looking for a consensus

[patfanken]

Jordan, Kerrigan, Watt, Pouncey, Carmini, etc etc etc. All the names are starting to blur. The more I get to know, the more confused I get. BUT here's what I DO ,know. The Pats have 6 picks in the first 3 rounds. I'm not convinced about the exact names, but I'm getting comfortable more in figuring out WHERE I want these guys to play We can argue all day.about WHO these guys should be, but I was hoping we could at least come to "some" consensus in what skills we are looking for.

So in not particular order, when the 3rd round is order here is what I'd be happy to see the Pats wind up with,

1, A premuim DE - a guy who can get penetration and big enough to hold up against the run
2. An outside edge rusher - Maybe not one of the top 3 but someone who gets me more excited than I was when Cunningham came off the board last season.
3. An OLman- OT interior, it doesn't matter. Just someone good to have the capability to start right out of the box' Not that they necessarily have to, but they could if we get the pick right.

In my mind those are the 3 things we need to have at the top of the draft. After that the next three can be any of the following

A running back or WR Not BOTH
A. DB
ANOTHER DL/OLB/OLman

All three IMHO are luxury picks. All three areas COULD be filled with FA acquisitions as opposed to draft picks.,

I know the Pats have at least 3 more picks after the 3rd round, but I won't know who any of them are anyway, and if they are all traded for a round higher next, or used to move up in the first 3 rounds. I'd be OK with that. But I'm sure they won't. This is the year the Pats need to focus on quality rather than quantity.

BTW- I know 6 picks would seem like half a draft for Pats fans, but for the rest of the league its a good outcome. The Pats don't need massive amounts of bodies. Their rebuilding for the next generation of good teams is done. Now its a matter of fine tuning

Having THAT many picks in the first 3 rounds means we SHOULD be looking to get 6 players who will be eventual starters on the team, and at least THREE players who will have an impact on the team in their first year.

I don't have a clue as to what their names are, but I have an p.inion of what areas they should play

 

[Off The Grid]

Excellent Thread idea, sir.​

This Patriot Fan's "Top 96" Priorities​

1 ~ D Line Grizzly: ​

Super Beast. It All Starts In The Trenches. That is a Cliche because it is TRUE.​

2 ~ D Line Grizzly:​

YES. AGAIN. Ty Warren needs a full year ~ half a one if we coddle him and we're lucky ~ to FULLY recover his previous form. History makes that crystal clear. And we cannot afford to wait. The affect of the Front 3 on the outcome of our entire Defense is deliciously disproportionate to the affect of the Back 8, as 3 Super Bowls and the 2004 Campaign, where most of our Secondary fell away, should make CRYSTAL clear to any Patriot fan.​

3 ~ Flanker. ​

As the Grizzlies affect the entire D in a manner disproportionate to the Back 8, so do the Flankers + MidFielders ~ OutSide LineBackers + Middle LineBackers, to you Earthlings ~ disproportionately affect the rest of the Defense: If your Front 7 is good enough, you can win a SUPER BOWL with Rodney Harrison and a bunch of rookies manning the Back 4, in case anyone's forgotten.​

4 ~ NOBODY.​

In my opinion, NOBODY in the Center Class...or the O Tackle Class...or the O GUARD Class...is WORTHY of a Top 64 Pick, this year.

Not if we want to be GREAT.​

My Game Plan​

I say we wait for next year to hit our targets, from the following list:

OC ~ Mike Brewster
OC ~ Peter Konz
OT ~ Riley Reiff
OT ~ Matt Kalil
OT ~ Bobby Massie
OT ~ Jon Martin
OT ~ Al Netter

Every last one of them strikes me as a SIGNIFICANTLY better prospect for OC, RT, LT, LG, and RG than the Top Rounders of 2011.​

Exceptions​

LT Willie "Fresh Prince" Smith ~ 5th Round ~ more upside than the LOT of them, for MY money...Yet, considering our needs, I would actually give a long look at drafting him for RIGHT GUARD.

RT David Mims ~ 7th Round ~ VAST Upside. All we have to do is burn 25 to 30 pounds off of him, and he is The O Tackle version of the PHIL TAYLOR/Kenrick Ellis RIDICULOUSLY athletic SUPER BEAST.

