2008 Draft Redux Poll: Who Would You Take if the Commish Hadn't Taken #31 Away?

[mayoclinic]

I'm bored. And with the news that Arizona signed Calais Campbell today to a 5 year deal, it raises the spectre of yet another player the Pats could have taken at #31 if the Commish hadn't taken the pick away for Spygate. Imagine if the Pats hadn't lost the pick and had taken Campbell at #31 in 2008. Would we still be running a 3-4 base? Would BB have traded Seymour to Oakland? Would we have another SB trophy, or 2? Some other great players went in the second round - Matt Forte, Ray Rice, DeSean Jackson, Campbell. Kenny Phillips went at 31. Who would you have taken?

 

[mayoclinic]

It should be noted that the board binky in 2008 was probably Quentin Groves from Auburn. He didn't do much for Jacksonville and hasn't done much for the Raiders.

For me, it would be a hard call between Rice/Forte and Campbell. Rice and Forte are tremendous fits for the offense and would have made it much less one-dimensional. But Campbell would have been a beast next to Wilfork.

 

[WaterfallJumper]

Although I've often wished we could have secured Campbell, I think that's probably hindsight speaking. I liked him, but the player I really wanted us to draft at the time was Cliff Avril. I was so disappointed when he was still around in the late second, and we passed anyway. He's been a very good player for Detroit, and last year he was borderline elite with 11 sacks, 6 forced fumbles, a fumble recovery for a touchdown, and an interception return for a touchdown.

My biggest regret is that lack of ability to trade down. We could have gotten a mid-late second, picked Campbell or Avril, and also secured another first for 2009. How do our fortunes look now if we'd had an extra first with which to play the annuity draft game? Thoughts to ponder in a nostalgic moment . . .

 

[mayoclinic]

Although I've often wished we could have secured Campbell, I think that's probably hindsight speaking. I liked him, but the player I really wanted us to draft at the time was Cliff Avril. I was so disappointed when he was still around in the late second, and we passed anyway. He's been a very good player for Detroit, and last year he was borderline elite with 11 sacks, 6 forced fumbles, a fumble recovery for a touchdown, and an interception return for a touchdown.

My biggest regret is that lack of ability to trade down. We could have gotten a mid-late second, picked Campbell or Avril, and also secured another first for 2009. How do our fortunes look now if we'd had an extra first with which to play the annuity draft game? Thoughts to ponder in a nostalgic moment . . .

I usually don't indulge in "what if?" speculation, but as I said, I'm bored.

If Goodell hadn't taken away the #31 pick the Pats would have gone into 2007 with picks #7, 31, 63, 70, 79 and 95 in the first 3 rounds (the ast 4 picks became 62, 69, 78 and 94 after #31 was voided). That's approximately 3000 points, or the value of the number 1 pick. With 3 third round picks the Pats had tons of ammo to trade up, and with 3 picks clustered in the late 2nd/early-mid 3rd round the Pats could move around and take their pick of players.

Taking away #31 messed up a lot of things. But even without that pick, the Pats still had a lot of ammo. 62, 69, 78 and 94 had a combined value of 857 points, or about the value of the #20 pick overall. The Pats ended up trading away 69 to San Diego for what turned out to be the #48 pick in 2009 (which he subsequently traded up to Oakland for Ron Brace). And they used #62 on Terrance Wheatley, #78 on Shawne Crabell, and #94 on Kevin O'Connell. So they basically got Wheatley, Crabell, O'Connell and Brace out of 4 "day 2" picks. What an incredible waste.

The Pats could easily have still done the SD trade with 69 and kept the 78 pick and used 62+94 to trade up to the 48-50 range and targeted someone like Campbell or Rice. And they could have picked up Jermichael Finley (91) or Cliff Avril (92) with the #78 pick instead of Crable.

What could have been. Losing #31 hurt. But missing on 4 consecutive top-100 picks after it hurt even more.

 

[ZoisKing]

I usually don't indulge in "what if?" speculation, but as I said, I'm bored.

If Goodell hadn't taken away the #31 pick the Pats would have gone into 2007 with picks #7, 31, 63, 70, 79 and 95 in the first 3 rounds (the ast 4 picks became 62, 69, 78 and 94 after #31 was voided). That's approximately 3000 points, or the value of the number 1 pick. With 3 third round picks the Pats had tons of ammo to trade up, and with 3 picks clustered in the late 2nd/early-mid 3rd round the Pats could move around and take their pick of players.

Taking away #31 messed up a lot of things. But even without that pick, the Pats still had a lot of ammo. 62, 69, 78 and 94 had a combined value of 857 points, or about the value of the #20 pick overall. The Pats ended up trading away 69 to San Diego for what turned out to be the #48 pick in 2009 (which he subsequently traded up to Oakland for Ron Brace). And they used #62 on Terrance Wheatley, #78 on Shawne Crabell, and #94 on Kevin O'Connell. So they basically got Wheatley, Crabell, O'Connell and Brace out of 4 "day 2" picks. What an incredible waste.

The Pats could easily have still done the SD trade with 69 and kept the 78 pick and used 62+94 to trade up to the 48-50 range and targeted someone like Campbell or Rice. And they could have picked up Jermichael Finley (91) or Cliff Avril (92) with the #78 pick instead of Crable.

What could have been. Losing #31 hurt. But missing on 4 consecutive top-100 picks after it hurt even more.

Bringing up bad memories eh mayo?

