Who should have the Patriots taken at 48 instead of Wilson

[FredFromDartmouth]

I was thinking that Peter Konz would have been solid choice. Dominant centers are hard to find and he could also play guard. I guess Koppen must be doing well...

 

[bbell31]

I'm liking tavon the more I learn but I would have taken jamell fleming ou db

 

[mayoclinic]

Lavonte David.

I'm fine with the Wilson pick for now until I see how he plays. But I thought David was one of the best defensive playmakers in the draft.

 

[Sciz]

I was predicting one of Casey Heyward, Josh Robinson, and Trumaine Johnson. The Pats were connected to all 3 of them pre-draft. Turns out they had us fooled. Not only did Belichick take Wilson over all three of them, but he then traded down from 62 when he could've had any one of them there. I'm perfectly fine with the Wilson pick, though.

 

[patchick]

The more I think about this question, the more interesting it becomes. The key is the phrasing -- putting aside the hypotheticals about what they MIGHT have been able to do trading down, and just naming a player.

Three things in evidence at the time of pick #48:

- The Pats really needed a young safety with leadership potential
- This was a weak draft for safeties with leadership potential
- The Pats only had one more pick remaining in the whole draft, at #62

So let say the Pats picked LaVonte David or Kendall Reyes or another non-safety of your choice at #48. At #62, can you still afford to trade down? Chance are there are only 1 or 2 safety prospects left you have any confidence in at all. They could go any moment (e.g. Brandon Taylor at #73). I think you have to take your top remaining safety NOW. So then your draft is done, with four players selected.

The non-safety player at #48 would thus have to be worth more than:

Jake Bequette
+Nate Ebner
+Alfonzo Dennard
+Jeremy Ebert
+the chance of having to take a safety they rated lower

 

[patfanken]

A 3-4 DE was one of our biggest needs predraft, so even though PatChick made a good point, I would have taken Still or Reyes (whomever they liked best) at 48 Then taken Johnson at 62 and gone Golfing.

However If i were blessed with 20-20 hindsight and knew how the draft was gong to play out, I might have made the trade at 62 and added Bequette in the 3rd, and Iloki in the 5th

Bottom line - I'm warming to this draft. I think we have 5 guys who can help right away and 2 guys who are perfect for the PS, and will be like extra draft picks in 2013

 

[doesntmatter1]

I'm really warming up to wilson. We got to the superbowl with ihedibo and not hating on ihedibo but im pretty sure wilson will be better than him. But the guy I wanted even in the first round was lavonte david. I've been a fan for 2 years.

The list of guys i foamed at the mouth for come draft time have been- jahvid best, shonn greene, corey liuget, lavonte david, michael floyd, and sean weatherspoon. I have many players i have liked but that list is who i craved and once floyd was gone I was banging the drum for david.

 

[doesntmatter1]

The more I think about this question, the more interesting it becomes. The key is the phrasing -- putting aside the hypotheticals about what they MIGHT have been able to do trading down, and just naming a player.

Three things in evidence at the time of pick #48:

- The Pats really needed a young safety with leadership potential
- This was a weak draft for safeties with leadership potential
- The Pats only had one more pick remaining in the whole draft, at #62

So let say the Pats picked LaVonte David or Kendall Reyes or another non-safety of your choice at #48. At #62, can you still afford to trade down? Chance are there are only 1 or 2 safety prospects left you have any confidence in at all. They could go any moment (e.g. Brandon Taylor at #73). I think you have to take your top remaining safety NOW. So then your draft is done, with four players selected.