BOTH could be starting by Halloween or ThanksGiving ~ IF they have the chance to learn the system!! ~ and prove to be HUGE upgrades in their rookie years, as Sebastian The Cruel proved to be in HIS!!​

5 ~ Wing Backs + Wing Ends!!​

Let's haul in Lance Kendricks AND Jordan Cameron, split them out, or even put them in motion with Rob Gronkowski and Aaron Hernandez, and just Blast the Enemy off the FIELD!!​

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Well now ...

There is no OL, QB, ILB, TE whom I feel carries a first round grade for the NE system.

Those DBs who carry a first round grade are going Top 10, or are best suited for nickel/dime duty in the slot.

Those WRs who carry a first round grade are going Top 10.

There is one RB who carries a first round grade in my view, I'd like him, but rate him a lesser value when compared to available DL and OLB, and not so much better when compared to later projected options.

It is conceivable NE will trade completely out of the first round if things fall the wrong way with runs on DL and OLB/DE.

Looking to the second round ...

There is no QB, WR, ILB, or TE whom I project to carry a second round grade for NE.

I don't really have an OL with a second round grade for the NE system, though I might consider moving on one at the back of the second if there is a run and the right kid is available.

There are RB, DB, OLB, and DL who probably carry a second round grade.

For the third round ...

I may consider a QB, perhaps a TE and/or WR late.

DB, OL, DL, OLB, RB all have likely kids projected to the third.

ILB, not so much.

My hope for the end of round one ...

DL and/or OLB, at worst a RB, or the luck of a sliding WR ... I don't think I'd go DB if one slid ... or trade for extra picks now or in the future.

My hope for the end of round two ...

A complementary DL and/or OLB, at worst a RB.

My hope for round three ...

Perhaps one OL, trade for additional picks for the future and later rounds, specifically an early 4th, at worst a RB if none has been selected up to now.

A QB only if the right kid is there with the goal of being the anti-Kevin O'Connell.

End of Day Two ...

1-2 DL. 1 OLB. 1 four position OL. Maybe a RB and/or QB. Additional picks for Day Three and 2012/13.

 

[Patriot Missile]

2 defensive lineman. I like a ton so it should be easy to please.

1 OLB. I like several and would not mind a trade up. If Bill likes one that much I would sleep better knowing he felt that strongly about his guy.

1 guard who could also play RT in case we have to move Volmer to left.

1 RB. Need depth and we could land a steal of a starter as well. There are 5 or 6 that could help. 2 or 3 I like quite a bit

1 WR. I like the idea of taking a shot on one from a smaller school who has awesome measurables and good tape.

1 Safety. Again I'd be willing to take a risk on small school since wr and safety are weak in this class. There may be great value if our scouting has been good.

There's 7 for the first 4 rounds.

I like OT candidates here, sleepers like Barksdale and Willie Smith in the 5th and later. Not that they would be there but you never know?

 

[Patriot Missile]

I feel the same way as the previous posters regarding the offensive line class. I hope the Pats don't feel pressure into taking any too early. It's just not good value imo.

 

[NewFeep]

Looking at our "needs" and compare the top 40 players I like what I see. A DE, A DE/OLB and a OT that can slide inside for a year or so. We settle on three such players at 17/28/33 would make me pretty happy........

 

[Off The Grid]

Looking at our "needs" and compare the top 40 players I like what I see.

A DE, A DE/OLB and a OT that can slide inside for a year or so. We settle on three such players at 17/28/33 would make me pretty happy........

A DE, A DE/OLB and a OT that can slide inside for a year or so.

If we could get 3 such players at 17/28/33, I would be SO HAPPY.
​

 

[mgteich]

I agree with this philosophy. It is not the particular player that is critical, it is the position.

I also think of the top 6 picks separately from the later picks, but I think that our 6th pick could be at 123 after a pick is traded into 2012. After all, we greatly value the 4th round; we don't cut 4th round draftees.

