Pats will not draft LB in 1st rd

[Box_O_Rocks]

patsnutme-dont lecture me on forum conduct if your going to be obnoxious. according to my friend, whos watched every nebraska game the past 4 yrs bradley has been there, his game didnt translate well to the nfl. i personally disagreed based on numbers/what ive seen on tape, but it would make sense to defer to someone who has much more extensive knowledge on a player.

Before I forget again, thanks for info.

EDIT: I double-checked Nut's comment, having had to endure his endless golfing stories and his fascination with peeing in the woods, I'd classify that as a Maine-iac pointing to his handmade i HeArT pAtRiCK WiLLyS t-shirt at a draft party. I'd recommend you view it as youtful [sic] and misguided enthusiasm for his boy, not an attempt to be obnoxious (he's fairly direct when that happens). :rocker:

 

[Metaphors]

Actually, no. I don't think Lynch, Ginn, or Moss grade out as first rounders.

Hmmm...I thought you meant graded as 1st rounders by scouts and people who are paid to do that. Lynch and Ginn are consistently graded as first round talent. Lynch may be sliding due to team needs and Ginn due to health reasons, but I've yet to see anyplace where they are graded as 2nd round or lower. I'm not as sure about Moss so I won't push back on him.

If the exercise was around who you grade as 1st round talent, then I think you are absolutely correct. Even so, 17 out of 20 ain't bad...

 

[VJCPatriot]

Nonsense, I projected him as a first round pick in my dream draft for MWP!

EDIT: Path to the Draft talking linebackers tonight: Mayock is forecasting Bradley off the board no later then the low 40's! Baldinger was trying to give Bradley to the Jets at 59 during the On The Clock segment, which led to some disagreement between the two pundits as to Bradley being there late second. Baldinger compares Bradley to Vrable and Mayock agrees. Lot's of love for Bradley on the show.

Seems to be a reach in the 1st. What happened to your theory that linebackers are not mismatch makers on the line of scrimmage??

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Seems to be a reach in the 1st. What happened to your theory that linebackers are not mismatch makers on the line of scrimmage??

I think it went to page two.

As this post shows, I don't rule out OLBs in mismatch theory, assuming they have true LB experience. Oddly enough, there is a difference between theory on drafting strategy and personal choices. My assessment of team needs says LB depth, especially ILB, is #1. Bradley and Harris are the two highest ranking ILBs, based on various website rankings. Bradley is my #1, so as long as we are talking personal choice, I want Bradley - and as long as at least one draft "guru" expects him to go at "40-42," I would take him with one of the two available picks at the end of the first.
http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showpost.php?p=396202&postcount=26

Ranking is based on expectations of outcome since these are transition or question mark players. For example: Woodley has the highest floor with a good ceiling as an OLB; Solaia has a very high ceiling, but the lowest floor.
#28: Woodley, Ugoh, Harris, McDonald, Meachem, Bowe, Revis, Hill, Wilson, Bradley (@OLB), Ross, Gonzalez, Wade, Satele, Davis, Nelson (@CB), Olsen, Solaia.

 

[captain stone]

I have a friend, who has a friend, who is an Ole Miss fan. He says that Patrick Willis is totally awesome and we should trade our entire draft for him if we need to.

Your friend's friend wouldn't be Mike Ditka, would he?

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Your friend's friend wouldn't be Mike Ditka, would he?

No picking on the handicapped.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Before I forget again, thanks for info.

EDIT: I double-checked Nut's comment, having had to endure his endless golfing stories and his fascination with peeing in the woods, I'd classify that as a Maine-iac pointing to his handmade i HeArT pAtRiCK WiLLyS t-shirt at a draft party. I'd recommend you view it as youtful [sic] and misguided enthusiasm for his boy, not an attempt to be obnoxious (he's fairly direct when that happens). :rocker:

If I can't be obnoxius then what's the sense of posting?

I have come to the conclusion theat Willis will be gone, hopefully to Atalnta rather than Buffalo.

So, I trying to decide who my new best friend is now. The Pos?