The non-safety player at #48 would thus have to be worth more than:

Jake Bequette
+Nate Ebner
+Alfonzo Dennard
+Jeremy Ebert
+the chance of having to take a safety they rated lower

I honestly like the players that we drafted but I really feel some of them definitely would have gone undrafted. No one values special teams like us and I definitely see its worth but I honestly feel like no one would have scooped up ebner since he barely played, kinda like last years malcolm williams and no one seems interested in finding underrated slot receivers in ebert like us either. Welker too was undrafted and that alone makes you not count out ebert's chances but we probably could have scooped him up just like we did danny farnam last year. Dennard was a surprise to still be there and him alone eases the passing on lavonte david for me. Since i watched alot of nebraska football i know him fairly well and i feel that he is the clone of kyle arrington and will definitely make this team. Lastly, Jake Bequette might turn out great but in my gut, I don't see him playing because i still feel that cunningham is better.

 

[Water Boy]

Three things in evidence at the time of pick #48:

- The Pats really needed a young safety with leadership potential
- This was a weak draft for safeties with leadership potential
- The Pats only had one more pick remaining in the whole draft, at #62

Given the potential to play McCourty at S, I think the Pats had some flexibility to take a quality CB instead, without having to reach in a weak safety class.

Personally I would have liked to see Kendall Reyes picked at 48 and then take the best available DB at 62 (Trumaine Johnson, Josh Robinson, Casey Hayward) or trade down and take a 3rd or 4th round DB like Hosley, Brooks or Boynkin.

 

[rookBoston]

Accepting the premise of the question at face value, I would say Devon Still, who is a first round talent and a space eater that could have solved our desire to re-sign Gerard Warren for another go at it. But, that said, I have a lot of confidence in Warren, so I'm not all that disappointed. We can take a DL next year.

But really, I'm prepared to believe that Wilson is the guy who we should have picked at 48. The fact of the question makes me more eager than ever to see Wilson establish himself as a solid anchor in our secondary for the next decade.

 

[Marqui]

I would have went with Devon Still, but they did really need a smart young versatile FS. So if they really believe Wilson is that guy then I can't blame them for taking him that early in a weak safety class.

 

[mayoclinic]

I don't think it was straightforward at all. And I'm very content with who the Pats ended up drafting, assuming that their evaluation of Wilson was "correct". There's a difference between a failure of player evauation and a failure of draft strategy. If Wilson solves a major problem at safety and ends up being something like a combination of James Sanders' leadership and intangibles with athleticism and versatility closer to Brandon Meriweather, then it will be a great pick. If the reality is more in line with what Kiper and the draftniks were thinking, it wont be so pretty.

The only problem that I personally have with the pick is that I had Lavonte David rated as an exceptional prospect, just as I had Connor Barwin pegged in 2009. That's my evaluation. Obviously a lot of other teams picked guys ahead of David - Mychal Kendricks, Bobby Wagner, Zach Brown - that I never would have taken ahead of him. So my evaluation may be off. But my only objection to what the Pats did is that I think they passed up a great player for a good one, and in my book that tends to be a mistake. The Pats passed up Ed Reed in 2002 to fill a need with a good player in Dan Graham. And they passed up Troy Polamalu in 2003 to pick a good player in Ty Warren. Both guys that they took were solid players who filled needs. They had bigger needs than safety both years and they filled them, but they passed up superior prospects. Both guys they passed up will end up in the HOF. I think David has that kind of potential, but I recognize that that's a huge projection. I didn't have any other prospect rated nearly as highly, but again, it all depends on your player evaluations.

The more I think about this question, the more interesting it becomes. The key is the phrasing -- putting aside the hypotheticals about what they MIGHT have been able to do trading down, and just naming a player.

Three things in evidence at the time of pick #48:

- The Pats really needed a young safety with leadership potential
- This was a weak draft for safeties with leadership potential
- The Pats only had one more pick remaining in the whole draft, at #62

So let say the Pats picked LaVonte David or Kendall Reyes or another non-safety of your choice at #48. At #62, can you still afford to trade down? Chance are there are only 1 or 2 safety prospects left you have any confidence in at all. They could go any moment (e.g. Brandon Taylor at #73). I think you have to take your top remaining safety NOW. So then your draft is done, with four players selected.

