Let's talk about current depth

[mgteich]

Cassel was 11-5 and would have this team in the playoffs. In the second season, anything can happen. The patriots have CHOSEN not to have a veteran backup. Using a well-trained backup with no experienced worked when Cassel was called upon. Perhaps the same will be the case for Hoyer or Mallett.

QB first and foremost, and there is no solution unless they sign Manning as the back-up. Hoyer could play his ass off and it would still be next to im possible to win it all without Brady.

 

[E Belichick Unum]

Really good question...and surprisingly hard to look past the starters and focus on depth!

For instance, just about everybody so far has listed OLB as a depth weakness. But are Banta-Cain & Moore really so bad as backups? If Cunningham & Ninkovich emerge as strong starters, a couple of reasonable vets behind them is respectable. Or is the problem that you'd expect to line up 3 so-called OLBs in a lot of sets -- in which case you could argue that starting 4-3 DE is the problem area?

This is the NUMBER 1 problem spot on this roster, no doubt about it.

When did Ninkovitch change from a stop gap starter who was starting because TBC can't play the run into the next coming of Andre Tippett? I must have missed something. I know he had that game with two ints, but he only had 4 sacks all year and he can't cover a lick, those two ints aside.

TBC is a JAG and might not even make the team. He doesn't play the run well, doesn't cover all that well, and doesn't get a lot of sacks against anybody other than Buffalo. He does do something that nobody else on the team does though, he gets pressure on the QB sometimes, if it isn't too good a team, or too big a game.

Nink is a nice backup and a fair emergency starter, but given the choice I would start Guyton instead of him. I know he is smallish for Belichick's scheme, but he is fast and he is a much better player.

And that leaves NT as my biggest depth worry spot on defense.

The Pats have depth along the D-line at every position, Mike Wright has been a very good NT back-up, Brandon Dedrick showed some flashes last year, Ron Brace has been kind of disappointing so far, but he isn't that bad as a third or fourth NT option. The Pats are in pretty good shape on the nose.

WR runs shallow, but the abundance of TEs keeps me from feeling too worried. Though if Taylor Price doesn't make the opening day 45, I'll start worrying more.

WR is the area of the team that could use a little sprucing up. The Pats have nobody who can stretch the field for Brady. They tried Tate as that guy, but he couldn't get open, and when he did get pen he dropped the ball. Welker is a second/slot guy. Edleman is Welker's backup. Price showed some flash in preseason and at the end of the season, but playing well when the game doesn't matter is much different than playing well all of the time. Dione Branch is the number 1 guy right now. He and Brady have a chemistry that is amazing, but he can't stretch the field either. Put Sydney Rice on this team and all of a sudden the recievers can't be double teamed and Brady can choose where to throw the ball.

RB looks OK barring early injuries, with plenty of young legs and versatile skillsets. OT, even without Light, has a reasonable top 4 including a pro-bowl caliber vet and a 1st-round rookie. But the interior OL...

Can it be that nobody else in this thread has mentioned the interior line? To me, C & OG leap out as the top depth concerns on the team.

As long as Mankins comes back the OL should be OK. The short free agency period really hurts a guy like Matt Light. He will probably want more money than a lot of teams will be willing to pay, and he is getting to the point in his career that guard is a better position for him than tackle. He should be signed to two years with an option. If Light doesn't come back then the Pats will need another OL, but there are plenty of decent guys out there.

 

[mgteich]

Depth can be viewed in several ways.

After Setting aside our starters (including nickel back who plays as much as a starter).

ABSOLUTE QUALITY OF THE PLAYERS
How good are these players. Would they start on another team? Are they almost starters? Are they JAG's? Are the marginal nfl players?

QUALITY OF THE PLAYER COMPARED WITH OTEHR TEAMS
We compare our starters with other starters. Perhaps the same approach is right here. How good are our depth players compared with others in the league. Are our #$ WR and #$ receivers as good as other playoff quality teams? What about our backup NT or backup OLB or C?