 

[dryheat44]

Hmmm...I thought you meant graded as 1st rounders by scouts and people who are paid to do that. Lynch and Ginn are consistently graded as first round talent. Lynch may be sliding due to team needs and Ginn due to health reasons, but I've yet to see anyplace where they are graded as 2nd round or lower. I'm not as sure about Moss so I won't push back on him.

If the exercise was around who you grade as 1st round talent, then I think you are absolutely correct. Even so, 17 out of 20 ain't bad...

Maybe we're falling into a semantic argument. Obviously there will be 32 guys drafted in the first round. So they're first rounders. If I remember correctly, Belichick tends to have 12-16 guys he feels are first rounders, and that's what I'm talking about.

To me, saying somebody is graded as a legit first rounder means that that player would be in the first round of the draft every single year. In my opinion, if Lynch, Ginn, or Moss were in the draft in another year, say last year, they wouldn't be first rounders. Lynch would have been drafted somewhere between Lendale White (45) and MJD (60) as the sixth running back off the board. Ginn would be slotted between Sinorice Moss (44) and Greg Jennings (52) as the fourth WR taken. Moss would have been between Darryl Tapp (63) and Frostee Rucker (91) as the fifth DE chosen.

Again, these are only my opinions, but that's where I feel those guys would be ranked a year ago. So while they may go in the first round, I don't consider them first round talent.

 

[Metaphors]

Maybe we're falling into a semantic argument. Obviously there will be 32 guys drafted in the first round. So they're first rounders. If I remember correctly, Belichick tends to have 12-16 guys he feels are first rounders, and that's what I'm talking about.

My bad. I was trying to reflect actual "grades" (0-100) of scouts against these players, not that they were expected to be in the top 32 of this year's class. And certainly not trying to anticipate how the Pats would grade out the first round.

Generally you can figure out what number corresponds to a 1st round grade for a scout. The number of players with that grade could be less that 32 or more than 32. Without looking it up, my thought was that this was a top-heavy draft. Your post got me thinking about it and it seems that there are in fact about 20 players with solid 1st round grades. There seems to be a whole slew of players with borderline 1st/2nd grades.

If that observation is reasonable, then it seems like a lot of people on this board are zeroing in on a possible strategy for the Pats:

1. Stick at #24 since there is a good chance enough people will reach for need to make a "top" player available at #24 (or with a small trade-up).
2. Trade out of #28 into the 2nd round (good chance for solid value) for a 2008 pick.

Doesn't take a genius intellect to reach this conclusion, but it seems even more reasonable once you break down what the Pats are likely to face. Though I still have "faith" in some of the other GMs that they will let 2 elite players slip to the Pats.

 

[dryheat44]

If that observation is reasonable, then it seems like a lot of people on this board are zeroing in on a possible strategy for the Pats:

1. Stick at #24 since there is a good chance enough people will reach for need to make a "top" player available at #24 (or with a small trade-up).
2. Trade out of #28 into the 2nd round (good chance for solid value) for a 2008 pick.

Doesn't take a genius intellect to reach this conclusion, but it seems even more reasonable once you break down what the Pats are likely to face. Though I still have "faith" in some of the other GMs that they will let 2 elite players slip to the Pats.

That's the way I see it, but my hope is for one guy to slip to the Pats. I don't dare hope for two.

 

[sebman2112]

If I can't be obnoxius then what's the sense of posting?

I have come to the conclusion theat Willis will be gone, hopefully to Atalnta rather than Buffalo.

So, I trying to decide who my new best friend is now. The Pos?

Yuck, I'll take David Harris and Woodley over Pos.

 

[DaBruinz]

Well,If you go by past year draft trends for BB in NE he rarily takes a 1st round LB so the idea is not so impossible to comprehend.

Please read post #2 in this thread.

 

[DaBruinz]

i mean if you'd like to manipulate my comments and take things completely out of context knock yourself out pal. if you think i come off as an expert, then i appreciate the compliment. and as far as the other posters prediction that i was going to regurgatate draft site rankings, please don't put words in my mouth. based on the draft visits, im sure you could argue for any of the prospects who have undergone specific evaluation by BB. im just saying based on watching the team/knowing the players in the draft that there are certain players that I believe would fit well in the system. so don't try and tutor me on the BB philosophy of taking BPA-im well aware of previous draft trends.