The non-safety player at #48 would thus have to be worth more than:

Jake Bequette
+Nate Ebner
+Alfonzo Dennard
+Jeremy Ebert
+the chance of having to take a safety they rated lower

 

[captain stone]

I was thinking that Peter Konz would have been solid choice. Dominant centers are hard to find and he could also play guard. I guess Koppen must be doing well...

What Bill should've done is trade 48 to GB for 59 & 123; he then could've chosen either
DB Trumaine Johnson or WR Rueben Randle (my choices), or Vinny Curry or CBs Casey
Hayward & Josh Robinson.

If he stayed at 48, then he should've chosen DLman (& NH-raised) Kendall Reyes (my choice),
or Konz or LB Lavonte David, or any of the names mentioned for 59 above.

I still can't believe how badly Bill effed-up that 2nd round.

 

[mayoclinic]

I still can't believe how badly Bill effed-up that 2nd round.

FWIW, here's Mel Kiper's original evaluation of the Pats' 2009 draft:

New England Patriots: GRADE: B+
You have to give the Patriots credit for acquiring even more picks for next year's draft. Safety Patrick Chung, defensive tackle Ron Brace and cornerback Darius Butler were all good selections in the second round, although offensive tackle Sebastian Vollmer was a reach. Wide receiver Brandon Tate was a decent third-round pick and I really like the sixth-round selection of Jacob Ingram, the best long snapper in the draft.

NFL: Mel Kiper grades the NFL draft - ESPN

So Brace has been a JAG, Butler a bust, and Ingram lasted a year before he forgot how to long snap. Meanwhile Vollmer has been an All Pro.

Here's another evaluation of the 2009 draft:

NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS: A-
I loved/hated New England's draft. Not just because of the players, either - they got some good ones, as they do every year. I just can't help but be impressed with/irate at the way this team can move up and down the draft board at will, collecting future picks along the way. There are two reasons this team is competitive every year: Tom Brady (or, in last year's scenario, a weak schedule) and their steadfast approach to finding cheap, talented players in the draft, having them for a few years, and then trading them for more picks (see: Hobbs, Ellis). Stupid Patriots.

Best pick: CB Darius Butler, Connecticut
I thought he was the best corner in the draft. Naturally, I was happy when the Dolphins passed on him at 25, and pulling my hair out when the Pats took him with their third pick at No. 41. The Pats signed Shawn Springs and Leigh Bodden during free agency and have a promising talent in Terrence Wheatley, but Butler is their best cornerback - right now.

Worst pick: OT Sebastian Vollmer, Houston
This pick was weird. I thought New England's offensive line was terrible last season, particularly at tackle. So naturally, it didn't surprise me to see the Pats take a tackle - it just surprised me which player they chose. Clearly, the Pats had Vollmer rated higher than UConn product William Beatty (who went two picks later to the Giants), but I don't see how Vollmer helps them this year. Tom Brady better be ready to throw the ball quickly... and, yeah, I'm gonna stop giving advice to Tom Brady now.

Sleeper pick: LB Tyrone McKenzie, South Florida
I was a big fan of McKenzie's entering draft weekend - he's an outstanding athlete with a good deal of potential. He'll work on the inside in New England - and the fact that he doesn't need to play right away is scary. Down the line, McKenzie could team with 2008 first-round pick Jerod Mayo to give the Pats one of the more devastating 3-4 ILB combos in the NFL. Sigh...

2009 NFL Draft Grades: AFC East Edition - Buffalo Rumblings

I'll wait to see how Tavon Wilson does before passing judgment.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I honestly like the players that we drafted but I really feel some of them definitely would have gone undrafted. No one values special teams like us and I definitely see its worth but I honestly feel like no one would have scooped up ebner since he barely played, kinda like last years malcolm williams and no one seems interested in finding underrated slot receivers in ebert like us either. Welker too was undrafted and that alone makes you not count out ebert's chances but we probably could have scooped him up just like we did danny farnam last year. Dennard was a surprise to still be there and him alone eases the passing on lavonte david for me. Since i watched alot of nebraska football i know him fairly well and i feel that he is the clone of kyle arrington and will definitely make this team. Lastly, Jake Bequette might turn out great but in my gut, I don't see him playing because i still feel that cunningham is better.