THE DROPOFF IN QUALITY OF PLAY IF THE PLAYER HAD TO START
At one obvious extreme Brady and Wilfork and their backups. Clearly there is a great dropoff because these two are the best in the league at their positions. At ther other are positions like DE where there is no dropoff because the backup and starter haven't even been named and may be equal-quality players.
====================================
Considering all of this


WORST DEPTH
NT
QB
OLB
C
OG
OT if Kaczur isn't healthy

BEST DEPTH
S
DE
CB
============

 

[IllegalContact]

Depth can be viewed in several ways.

After Setting aside our starters (including nickel back who plays as much as a starter).

ABSOLUTE QUALITY OF THE PLAYERS
How good are these players. Would they start on another team? Are they almost starters? Are they JAG's? Are the marginal nfl players?

QUALITY OF THE PLAYER COMPARED WITH OTEHR TEAMS
We compare our starters with other starters. Perhaps the same approach is right here. How good are our depth players compared with others in the league. Are our #$ WR and #$ receivers as good as other playoff quality teams? What about our backup NT or backup OLB or C?

THE DROPOFF IN QUALITY OF PLAY IF THE PLAYER HAD TO START
At one obvious extreme Brady and Wilfork and their backups. Clearly there is a great dropoff because these two are the best in the league at their positions. At ther other are positions like DE where there is no dropoff because the backup and starter haven't even been named and may be equal-quality players.
====================================
Considering all of this


WORST DEPTH
NT
QB
OLB
C
OG
OT if Kaczur isn't healthy

BEST DEPTH
S
DE
CB
============

NT? basically have wilfork, wright, and brace......I would not call that worst (how many htings can you call worst anyway?)

OLB - depth is not the problem......everyone the pats have would make great backups......they just lack proven starter quality people. how good the starters are is not a depth issue.....if it is, then you need to remove QB from the 'worst' list unless your definition changes with every position.

OT - both solder and cannon spent their college careers playing OT......even though cannon projects as an OG, he can more than hold his own at RT and vollmer is better suited as an LT while solder develops.

 

[IllegalContact]

Oh, no doubt. You and Patchick's thoughts are more than fair, and I agree entirely. You are both more 'right' than I was, and I have no problem saying that. I think that Mallett has the 'it' factor that you talk of.

Like I said, I think I meshed the thoughts with Deus' questioning of the possible derailment of SB dreams, and in that case, I still think that we'd see the most significant downgrading of ANY position at the one of QB. I think that is where my confusion lied.

everyone sees depth with a different meaning.....to me it is something completely separate from starter quality

 

[Deus Irae]

Maybe we could whittle down the list of positions a bit by agreeing on a few that would seem to be more obvious than others. For example, I think that most would agree to some extent about the QB position: While there are certainly teams out there that are in much better shape in terms of the backup QB right now, what little we've seen of Hoyer seems to give us a bit of a Matt Cassel sort of confidence in the spot, in that the team should still be fine against the weaker teams and should still be at least in a position to compete against the better teams. Mallet's a rookie QB who's a complete unknown in the equation until we see at least a little bit on the field.


Does anyone have a significant issue with this analysis?

 

[BradyManny]

Maybe we could whittle down the list of positions a bit by agreeing on a few that would seem to be more obvious than others. For example, I think that most would agree to some extent about the QB position: While there are certainly teams out there that are in much better shape in terms of the backup QB right now, what little we've seen of Hoyer seems to give us a bit of a Matt Cassel sort of confidence in the spot, in that the team should still be fine against the weaker teams and should still be at least in a position to compete against the better teams. Mallet's a rookie QB who's a complete unknown in the equation until we see at least a little bit on the field.


Does anyone have a significant issue with this analysis?

It's hard not to feel good about this team's situation at QB given what we saw them do with Cassel, and what we've seen from Hoyer to this point. Between Belichick & Brady, there's a system in place where the guys behind him will be ready if called upon.

