The Number One Priority IS Defensive End

[mgteich]

Posters here have asked for a passrushing OLB every year since Belichick arrived. That may come or not. It may come in the first or not.

Belichick DEFINTELY understands the need to draft top defensive linemen. Who is acceptable to you as a DE? Is Wilkerson at 17 OK if ther rest are gone?

 

[patchick]

Wilkerson is definitely ok with me at 17 if need be. As I said in another thread, there are very few chances to get a legitimate starting 5-tech prospect. Look at Pioli spending the #3 overall on the fine-but-not-great prospect Tyson Jackson, or the way a ton of folks here tried to talk themselves into Jared Odrick last year.

 

[Sciz]

I like Wilkerson as a short-term project, but 17 is too high. He's more than likely going to be around at 28 just because he's not a finished product.

Right now, I think the Pats get Watt, either by trading up or by staying where they are and watching him fall. There was a report somewhere that Condon being his agent wouldn't be enough to scare off the Pats, and I like Watt so much that I'm going to believe it!

 

[IllegalContact]

I think watt has too much of a chance of being another carriker.......i think wilkerson has more upside......

I believe they can wait until 28 to get Wilkerson, though. I think upgrading the OL is equally important......if you can get the right OT at 17, then you do it......unless so few of them were selected before 17 that a good one will be there at 28 or 33. I want castonzo or solder, though.

 

[supafly]

While I can agree that 17 could be too high, I can also see a scenario where 28 is too late.

I would like to have Muhammad Wilkerson, no doubt. Seems like a smart kid, who has experience in both the 3-4 and 4-3 defenses. I think he would be a 'safer' type pick that we all covet.

If it came down to it, I would be fine with him at 17, especially since I trust the feelings of a certain good scouting coach.

 

[IllegalContact]

I also think martez Wilson at 33 would be a shrewd move.......he has the tools to cause real problems from the edge, and has a couple of years in coverage......would need to be accounted for whether he is rushing the passer or not

 

[supafly]

I think watt has too much of a chance of being another carriker.......i think wilkerson has more upside......

I believe they can wait until 28 to get Wilkerson, though. I think upgrading the OL is equally important......if you can get the right OT at 17, then you do it......unless so few of them were selected before 17 that a good one will be there at 28 or 33. I want castonzo or solder, though.

My dream scenario in that case would be to take the OL at 17, then move back up to 24--25 or so to grab him, I still think Wilkerson may be gone at 28. I'd hate to bank on him being around at 28, only to see him taken slightly before by another team.

 

[Sciz]

Carriker was actually pretty decent once he got in a 3-4 in Washington

 

[IllegalContact]

Carriker was actually pretty decent once he got in a 3-4 in Washington

As a top 12 pick?

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Wilkerson is fine at #17. Watt might slide to #17, I'll take him happily. I'd be okay with Paea there too. The next DE prospect I like is Jarvis Jenkins in the second.

 

[IcyPatriot]

Posters here have asked for a passrushing OLB every year since Belichick arrived. That may come or not. It may come in the first or not.

Belichick DEFINTELY understands the need to draft top defensive linemen. Who is acceptable to you as a DE? Is Wilkerson at 17 OK if ther rest are gone?

I have been saying this all year long ...

we had Vince Wilfork playing DE this year. He did okay but I'd rather have one a bit leaner and taller.

 

[Snake Eyes]

I have been saying this all year long ...

we had Vince Wilfork playing DE this year. He did okay but I'd rather have one a bit leaner and taller.

Why? Taller and leaner means a lot less dense, if you want an immovable object then having that density and low center of gravity is where it's at.

 

[Off The Grid]

Wilkerson?

NO.

HELL, no.

Phil Taylor ~ if he checks out.

Kenrick Ellis ~ if he checks out.

Cameron Heyward.

Last But Not Least: JJ Dynomite Mega Watt!!

Wilkerson??

HELL, no.

 

[Patriot Missile]

Wilkerson?

NO.

HELL, no.

Phil Taylor ~ if he checks out.

Kenrick Ellis ~ if he checks out.

Cameron Heyward.

Last But Not Least: JJ Dynomite Mega Watt!!

Wilkerson??

HELL, no.

So no to Wilkerson? Yes to 2 NTs'? Yes to Watt who probably won't be there unless we trade up? I guess Heyward it is then. I'm fine with him too btw. I like the value for Ellis a lot more than Taylor as well

 

[supafly]

Wilkerson?

NO.

HELL, no.

Phil Taylor ~ if he checks out.

Kenrick Ellis ~ if he checks out.

Cameron Heyward.

Last But Not Least: JJ Dynomite Mega Watt!!

Wilkerson??

HELL, no.

Okay, I'll bite.

What do you dislike about Wilkerson, specifically?

 

[mgteich]

The latest DRAFTEK consensus mock has NINE front seven defensive players being drafted in the first 16 picks. We will have what's left if we don't move up. We need to understand what this base case means to us.

Yes, almost all of us would draft Watt. Some would trade up if there is a reasonable offer.

However, it is getting less and less likely that Watt will slip. As far as trade partners, we need to trade with one the teams that want to draft a quarterback, an OT, or a corner. There will certainly be lots of teams wanting one of the defensive players before 17.