The Patriots might actually have drafted Welker . . . if they didn't still have Troy Brown at that point.

 

[patchick]

taken Johnson at 62

Trumaine Johnson

Trumaine Johnson

Trumaine Johnson

I'm a little surprised at this name being the most mentioned in the thread. My guess is Johnson was never even in the mix -- many, many reports of major attitude problems, a "diva" who "needs to be managed carefully." Athletic skills aside, that's just not what the Patriots' secondary needed.

I can definitely understand feeling that a player at a different position was special enough to take the risk on at #48. But if it's just a matter of WHICH safety to take there, the more I look the less I like on most of them.

 

[AzPatsFan]

In all this love for Lavonte David, just where would he have played for them? He is woefully undersized for their LB corps, and too slow for their Safety needs.

Could he have replaced Tracy White? Sure but why? White isn't over the hill and you don't spend a second rounder on a ST player who isn't even a gunner candidate.

Yeah I know Larry Izzo played [actually sat], for years. But the Pats did not spend a second on him either. Matt Slater in the Fifth, was criticized as too high a choice for a Pro bowl Gunner and ST maven. Second Round? Never!!!!:snob:

 

[mayoclinic]

I think the Pats took a very long hard look at Trumaine Johnson and decided to pass. They had Johnson in for a visit, and clearly had a chance to evaluate him. Whether because of his small school background, off-field incidents, rumored diva attitude and selfishness, or lack of actual experience at FS, they clearly preferred Tavon Wilson. Richard Hill reported that both Nick Caserio and director of scouting Jon Robinson worked out Wilson at his Illinois Pro Day, so the Pats had plenty of opportunity to evaluate both prospects. Rightly or wrongly, they preferred Wilson. If that turns out to be wrong it's an error or evaluation, not of draft strategy. No team is perfect in their evaluations, but presumably Caserio and Robinson have a better idea of what the team needs and who will be a good fit than we do.

I'm a little surprised at this name being the most mentioned in the thread. My guess is Johnson was never even in the mix -- many, many reports of major attitude problems, a "diva" who "needs to be managed carefully." Athletic skills aside, that's just not what the Patriots' secondary needed.

I can definitely understand feeling that a player at a different position was special enough to take the risk on at #48. But if it's just a matter of WHICH safety to take there, the more I look the less I like on most of them.

 

[patchick]

I think the Pats took a very long hard look at Trumaine Johnson and decided to pass. They had Johnson in for a visit, and clearly had a chance to evaluate him. Whether because of his small school background, off-field incidents, rumored diva attitude and selfishness, or lack of actual experience at FS, they clearly preferred Tavon Wilson.

I'm sure they did their homework. I also think safety is a position where teams across the league are weighing intangibles heavily. There seemed to be a pattern this year of the guys considered to be good leaders (Barron, Wilson, Taylor, Hardin) going on the early side, and the personality question marks (Johnson, Iloka) going later than projected.

 

[mayoclinic]

It also seems to me that the Pats may have let the local writers spread a little disinformation about how much they reportedly loved Johnson. And there were rumors during the second day of the draft about a "hand shake deal" that the Pats had told Johnson he would be their pick at 48 if he were on the board.

Other than the fact that the Pats seem to like playing these games, I wonder whether they may have been concerned that another team might trade up ahead of 48 to take Tavon Wilson, and let it be widely rumored that Trumaine Johnson was their guy. Just a thought.

I'm sure they did their homework. I also think safety is a position where teams across the league are weighing intangibles heavily. There seemed to be a pattern this year of the guys considered to be good leaders (Barron, Wilson, Taylor, Hardin) going on the early side, and the personality question marks (Johnson, Iloka) going later than projected.