Blue Chippers and Red Chippers

[mgteich]

Where will the breaks be this year?

BLUE CHIPPERS
The break is usually in the 9-14 range, always with occasional one or two players rated as studs falling through. We could always wait and be lucky at 17 as we were with Wilfork.

RED CHIPPERS
Often it is said that 15-35 or 15 -50 or 15-65 give you almost the same quality player. Where is the break this year. Do you believe that pick 60 is close to 30 or 15?

IHMO, there are many of the same players being talked about at 17, 28 and 33. There are few who are said to "definitely" be there at 17 and will be very "unlikely to be there at 28 or even 33.

BOTTOM LINE
This type of situation often results in Belichick moving down a bit from 17 or 28, unless a stud falls through that Belichick judges womeone else will pick at 18-27. Or unless, Belichick has a couple of red chippers that he feels will be gone a few picks later.

WHAT SAY YOU ALL
Would you trade down to 27 or 29 to someone who gave you their 2nd at 59 or 71 (the draft value is about right)? That would give 2 in a row in the 1st and 2nd in addition to pick 33.

We would have 5 picks in the top 61.

ALTERNATIVELY OR IN ADDITION
If you don't like the end of the second, we could trade two seconds or a second and a third to move up.

THE KEY ISSUE
is where will the top quality end. I understand that even after this "break" there will be opportunities for a mid-round player anf diamond in the rough late.

 

[Water Boy]

Where will the breaks be this year?

BLUE CHIPPERS
The break is usually in the 9-14 range, always with occasional one or two players rated as studs falling through. We could always wait and be lucky at 17 as we were with Wilfork.

RED CHIPPERS
Often it is said that 15-35 or 15 -50 or 15-65 give you almost the same quality player. Where is the break this year. Do you believe that pick 60 is close to 30 or 15?

IHMO, there are many of the same players being talked about at 17, 28 and 33. There are few who are said to "definitely" be there at 17 and will be very "unlikely to be there at 28 or even 33.

BOTTOM LINE
This type of situation often results in Belichick moving down a bit from 17 or 28, unless a stud falls through that Belichick judges womeone else will pick at 18-27. Or unless, Belichick has a couple of red chippers that he feels will be gone a few picks later.

WHAT SAY YOU ALL
Would you trade down to 27 or 29 to someone who gave you their 2nd at 59 or 71 (the draft value is about right)? That would give 2 in a row in the 1st and 2nd in addition to pick 33.

We would have 5 picks in the top 61.

ALTERNATIVELY OR IN ADDITION
If you don't like the end of the second, we could trade two seconds or a second and a third to move up.

THE KEY ISSUE
is where will the top quality end. I understand that even after this "break" there will be opportunities for a mid-round player anf diamond in the rough late.

Here's my humble attempt:

Blue Chippers 6:

Da Quan Bowers
Patrick Peterson
Nick Fairley
Marcel Dareus
AJ Green
Cam Newton

Almost Blue Chippers 5:
Robert Quinn
Von Miller
Cameron Jordan
Blane Gabbert
Prince Amukamara

I'd say the red chippers go about half way through round 2 about 11-45.

As far as trading down from 17, if Cam Jordan (very likely) and Aldon Smith (possibly) are off the board, I would be all for a trade down.

 

[bucky]

Maybe it depends on what you define as a blue chipper. But I think it's extremely rare to find 8 or 9 of them. In 2010, I would say there were 4 - Bradford, Suh, McCoy and Berry. In 2009, were there any? Are Stafford, Tyson Jackson, or Jason Smith blue chippers? What about 2008? You could say there was a top 7, but were Gholston and Sedrick Ellis really blue chippers?

That said, I think the list this year is very short - Peterson, AJ Green, Fairley and maybe Bowers.

 

[Sciz]

2009 was a really bad year at the top of the draft. I think there were 6 in 2008, hence Bill trading back from #7.

I've got 4 for this year right now: Green, Peterson, Fairley, Bowers. I suppose Newton is the closest to being a fifth, but I pretty much ignore all high-round QB prospects right now.

 

[mgteich]

I like your humble attempt. It is what I had in mind. A dozen that are likely to be out of reach seems a good place for us to start, given that we pick 17th.