I'm not as adamant as some are, but I do agree that the Pats haven't been the best 2nd round drafters. They ace the 1st round in my opinion. Meriweather was an incredible talent whose lack of intelligence hurt him. Maroney could be included in that as well.

However, as you've clearly listed, we've not done too well on our 2nd round picks. We've had our highlights, and those've been more pronounced the last couple seasons, but our misses-especially with the talent available-have been huge.

As for your poll question. Calais Campbell easily. Phillips 2nd.

 

[Sciz]

Didn't the Pats supposedly really like Brandon Flowers? He went very early in the 2nd round.

 

[IllegalContact]

depends on how I can use my hindsight.

I would have traded the pick.......the bottom of the 3rd round produced more good players than the top of the 2nd round

 

[dryheat44]

Well, having spent a first the year before on Meriweather, Phillips really wasn't an option. Somebody mentioned Flowers above, and he was a binkie of mine that year, although not as much as Groves was.

However, consulting my big board at the time ( http://www.patsfans.com/new-england.../13/80203-new-u-h-horizontal-sort-3-26-a.html ) my pick would have been Groves.

 

[The Gr8est]

Although I've often wished we could have secured Campbell, I think that's probably hindsight speaking. I liked him, but the player I really wanted us to draft at the time was Cliff Avril. I was so disappointed when he was still around in the late second, and we passed anyway. He's been a very good player for Detroit, and last year he was borderline elite with 11 sacks, 6 forced fumbles, a fumble recovery for a touchdown, and an interception return for a touchdown.

My biggest regret is that lack of ability to trade down. We could have gotten a mid-late second, picked Campbell or Avril, and also secured another first for 2009. How do our fortunes look now if we'd had an extra first with which to play the annuity draft game? Thoughts to ponder in a nostalgic moment . . .

I agree with this. Getting to pick from players who we already know how they have played isn't really a good measuring tool since, as mentioned, it could easily have been Quentin Groves who was the choice.

I think BB would have "invested" it in ine "First National Golden Goose Bank".

 

[Off The Grid]

I agree with this. Getting to pick from players who we already know how they have played isn't really a good measuring tool since, as mentioned, it could easily have been Quentin Groves who was the choice.

I think BB would have "invested" it in ine "First National Golden Goose Bank".

Heh.

The SeaHawks gave the Packers #55 and #86 to move up to #38.

Think they would've given up #86 and their 2009 1st Rounder for #31??

I do.

The SeaHawks aren't exactly famous for the Long View.

#86 ~ WB JerMichael Finley
EL Cliff Avril

Take your pick.

#4 in 2009 ~ DT BJ Raji work for everyone??

...Or, if you want to go slumming...EL Brian Orakpo.

 

[mayoclinic]

Man, did I want BJ Raji in 2009:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/13/209694-bj-raji-hypothetical.html

But you got one thing wrong, Brother Grid: BB would have traded BACK from #4 a few spots, THEN he would have picked up Raji.

 

[WhiZa]

Didn't the Pats supposedly really like Brandon Flowers? He went very early in the 2nd round.

I posted about Flowers in the same type of thread long ago. You knew the Pats wanted a CB because they took Wheatley with their next pick.

Another option would have been Tracy Porter, but if we took him he would of never intercepted Manning in the superbowl So in the end it actually worked out for the best.

 

[Off The Grid]

Man, did I want BJ Raji in 2009:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/13/209694-bj-raji-hypothetical.html

But you got one thing wrong, Brother Grid: BB would have traded BACK from #4 a few spots, THEN he would have picked up Raji.

No, YOU got one thing wrong, Brother Mayo!!

Raji went at #9, and the Hawks Pick was #4.

Do you really think that I would let that roll without picking up extra Picks?? C'mon, now!!

YOU, above all...know me better'n THAT.

I was just keeping it simple...Not EVERYBODY wants to read about my 15 Trade Downs!!

 

[mayoclinic]

No, YOU got one thing wrong, Brother Mayo!!

Raji went at #9, and the Hawks Pick was #4.

Do you really think that I would let that roll without picking up extra Picks?? C'mon, now!!

YOU, above all...know me better'n THAT.

I was just keeping it simple...Not EVERYBODY wants to read about my 15 Trade Downs!!

For the difference between 4 and 8 you could have traded for all 64 picks in the 6th and 7th rounds for about 3 consecutive years. That's 192 "moon shots".

 

[captain stone]

I posted about Flowers in the same type of thread long ago. You knew the Pats wanted a CB because they took Wheatley with their next pick.

Another option would have been Tracy Porter, but if we took him he would of never intercepted Manning in the superbowl So in the end it actually worked out for the best.

I voted for Flowers because he was the player I had wanted at 31, and just as you stated,
Bill drafted a CB w/ his next pick anyway, so we knew the interest in one was already there.
Flowers would've been a top 15-20 pick were it not for the slow 40-time he ran at the combine.
And yes, Quentin Groves would've been my second choice.

 

[dryheat44]

For the difference between 4 and 8 you could have traded for all 64 picks in the 6th and 7th rounds for about 3 consecutive years. That's 192 "moon shots".

Well sure, assuming one team had those 64 picks and was willing to make that trade.

The trade chart really is useless. A pick is worth exactly what another team will give.

I can pretend my car is worth 20000 because Kelly Blue Book says so, but if nobody will give me more than 12000 for it, it's silly to say I took a below-value deal.