I suspect that we will have the choice of Costonzo, Kerrigan or Wilkerson at 17. This is not a bad choice of talent at 17. It seems that we could wait and get Heyward or Paea later (or Ballard as some have us drafting at 28).

While many here might choose Kerrigan (and a fine choice he is), I suspect that, for Belichick, DE's have a much higher value at this point in the draft because they don't need a year of training at a new position.

I would think that Belichick would take Wilkerson if Watt is gone and look to take one of the OLB's at 28 (perhaps Kerrigan or Reed) or even wait until 33.

 

[Patriot Missile]

The latest DRAFTEK consensus mock has NINE front seven defensive players being drafted in the first 16 picks. We will have what's left if we don't move up. We need to understand what this base case means to us.

Yes, almost all of us would draft Watt. Some would trade up if there is a reasonable offer.

However, it is getting less and less likely that Watt will slip. As far as trade partners, we need to trade with one the teams that want to draft a quarterback, an OT, or a corner. There will certainly be lots of teams wanting one of the defensive players before 17.

I suspect that we will have the choice of Costonzo, Kerrigan or Wilkerson at 17. This is not a bad choice of talent at 17. It seems that we could wait and get Heyward or Paea later (or Ballard as some have us drafting at 28).

While many here might choose Kerrigan (and a fine choice he is), I suspect that, for Belichick, DE's have a much higher value at this point in the draft because they don't need a year of training at a new position.

I would think that Belichick would take Wilkerson if Watt is gone and look to take one of the OLB's at 28 (perhaps Kerrigan or Reed) or even wait until 33.

Spot on assesment.

 

[Off The Grid]

Wilkerson?

NO.

HELL, no.

Phil Taylor ~ if he checks out.

Kenrick Ellis ~ if he checks out.

Cameron Heyward.

Last But Not Least: JJ Dynomite Mega Watt!!

Wilkerson??

HELL, no.

So no to Wilkerson? Yes to 2 NTs'?

Yes to Watt who probably won't be there unless we trade up?

I guess Heyward it is then. I'm fine with him too btw.

I like the value for Ellis a lot more than Taylor as well

YES, sir!!

And: YES.

Kenrick Ellis is ~ to me ~ a COLOSSAL Super Value, right about NOW.

He is VERY close to commanding all the aspects of Taylor's Repertoire...and their UpSides, in my view, are identical.

GOD, I'd love to have BOTH.

 

[Off The Grid]

Wilkerson?

NO.

HELL, no.

Phil Taylor ~ if he checks out.

Kenrick Ellis ~ if he checks out.

Cameron Heyward.

Last But Not Least: JJ Dynomite Mega Watt!!

Wilkerson??

HELL, no.

Okay, I'll bite.

What do you dislike about Wilkerson, specifically?

It's much to my surprise that ~ as consistently unconventional as I am ~ this is the first time that I can remember that my position diverged with EVERYONE!!

I don't actually dislike Wilkerson...But I think he lacks the lower body Power and Strength that I want in a Grizzly: He plays FAR too upright FAR too often for my comfort. Potential?? Absolutely, if we can get him to burn a few hundred thousand Squats. But that makes him a 3rd Rounder, in my book, not a 1st.

 

[Off The Grid]

The latest DRAFTEK consensus mock has NINE front seven defensive players being drafted in the first 16 picks. We will have what's left if we don't move up. We need to understand what this base case means to us.

Yes, almost all of us would draft Watt. Some would trade up if there is a reasonable offer.

However, it is getting less and less likely that Watt will slip. As far as trade partners, we need to trade with one the teams that want to draft a quarterback, an OT, or a corner. There will certainly be lots of teams wanting one of the defensive players before 17.

I suspect that we will have the choice of Costonzo, Kerrigan or Wilkerson at 17. This is not a bad choice of talent at 17. It seems that we could wait and get Heyward or Paea later (or Ballard as some have us drafting at 28).

While many here might choose Kerrigan (and a fine choice he is), I suspect that, for Belichick, DE's have a much higher value at this point in the draft because they don't need a year of training at a new position.

I would think that Belichick would take Wilkerson if Watt is gone and look to take one of the OLB's at 28 (perhaps Kerrigan or Reed) or even wait until 33.

I have no idea how DraftTek comes up with it, but I strongly suspect ~ based on their Drafts ~ that they lean heavily on Formula, and integrate very little common sense.

I've said it a few dozen times, and I'll say it again: The Law of Supply and Demand will very likely rear its head on MANY occasions, in late April.

***

There MAY be a run on Front 7 Defenders. It is not for me to say there will NOT be.

But to PRESUME such a thing is flat out FOOLISH.

Will they dominate the Draft?? Obviously, they WILL. BUT...

Every single team that considers drafting a Front 7 Defender in the Top 10 ~ or in the 1st Round, all together ~ will be giving serious thought to the STRONG likelihood that there is VERY likely to be an high caliber Front 7 Defender available 32 picks LATER...where as the likelihood of an equally high caliber Quarter Back, Wide Out, Corner Back, Running Back, et cetera being available 32 Picks later...is MUCH less likely.

Supply + Demand, baby.