MY BOTTOM LINE
In the frist four picks, I want a defesive end, an offensive lineman, and then two more front seven defensive players or offensive linemen. We have two needs and we should give both groups two top picks each. The talent and value seems to match the need.
=====================================
FIRST THREE PICKS
I'm not quite as picky as you are. The premium defensive end is a must. An offensive lineman is a must. The third player could be anyone. However, I just want another player who will bolster the defensive front seven or the offensive line. I guess that you would have preferred Dunlop to Cunningham last year. I have no need to be excited by the OLB pick. However, I would like to see one in the first two rounds.

NEXT THREE PICKS (through Round 4 since one pick will be traded into 2012)
Here I am a bit more particular than you. For me, a second offensive lineman is not a luxury pick. I want 2 front defensive players and two offensive linemen in then first two rounds.

THEN, and only then do I consider the two luxury picks. Strong options certainly include a RB and a S. But then, these picks could come from another OL, a WR, a TE, or even a QB.

.
BUT here's what I DO ,know. The Pats have 6 picks in the first 3 rounds. I'm not convinced about the exact names, but I'm getting comfortable more in figuring out WHERE I want these guys to play ...

1, A premuim DE - a guy who can get penetration and big enough to hold up against the run
2. An outside edge rusher - Maybe not one of the top 3 but someone who gets me more excited than I was when Cunningham came off the board last season.
3. An OLman- OT interior, it doesn't matter. Just someone good to have the capability to start right out of the box' Not that they necessarily have to, but they could if we get the pick right.

In my mind those are the 3 things we need to have at the top of the draft. After that the next three can be any of the following

A running back or WR Not BOTH
A. DB
ANOTHER DL/OLB/OLman

All three IMHO are luxury picks. All three areas COULD be filled with FA acquisitions as opposed to draft picks.,

 

[patchick]

A DE, A DE/OLB and a OT that can slide inside for a year or so.

That sounds lovely, but I'm nervous at the concept of "an OT that can slide inside for a year or so." Does that mean drafting a natural tackle who has always played tackle and expecting him to be a day-1 starter at OG -- and not training him up at tackle? Or drafting a "tweener" rather than a natural tackle, deciding that our top priority in a long-term OT is his immediate ability to play OG?

I'm all for versatility, but IMO cross-training at multiple OL positions is more of a priority for backups and developmental prospects. If I'm picking an OL at #28 or 33, I expect to plug him into the starting lineup at a position he's well-suited to, and let him learn and grow.

 

[sbpatfan]

Wasn't DE / OLB as the top "need" the general consensus last year? And then we took a corner and an OLB that no one even talked about, while waiting until the 7th (?) to draft a defensive lineman.

 

[mgteich]

1) Perhaps DE and OLB was the consensus last year at this point, and even by most on Draft Day. What is your point? If it is that we don't know as much about the needs of the team as Belichick, then we plead guilty. Is it that you have a crying need to recognize all the players drafted early? Well, that's too bad I guess.

2) The OP's point was that we don't NEED to know the player; it is the position that is important. Last year, I wanted a DE, OG, CB, an ILB, a couple of TE's, and of course, a punter. I have never been so satisfied with a draft. I guess it's too bad that you are disappointed with a draft rated B+ or A at the time, and A or A+ in hindsight.

I didn't know whether Belichick wanted the only DE I thought that we should draft: Odrick. He didn't want him. Was I disappointed that he didn't chose MY 2 front seven defensive players? Of course not.

BOTTOM LINE
Yes, there was a need for a DE last year, and a need for 3 linebackers. Belichick decided that he didn't see the value in the first tow rounds to bring in FOUR top rookie front seven defensive players. Belichick brought in two. In addition, he used a couple of late picks also. He did well to find a sometime rookie starter in Deaderick; plus, he drafted Weston who is till on the team. So, in the end, he did indeed bring in four rookie defensive seven players.

Wasn't DE / OLB as the top "need" the general consensus last year? And then we took a corner and an OLB that no one even talked about, while waiting until the 7th (?) to draft a defensive lineman.

 

[patchick]

Wasn't DE / OLB as the top "need" the general consensus last year? And then we took a corner and an OLB that no one even talked about, while waiting until the 7th (?) to draft a defensive lineman.

Last year everybody agreed on DE as a need, but there was also widespread agreement that the DE class was extremely weak. A common refrain was "rather than reaching for Odrick in the 1st, I'd rather aim for a guy like Deaderick in the 5th."

