backs they had plenty of chances before and after that pick to take one- yet they did not.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

Re: Michael Smithats Wanted Hardesty

Dead right! I read no criticism of Bodden and Butler into the McCourty pick.

In his ideal world, BB would just draft BPA every time. He said once that the team has needs every year at every position. What that means (of course) is that you hope that the needs aren't so much greater at one position that they can't be ignored. Apart from anything else, his as-little-as-possible for needs strategy keeps him inscrutable. You know he loves it when the GM at the other end of the line says "It's Belichick on the phone and he wants to trade. I haven't the slightest go**am idea who's he's after, though."

Huh? He used a first on a CB, does that mean that our CBs weren't fine? He used a 1st on a RB when we had Corey Dillon- does that mean that Dillon wasn't fine? He used a 2nd on a NT last year, does that mean that Wilfork wasn't fine? He was using 2nds on defensive linemen like Marquise Hill back when we had an absolute dream team put together on the DL.

Bottom line, Belichick picks for talent and likes a stable of RBs. If you think the fact that he liked Hardesty is an indictment of our RBs, then I dunno what to tell you, but I think you're reading way too much into it.

Believe it or not, the Pats pass defense isn't as good as people think and it still was a need. As much as I wanted a pass rusher in the first round, there wasn't anybody available. While Hughes is most people's favorite, he's way too light to hold up in a 2 gap scheme. In addition, Kindle is too much of a risk. In the end, taking a CB was the right choice because every team needs 3 good CB's. The Jets are a perfect example. The Jets had Revis and Cromartie, yet they still drafted Wilson.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Re: Michael Smithats Wanted Hardesty

Good point, wrong question, because our corners were NOT fine.

Going into the season with Bodden, Butler, Springs and Wilhite as the top 4 CBs wouldn't be ideal, but it would have been serviceable. My point stands.