I would add Julio Jones to your "almost blue-chippers", given us an even dozen of "blue chippers" or almost blue chippers".

At this point, it seems that all these are out of reach without us using our #60 to move up to 11 or 12. Of course, we have the ammunition to move even higher if we wish.

Here's my humble attempt:

Blue Chippers 6:

Da Quan Bowers
Patrick Peterson
Nick Fairley
Marcel Dareus
AJ Green
Cam Newton

Almost Blue Chippers 5:
Robert Quinn
Von Miller
Cameron Jordan
Blane Gabbert
Prince Amukamara

I'd say the red chippers go about half way through round 2 about 11-45.

As far as trading down from 17, if Cam Jordan (very likely) and Aldon Smith (possibly) are off the board, I would be all for a trade down.

 

[dryheat44]

Where will the breaks be this year?

WHAT SAY YOU ALL
Would you trade down to 27 or 29 to someone who gave you their 2nd at 59 or 71 (the draft value is about right)? That would give 2 in a row in the 1st and 2nd in addition to pick 33.

We would have 5 picks in the top 61.

THE KEY ISSUE
is where will the top quality end. I understand that even after this "break" there will be opportunities for a mid-round player anf diamond in the rough late.

It seems to me that there are very few "blue chippers" in this draft (12 by my count), and fewer still that would be a good fit in New England (Somewhere between 4-8). The only one who is somewhat likely to be there at #17 would be Ingram. And I don't feel comfortable taking a running back that high.

So, that being said, unless BB makes an uncharacteristically strong move up to get in position for a guy like Dareus, I would accept that proposed trade in half a heartbeat.

Honestly, when mocking this draft, I'm hard-pressed to find a guy who really makes sense at #17. I'd probably try to package it in a trade for an established veteran (WR isn't a huge priority for the team, but Larry Fitzgerald makes too much sense not to try to bring him in). Barring that, I'd flip it to a team for a top 35 pick and a projected top 35 pick next year.

 

[CTHuskies]

Here's my humble attempt:

Blue Chippers 6:

Da Quan Bowers
Patrick Peterson
Nick Fairley
Marcel Dareus
AJ Green
Cam Newton

Almost Blue Chippers 5:
Robert Quinn
Von Miller
Cameron Jordan
Blane Gabbert
Prince Amukamara

I'd say the red chippers go about half way through round 2 about 11-45.

As far as trading down from 17, if Cam Jordan (very likely) and Aldon Smith (possibly) are off the board, I would be all for a trade down.

I agree with a number of your selections, here is another attempt:

Blue Chippers: 8
Nick Fairley
Patrick Peterson
Da'Quan Bowers
A.J. Green
Robert Quinn
Marcel Dareus
Von Miller
Cameron Jordan

Almost Blue Chippers: 4
Aldon Smith
J.J. Watt
Prince Amukamara
Blaine Gabbert

Red Chippers: 34 (in no particular order)
Muhammad Wilkerson
Cam Newton
Corey Liuget
Adrian Clayborn
Julio Jones
Jimmy Smith
Titus Young
Mikel LeShoure
Mark Ingram
Brandon Harris
Nate Solder
Jon Baldwin
Anthony Castonzo
Akeem Ayers
Tyron Smith
Justin Houston
Martez Wilson
Rahim Moore
Torrey Smith
Gabe Carimi
Ryan Kerrigan
Mike Pouncey
Derek Sherrod
Jake Locker
Danny Watkins
Ryan Mallett
Stephen Paea
Cameron Heyward
Aaron Williams
Phil Taylor
Kyle Rudolph
Stefan Wisniewski
Ryan Williams
Ben Ijalana

As far as trading down from 17, ifI would be all for a trading more than once down. If Locker drops out of first round, it would make #33 very valuable.

 

[mgteich]

A fine analysis a usual

BTW, I don't find the number of blue chippers esepcially low. If I add Ingram, who I have a bit on the edge, I would have 13.

It seems to me that there are very few "blue chippers" in this draft (12 by my count), and fewer still that would be a good fit in New England (Somewhere between 4-8). The only one who is somewhat likely to be there at #17 would be Ingram. And I don't feel comfortable taking a running back that high.