First off, no one put words in your mouth. You are the one who came off like you knew more than everyone else here. You don't.

Secondly, you clearly have NOT followed the Patriots as closely as you claim nor do you truly understand BB's drafting philosophy. The philosophy is NOT Best Player available. It is best VALUE available. And there is a difference.

Third, I posted 3 different examples from the last 3 drafts where BB clearly bucked the drafting "trends" that people set up regarding the Patriots. All 3 debunked your statements. I have a 4th one that applies to the 2004 draft. Prior to that draft, BB had taken 1 underclassmen since joining the Patriots. ONE. So, the "draft trend" was that BB didn't draft underclassmen. In the 2004 draft, BB took 3 underclassmen and he's taken underclassmen in each subsequent draft as well.

So, you can be ignorant and follow your "draft trends" or you can realize that you don't know nearly as much as you think and that BB tends to "buck" the trends when he believes that the VALUE is there to do so.

As for the "draft visits" most people don't put much stock in them. There was a point that BB and company had drafted many players that they hadn't ever met directly. But, we do know that in the past few drafts, they have drafted players they HAVE met with. They met with Maroney and Jackson both. They also met with several other players that were drafted. So you could chalk that up to another myth being busted.

Oh, and everyone here has an opinion on who would fit well into the Pats system. Your statement would have some legitimacy if you had actually listed players out for each pick. You didn't. In fact, you only listed out 1 player. Desmond Bishop.

Now, something else for you to think about. BB has gone on record saying that it takes awhile for LBs to develop in this system. Do you honestly think that he would wait ANOTHER year to draft a LB when ALL 4 of the primary LBs will be 30 or older as of the start of the year?

 

[DaBruinz]

and bruins you may have gotten my post confused. your argument seemed to be that the pats have gone against conventional thought in the past few drafts-which only reaffirms my initial point that despite everyone thinking the pats will go LB 1st rd that they will go a different direction.

I think you need reading comprehension lessons because nothing in your initial posts states such a thing.

 

[VJCPatriot]

Let's just draft all linebackers so some posters on this forum can be happy!

 

[captain stone]

Let's just draft all linebackers so some posters on this forum can be happy!

Seriously, I wouldn't be upset if our draft consisted of mostly LBs and DBs.

 

[hobbsownscoles]

Yuck, I'll take David Harris and Woodley over Pos.

I cosign this statement

 

[BelichickFan]

As I have said several times, I won't say the Patriots WON'T draft a LB #1 but I won't believe they will until I see it.

Belichick is not predictable, obviously. But this is MORE than a trend. It's clearly a philosophy.

Regarding the so-called other things Belichick surprised us with :

Second TE - now that's NOT a surprise. Come on.
Interior OL ? Yeah, that was a surprise but it was 32nd in a weak draft. And still a lineman.
RB ? Again a surprise but we have one starting RB, 4 starting LB. If we legitimitely considered LB high we would have four times the likelihood of drafting one vs. a RB simply because we need more of them.

Say what you want, 18% of our starting lineup is LB and we haven't drafted one on day one. That's a damn philosophy people.

 

[BelichickFan]

So, you can be ignorant and follow your "draft trends" or you can realize that you don't know nearly as much as you think and that BB tends to "buck" the trends when he believes that the VALUE is there to do so.

As a theoretical argument that's all well and good.

For this draft, though, it doesn't do much because unless Willis unexpectedly slides I don't think many people think the best VALUE at #24 will be a LB. If we take a LB at 24 (or 28) outside of Willis it would be a value reach IMO.

 

[captain stone]

For this draft, though, it doesn't do much because unless Willis unexpectedly slides I don't think many people think the best VALUE at #24 will be a LB. If we take a LB at 24 (or 28) outside of Willis it would be a value reach IMO.

Does that include The Poz?