With Mallet's upside, you have to feel good about him turning into a decent QB in a few years playing behind this QB and playing for this coach.

Complete side note: I find it ironic people will try to use this fact against Brady in terms of his legacy, and use it to support Peyton Manning. Cassel & Hoyer have all cited Brady as a huge part of their development. Brady's a good teammate. He helps the players behind him learn. What is Manning doing in Indy? Is he turning Painter into a decent QB? Did he with Sorgii? I think we all know what kind of teammate Peyton Manning is at this point, and he probably doesn't care how his team does when he's not QB'ing it.

Back to the topic at hand - to answer your question, yes, the depth at QB is fine.

 

[willard]

For me depth includes both the starters and the backups.

I view the strengths in depth for 2011 as Inside linebacker, corner back and safety (I assume Page will sign in FA) on defense. On offense running back looks good with the 4 primary runners. I also feel very good about QB. The Patriots have had some good TE play, but last year was their best and so i view that as a strength.

On Defense, the line is my biggest concern as other than Wilfolk, all of the players have question marks next to their name. Now all could be very good and based on the draft BB would seem to expect them to be, but that part of the squad feels very unsettled right now.

I really hope Mankins is signed long term and Cannon is able to play guard at the level I envision, but the interior of the line (G,C) is my first concern on offense with depth.

 

[townes]

Cassel was 11-5 and would have this team in the playoffs. In the second season, anything can happen. The patriots have CHOSEN not to have a veteran backup. Using a well-trained backup with no experienced worked when Cassel was called upon. Perhaps the same will be the case for Hoyer or Mallett.

No real disagreement here, and you go on to list QB as one of the worst depth situations in your follow up post. I don't think there's much they can do about it as there is going to be a huge drop-off no matter what they do.

 

[patchick]

For me depth includes both the starters and the backups.

But if you take it that way, isn't "depth" just a synonym for "the team"? You're left with the question being just one more position-by-position breakdown of the roster.

It strikes me as more interesting to say "Take away your starting 22 and look at the rest of your roster. Where do you feel good about your backups and situational options, and where do you pray those guys don't see the field?" That was how I approached it, anyway. :confused2:


BTW, to those who list Wright and Deaderick as NT backups -- have either of them taken any significant snaps, even in preseason, as 3-4 NTs in the past couple of years? I see them as clear DEs, with Love as the only real NT among the reserves.

 

[Ron Sellers]

Maybe we could whittle down the list of positions a bit by agreeing on a few that would seem to be more obvious than others. For example, I think that most would agree to some extent about the QB position: While there are certainly teams out there that are in much better shape in terms of the backup QB right now, what little we've seen of Hoyer seems to give us a bit of a Matt Cassel sort of confidence in the spot, in that the team should still be fine against the weaker teams and should still be at least in a position to compete against the better teams. Mallet's a rookie QB who's a complete unknown in the equation until we see at least a little bit on the field.


Does anyone have a significant issue with this analysis?

I'm in complete agreement. Given the constraints of free agency, the days of having a Steve Young backup Joe Montana are gone forever. Unless somebody can point out a backup quarterback that is available that would be an improvement over Hoyer, discussing depth at the quarterback position is as pointless as discussing depth at punter, kicker and long snapper.

 

[Deus Irae]

For me depth includes both the starters and the backups.

That's fine. In that case, however, this thread is probably not for you, since I was specifically intending it to be about the non-starters.

 

[Sciz]

Nink is a nice backup and a fair emergency starter, but given the choice I would start Guyton instead of him. I know he is smallish for Belichick's scheme, but he is fast and he is a much better player.

Given your tendency to completely disregard the responsibilities of OLBs in the run game, I'm not surprised to see this from you. They tried this, and it was bad. He can't hold up against the run. He has no pass rushing moves. All he has going for him at OLB is his speed.