So, that being said, unless BB makes an uncharacteristically strong move up to get in position for a guy like Dareus, I would accept that proposed trade in half a heartbeat.

Honestly, when mocking this draft, I'm hard-pressed to find a guy who really makes sense at #17. I'd probably try to package it in a trade for an established veteran (WR isn't a huge priority for the team, but Larry Fitzgerald makes too much sense not to try to bring him in). Barring that, I'd flip it to a team for a top 35 pick and a projected top 35 pick next year.

 

[Water Boy]

I would add Julio Jones to your "almost blue-chippers", given us an even dozen of "blue chippers" or almost blue chippers".

Agreed. That was a clerical error on my part.

 

[Water Boy]

Honestly, when mocking this draft, I'm hard-pressed to find a guy who really makes sense at #17.

There is plenty of room on the Aldon Smith Bandwagon.

 

[dryheat44]

There is plenty of room on the Aldon Smith Bandwagon.

I think Smith will be a good player, but it's hard to see Belichick spending #17 on someone so young.

 

[BradyManny]

I think Smith will be a good player, but it's hard to see Belichick spending #17 on someone so young.

While Mayo had some more experience and production behind him, he was an underclassmen and Belichick did pull the trigger on him at #10. Ultimately, Smith will be only a few months younger than Mayo was, though he admittedly may be a more raw prospect.

 

[CTHuskies]

While Mayo had some more experience and production behind him, he was an underclassmen and Belichick did pull the trigger on him at #10. Ultimately, Smith will be only a few months younger than Mayo was, though he admittedly may be a more raw prospect.

With all the picks this year, BB needs to take a chance on some one with a huge upside. I agree he's unlikely to do so. He he goes young, do you think JJ Watt would be more to his liking? Watt seems to be less risky.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

A fine analysis a usual

BTW, I don't find the number of blue chippers esepcially low. If I add Ingram, who I have a bit on the edge, I would have 13.

I don't know if Mallett or Newton qualified as blue or red in your count, but I'd love to see them get drafted higher than expected because they're QBs. That could push one of the blues down to striking range for us, say 17 + 92 for 14 or 15. BB could always move down with 28 or 33 to reclaim that 3rd as well.

 

[fxkane]

I've a sense that we trade 17 for a mid-twenties pick and the additional second round pick. But only if we have this kind of leverage at 17. If not, I think we do go after the best under-classman on the board at 17 and ink the kid for 5 years.

Perhaps we trade 33 for a first rounder next year, because it will be hard to trade any other second rounder for a higher pick in 2011. We might also pick the third round Minnesota pick for a second next year.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

I've a sense that we trade 17 for a mid-twenties pick and the additional second round pick. But only if we have this kind of leverage at 17. If not, I think we do go after the best under-classman on the board at 17 and ink the kid for 5 years.

Perhaps we trade 33 for a first rounder next year, because it will be hard to trade any other second rounder for a higher pick in 2011. We might also pick the third round Minnesota pick for a second next year.

I have to agree. I see this draft as having 15 maybe 16 studs and then 30 guys or so that all grade out really close.

In an ideal situation someone from the top 15 falls and BB trades the #17 to a team in the twenties that wants to come up and get him.

 

[Patriot Missile]

I have to agree. I see this draft as having 15 maybe 16 studs and then 30 guys or so that all grade out really close.

In an ideal situation someone from the top 15 falls and BB trades the #17 to a team in the twenties that wants to come up and get him.

I'm sure this will happen. I picture someone dropping that everyone here is screaming to draft ad having him trade the pick. That is so BB like.

 

[Metaphors]

I have to agree. I see this draft as having 15 maybe 16 studs and then 30 guys or so that all grade out really close.

In an ideal situation someone from the top 15 falls and BB trades the #17 to a team in the twenties that wants to come up and get him.

Does that make sense in this draft? For this team? In general that approach makes perfect sense but in a shallow, top-heavy draft and for a deep but young team, I'm not sure this is a sensible tactic.