As for CB in the first...most fans were mentally plugging in Darius Butler as a starter. Belichick clearly was in position to know better.

Oh, and we cite OLB is a top need EVERY year. It's become a kind of shamanistic ritual. One of these years we're bound to be right, just as a rain ceremony will occasionally precede rain.

 

[patfanken]

Well now ...

There is no OL, QB, ILB, TE whom I feel carries a first round grade for the NE system.

Those DBs who carry a first round grade are going Top 10, or are best suited for nickel/dime duty in the slot.

Those WRs who carry a first round grade are going Top 10.

There is one RB who carries a first round grade in my view, I'd like him, but rate him a lesser value when compared to available DL and OLB, and not so much better when compared to later projected options.

It is conceivable NE will trade completely out of the first round if things fall the wrong way with runs on DL and OLB/DE.

Looking to the second round ...

There is no QB, WR, ILB, or TE whom I project to carry a second round grade for NE.

I don't really have an OL with a second round grade for the NE system, though I might consider moving on one at the back of the second if there is a run and the right kid is available.

There are RB, DB, OLB, and DL who probably carry a second round grade.

For the third round ...

I may consider a QB, perhaps a TE and/or WR late.

DB, OL, DL, OLB, RB all have likely kids projected to the third.

ILB, not so much.

My hope for the end of round one ...

DL and/or OLB, at worst a RB, or the luck of a sliding WR ... I don't think I'd go DB if one slid ... or trade for extra picks now or in the future.

My hope for the end of round two ...

A complementary DL and/or OLB, at worst a RB.

My hope for round three ...

Perhaps one OL, trade for additional picks for the future and later rounds, specifically an early 4th, at worst a RB if none has been selected up to now.

A QB only if the right kid is there with the goal of being the anti-Kevin O'Connell.

End of Day Two ...

1-2 DL. 1 OLB. 1 four position OL. Maybe a RB and/or QB. Additional picks for Day Three and 2012/13.

I agree with most of what you say, however I cannot see any value to draft a QB in ANY round. First Brady gha minimum of 3 quality years left, maybe more, why draft a QB, especially in such a week class. At best he'll be sitting 3-4 years and then when he's ready to play- IF he is good enough, his contract will be ending. Right now we have a guy BB is comfortable with. If we think we need a 3rd option there will be plenty of vet FAs available, all of whom would be superior options to any draft pick.

2 years from now should be the time the Pats start thinking about drafting Brady's replacement

 

[patfanken]

That sounds lovely, but I'm nervous at the concept of "an OT that can slide inside for a year or so." Does that mean drafting a natural tackle who has always played tackle and expecting him to be a day-1 starter at OG -- and not training him up at tackle? Or drafting a "tweener" rather than a natural tackle, deciding that our top priority in a long-term OT is his immediate ability to play OG?

I'm all for versatility, but IMO cross-training at multiple OL positions is more of a priority for backups and developmental prospects. If I'm picking an OL at #28 or 33, I expect to plug him into the starting lineup at a position he's well-suited to, and let him learn and grow.

IIRC, wasn't Mankins a full time OT at Fresno State. He seemed to "slide down" without any problems.

 

[mgteich]

The way I see it, many college LT are drafted to play other positions. That is because the top college linemen play LT. That is different from draft an OT, having him play OT and then move him to another position. If we draft Carimi to play guard, the I would expect him dante to develop hiom as a guard, rather than have him backup at OT for a year and then move. If were to be drafted to play OT, I would not expect him to start at RG and then move to OT.

IIRC, wasn't Mankins a full time OT at Fresno State. He seemed to "slide down" without any problems.

 

[mgteich]

TOM BRADY IS NOT INVINCABLE. There is always the possibility of injury. Our current backup is an RFA next year.

1) First, we need four QB's for camp. We almost ALWAYS draft a quarterback, and then pick up another as an UDFA.

2) Would it be so terrible to have the option to trade Hoyer next year, when he is an RFA? Even if we expect to keep Hoyer through 2012, it would not be terrible to have a #3. After all, Hoyer could get injured. In the end, this is business as usual. To draft a quarterback is NOT a suggestion that this quarterback might be Brady's replacement.