 

[Deus Irae]

Safety: Is there anyone besides our "cousin" who isn't at least fairly comfortable with the team's depth at safety, if you consider Chung and Meriweather as the starters, and comfortable with Sanders if he has to fill in as a starter for a stretch?

 

[Sciz]

Safety: Is there anyone besides our "cousin" who isn't at least fairly comfortable with the team's depth at safety, if you consider Chung and Meriweather as the starters, and comfortable with Sanders if he has to fill in as a starter for a stretch?

The problem is that the Pats use three safeties so much, so the 4th safety becomes a regular contributor if one of the top-3 goes down. I'd prefer to have somebody other than Josh Barrett or Sergio Brown at that #4 spot. Page or McGowan would be good options to fill that #4 spot that I'd be a lot more comfortable with.

 

[townes]

WR would be the concern to me. Branch has always been fragile and Welker while tough as they come is still a little guy. I like Edelman but don't see him as a starter, so unless both tate and Price turn themselves into quality NFL WR's this year the depth at WR is a real concern to me, which is why i'd love to see them go after Sydney Rice, but doubt Belichik will pay that ransom. Ultimately i do believe chad johnson is going to end up on this roster, and for the reason that they lack proven NFL quality Wr's deep enough on the chart. I'm also guessing they go with six for the same reason, but ST positions will ultimately determine whether or not that's the case at final cutdown.

 

[patchick]

The problem is that the Pats use three safeties so much, so the 4th safety becomes a regular contributor if one of the top-3 goes down. I'd prefer to have somebody other than Josh Barrett or Sergio Brown at that #4 spot. Page or McGowan would be good options to fill that #4 spot that I'd be a lot more comfortable with.

Personally, I'm totally fine with Sergio Brown as my #4 safety. I think he's going to have a pretty decent career. But IMO it's a moot point, since I've been picturing Dowling in a hybrid safety role since before the draft.

 

[signbabybrady]

Good topic of coversation. I have breezed through the discussion so far and see some good points and I think this highlights how BB likes to build his team which again is starting to show strength in its middle class like back in the 01-04 days (now if we can get some of the starters to play as well and more together).

IMO the weakest area on this teams depth comes at OL which isnt a bad thing as Scar and BB seem to very good at developing lesser talent along the line. Also depth will be greatly improved on depending on what happens with Light. Though it could get worse if Mankins holds out again.

Also Kaczur is a question mark at this point because of health and because his salary may make him a casuality.

If Kaczur and Light are back than Tackle depth is actually pretty good when you add in Lavoir and others.

Interior scares me much more as we lost Neal last year which means a depth guy gets moved into starters spot. The one guy you feel would make the depth here decent has a fairly large medical issue he has been dealing with all accounts are he is doing amazing but still tough to count on him.

I really feel that depth on the rest of the team is really good, starters may only be moderately better than depth in some areas (OLB and DE) but still tons of depth on this team.

 

[signbabybrady]

The problem is that the Pats use three safeties so much, so the 4th safety becomes a regular contributor if one of the top-3 goes down. I'd prefer to have somebody other than Josh Barrett or Sergio Brown at that #4 spot. Page or McGowan would be good options to fill that #4 spot that I'd be a lot more comfortable with.

We are talking about depth here I think you stretch that to far if you talk about how are depth is after one of the starters go down.

You could make the same statement across the board. Our depth at position X is great unless a Starter gets hurt then our best depth is starting.

Also if all CBs are healthy and one safety goes down we might just use 3 safeties a little less.

 

[Deus Irae]

On offense, I'm assuming

5 OL
2 WR
QB
RB
TE

leaving the 11th spot open for TE/RB/WR as situational (and/or figuring posters will decide who they put in as the 11 starter), and considering 3rd down RB as a position as well as a part of the basic RB stable.

Other than the Solder King, who's seemingly either related to, or dating, Smith, and is bagging on Crumpler as a result, is there anyone who's got an issue with TE depth?