Here is where I'm going with this...this team is likely to return pretty much intact. There is going to be turnover but the kind of turnover is key. Some established veterans won't be returning. TBC, Wilhite, Neal (retiring) are some guesses. So there is room on the roster for some top draft picks (red and deep blue chippers) to come in and replace snaps from departing vets. There are also spots at the back end where developmental types (5th round to UDFA) can battle to make the roster or PS.

However, I don't see much room for 3rd/4th round guys that are talented, have flaws/limitations that prevent them from seeing meaning snaps early and need time to develop. The roster is littered with those types...so drafting more just is swapping out guys that may just be hitting their stride and resetting the clock on a new batch.

Also, this draft seems to hit a talent "cliff" at around pick #75 or so. I would think the Pats would want to maximize their picks at the top...using the middle rounds to do it. If my take on this draft class is accurate, I doubt Belichick trades down just because he has done it in the past.

 

[MaineMan]

Does that make sense in this draft? For this team? In general that approach makes perfect sense but in a shallow, top-heavy draft and for a deep but young team, I'm not sure this is a sensible tactic.

Here is where I'm going with this...this team is likely to return pretty much intact. There is going to be turnover but the kind of turnover is key. Some established veterans won't be returning. TBC, Wilhite, Neal (retiring) are some guesses. So there is room on the roster for some top draft picks (red and deep blue chippers) to come in and replace snaps from departing vets. There are also spots at the back end where developmental types (5th round to UDFA) can battle to make the roster or PS.

However, I don't see much room for 3rd/4th round guys that are talented, have flaws/limitations that prevent them from seeing meaning snaps early and need time to develop. The roster is littered with those types...so drafting more just is swapping out guys that may just be hitting their stride and resetting the clock on a new batch.

Also, this draft seems to hit a talent "cliff" at around pick #75 or so. I would think the Pats would want to maximize their picks at the top...using the middle rounds to do it. If my take on this draft class is accurate, I doubt Belichick trades down just because he has done it in the past.

Actually, I guess this is sort of my sense of it, too. In my latest stab in the Mock Draft Contest thread, I (inadvertently) have BB preserving two 1sts and two 2nds while trading down a bit to pick up later round picks and then trading 3rds for 2012 2nds, so that we end up with, as you suggest, a few top guys and (mostly) later round, roster-end challengers.

 

[Metaphors]

Actually, I guess this is sort of my sense of it, too. In my latest stab in the Mock Draft Contest thread, I (inadvertently) have BB preserving two 1sts and two 2nds while trading down a bit to pick up later round picks and then trading 3rds for 2012 2nds, so that we end up with, as you suggest, a few top guys and (mostly) later round, roster-end challengers.

That is where my head is, but I have to admit this is the most difficult draft season for me to get a handle on. Take a look at the generally agreed up areas of need:

OL - Mankins, Light and Neal could all be back. Connolly, Wendell and Ohrnberger all have experience in the program and could have been released multiple times (but weren't). Maneri and Ojinnaka were acquired for a reason. This doesn't even count Kaczur coming back.

DL - The Pats have 8 players that have started (Wilfork, both Warrens, Wright, Brace, Pryor, Love, Deaderick). Moore proved to be a solid rush specialist out of 40 front. And Richard is still hanging around.

CB - Bodden and McCourty are the starters. Butler has the talent to be a solid nickel/backup and Wilhite has experience in the system. Arrington is amazingly valuable as a solid corner and special teams ace.

S - Say what you want about Meriweather but he makes plays for a defense that needs playmakers. Chung is solid and improving and the coaches seem very comfortable with Sanders. Sergio and Josh Barrett have to be a consideration and McGowan and Page could both be brought back.

WR - Assume Branch and Welker return as the top guys. Tate just needs more time with Brady to break out. Edelperson has produced whenever he has been given regular practice/game reps. Price has the physical skills to be very productive and needs to be in the mix.

Depending on Belichick's evaluations, each of these positions could be all set for 2011. Or Belichick may want to make major changes for any of them. Outside of RB and OLB, it is impossible to know which youngsters are on the verge of getting major snaps and which are on the verge of collecting unemployment.

So outside of getting one or two OLBs early in the draft and grabbing a RB at some point (they can be had anytime), this draft could go a million different ways.