I agree with most of what you say, however I cannot see any value to draft a QB in ANY round. First Brady gha minimum of 3 quality years left, maybe more, why draft a QB, especially in such a week class. At best he'll be sitting 3-4 years and then when he's ready to play- IF he is good enough, his contract will be ending. Right now we have a guy BB is comfortable with. If we think we need a 3rd option there will be plenty of vet FAs available, all of whom would be superior options to any draft pick.

2 years from now should be the time the Pats start thinking about drafting Brady's replacement

 

[Off The Grid]

I agree with most of what you say, however I cannot see any value to draft a QB in ANY round. First Brady gha minimum of 3 quality years left, maybe more, why draft a QB, especially in such a week class. At best he'll be sitting 3-4 years and then when he's ready to play- IF he is good enough, his contract will be ending. Right now we have a guy BB is comfortable with. If we think we need a 3rd option there will be plenty of vet FAs available, all of whom would be superior options to any draft pick.

2 years from now should be the time the Pats start thinking about drafting Brady's replacement

Bless you, Brother.

Even though I WOULD like to see us pick up Greg McElroy in ADDITION to young Brian Sipe, there, it is very refreshing to read someone who conceives that ~ although there is no reason to PRESUME anything ~ there is very good reason, indeed, to hope that General Tom will be with us for another 6 to 9 years, and that while it behooves us to develop Depth of Talent at the position, it would be flat out FOOLISH ~ considering our other needs ~ to invest HEAVY in QB at this early juncture.

 

[sbpatfan]

1) Perhaps DE and OLB was the consensus last year at this point, and even by most on Draft Day. What is your point? If it is that we don't know as much about the needs of the team as Belichick, then we plead guilty. Is it that you have a crying need to recognize all the players drafted early? Well, that's too bad I guess.

2) The OP's point was that we don't NEED to know the player; it is the position that is important. Last year, I wanted a DE, OG, CB, an ILB, a couple of TE's, and of course, a punter. I have never been so satisfied with a draft. I guess it's too bad that you are disappointed with a draft rated B+ or A at the time, and A or A+ in hindsight.

I didn't know whether Belichick wanted the only DE I thought that we should draft: Odrick. He didn't want him. Was I disappointed that he didn't chose MY 2 front seven defensive players? Of course not.

BOTTOM LINE
Yes, there was a need for a DE last year, and a need for 3 linebackers. Belichick decided that he didn't see the value in the first tow rounds to bring in FOUR top rookie front seven defensive players. Belichick brought in two. In addition, he used a couple of late picks also. He did well to find a sometime rookie starter in Deaderick; plus, he drafted Weston who is till on the team. So, in the end, he did indeed bring in four rookie defensive seven players.

Why are you assuming things about me? I guess my point was the board tends to downplay certain team needs while overstating others.

 

[NewFeep]

Last year everybody agreed on DE as a need, but there was also widespread agreement that the DE class was extremely weak. A common refrain was "rather than reaching for Odrick in the 1st, I'd rather aim for a guy like Deaderick in the 5th."

As for CB in the first...most fans were mentally plugging in Darius Butler as a starter. Belichick clearly was in position to know better.

Oh, and we cite OLB is a top need EVERY year. It's become a kind of shamanistic ritual. One of these years we're bound to be right, just as a rain ceremony will occasionally precede rain.

Extremely good point! Going back to a Tackle that can slide inside for a year or so, I see Mankins as good as gone and by all accounts there are several decent Tackles in this draft. It was my wishful thinking at play there with that comment.........

 

[ctpatsfan77]

If we think we need a 3rd option there will be plenty of vet FAs available, all of whom would be superior options to any draft pick.

The Patriots haven't had a veteran FA who could realistically compete elsewhere for a starting job since Damon Huard.

Since then, Brady's backups have either been rookies brought up in the system (Cassel, Hoyer) or QBs on the 17th hole (Flutie, Testaverde).

I think the Patriots, with Brady, and the Colts, with Manning, have basically the same problem in that regard: Brady and Manning are so good that no other QB even has a chance to compete for the starting job. So why would a vet sign in Foxboro when they could get the same (or better!) money and a better chance of competing for the starting job elsewhere?