A guy who thinks before he mocks?

[Irish Hooligan]

I am cracked out waiting on this draft and have probably read 2,764 mocks in last month or so, I stumbled across this one today and I just felt it was more thought out and felt a little, dare I say, accurate? Currious as to what you folks think....

http://www.nfldraftforecast.com/mock/tyler/round1.shtml

 

[notex]

still dont see us passing up on a LB for an OT .... they always have us going with the "safe" pick which i guess is true...watson/graham/mankins/maroney were all pretty safe picks....all big bodied but athletic guys....

 

[ironwasp]

I like it.

He's picked exactly the same picks for the Pats as I picked in my mock.

The guy's obviously a genius.

 

[14thDragon]

still dont see us passing up on a LB for an OT .... they always have us going with the "safe" pick which i guess is true...watson/graham/mankins/maroney were all pretty safe picks....all big bodied but athletic guys....

I am sticking with my prediction, if Staley, Ugoh or Blaylock is on the board at 28, and they did not get Beason with 24, the patriots are trading down with someone that needs o-line help.

 

[Oswlek]

A little off topic, but the notes under Staley reminded me of this:

I was watching the NFLN during commercials yesterday and their top 5 needs for NE scrolled on the bottom of the screen. Somehow they had OL and C on there, both of which being higher than LB.

What team were these guys watching the past few years?

 

[TruthSeeker]

A little off topic, but the notes under Staley reminded me of this:

I was watching the NFLN during commercials yesterday and their top 5 needs for NE scrolled on the bottom of the screen. Somehow they had OL and C on there, both of which being higher than LB.

What team were these guys watching the past few years?

Well, I'm somewhat in agreement, our offensive line is far from dominant. We can't get our running game going at crucial times (Indy game last year, most of 2005), and though some of the blame has to go to the running backs, the OL are not GREAT run blockers, very good at protecting Brady on passes though. If Staley is as good as advertised, I'd be thrilled if this mock comes true. Staley, Mankins, O'Callahan, Kaczur & Koppen would be a fine, talented & young offensive line (and possibly a dominating line).

LB is a more pressing need, but apparently the Pats pick the best available prospect.

 

[chowder]

i would be very happy with this draft. Even though myself and alot of other people here would like a LB in the first round too, if Staley is there at 28, i think he is too good of a talent to pass up and i'd take him in a second. I think he has the potential to be the best offensive lineman of this draft.

 

[DW Toys]

A little off topic, but the notes under Staley reminded me of this:

I was watching the NFLN during commercials yesterday and their top 5 needs for NE scrolled on the bottom of the screen. Somehow they had OL and C on there, both of which being higher than LB.

What team were these guys watching the past few years?

I saw that too cousin. I think it was a mis-print (or mis-banner if you prefer), I think it was supposed to say CB .
DW Toys

 

[Ochmed Jones]

I saw a mock that had us taking Staley at #24 and Blalock at #28 and the caption read BB's to do list, rebuild right side of OL, completed.

 

[chowder]

I saw a mock that had us taking Staley at #24 and Blalock at #28 and the caption read BB's to do list, rebuild right side of OL, completed.

i'd be happy with taking staley at 24 or 28, but using both of our 1st round picks on OL would definitely have me scratching my head!

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

I think Staley will be gone as early as #20 to the Giants. They need a tackle and Staley would fit nicely at that spot. If LB/DE Jarvis Moss drops to them and the DB's of choice aren't there, don't be surpised if they pick Moss.

 

[DW Toys]

Well, I'm somewhat in agreement, our offensive line is far from dominant. We can't get our running game going at crucial times (Indy game last year, most of 2005), and though some of the blame has to go to the running backs, the OL are not GREAT run blockers, very good at protecting Brady on passes though. If Staley is as good as advertised, I'd be thrilled if this mock comes true. Staley, Mankins, O'Callahan, Kaczur & Koppen would be a fine, talented & young offensive line (and possibly a dominating line).

LB is a more pressing need, but apparently the Pats pick the best available prospect.

IMO LB, CB, S and running back are a need more than OL. We always say the Pats are a BPA team.

Interesting observation about the Pats 2006 draft. They say the Pats draft BPA. I do not believe it was the case last year. I hope it's not this year. We need what there happens to be a pretty decent supply of.
Yes I understand that if Joe Thomas fell to #24 we would need to get him or maybe even Branch or Carriker or even a Brady Quinn (All most likely never).

They knew they needed an RB to spell Corey in 2006 and as you see with retirement it was a good thing. The needed an WR and got the supposed best one (we'll see) They needed a K and got one, The wanted a Willie M. replacement and went after Mincey although he was not a fit here. They needed a TE to replace Fauria and got two. They needed a NT to back Wilford and got Smith (we'll see). They need a KR and got one from Baylor, who worked out better as an ST guy (that's o.k.) Correct me if I am wrong but last year for the most part, The Godfather and Pioli broke the so called Pats (BPA) mold and went mostly needs?

Can't see them not going for LB, CB, S and RB instead of going BPA in 2007. Too many players to choose from. There has to be someone on the board better for our needs than a OL or DL when we pick if we haven't met that need. You'll have a hard time convincing me a Staley at say #28 is better to grab than a McCauley or a Rouse or a Merriweather (not my favorite) that might be rated in the high to mid second round rating. Those guys help the team in 2007 and beyond. Staley helps but more beyond. I'd sacrifice o few rating points that a guy like Kipper concludes for a guy we can use. I agree another OL would be great but after the war chest is full, cousins.
DW Toys

 

[shakadave]

Staley, Mankins, O'Callahan, Kaczur & Koppen would be a fine, talented & young offensive line (and possibly a dominating line).
quote]

Is this after we trade Light and Neal for another punter?

 

[DaBruinz]

IMO LB, CB, S and running back are a need more than OL. We always say the Pats are a BPA team.

Interesting observation about the Pats 2006 draft. They say the Pats draft BPA. I do not believe it was the case last year. I hope it's not this year. We need what there happens to be a pretty decent supply of.
Yes I understand that if Joe Thomas fell to #24 we would need to get him or maybe even Branch or Carriker or even a Brady Quinn (All most likely never).

Sorry, but the Patsw DON'T say they draft BPA. They say they draft best VALUE available. And it was the case last year based on what they viewed was the best value. People always seem to forget that the Pats view value as Tangibles * Intanglibles * Need. Also take into consideration that the Pats probably had already decided that Corey Dillon was done after last year. So that would allow them to groom Maroney for a year without ALL the pressure being on him.

They knew they needed an RB to spell Corey in 2006 and as you see with retirement it was a good thing. The needed an WR and got the supposed best one (we'll see) They needed a K and got one, The wanted a Willie M. replacement and went after Mincey although he was not a fit here. They needed a TE to replace Fauria and got two. They needed a NT to back Wilford and got Smith (we'll see). They need a KR and got one from Baylor, who worked out better as an ST guy (that's o.k.) Correct me if I am wrong but last year for the most part, The Godfather and Pioli broke the so called Pats (BPA) mold and went mostly needs?

Ok. Consider yourself corrected. They went with best VALUE based on their draft boards. Not the ratings from Scout.COM, Blesto, or any of the other hundreds of draft sites out there.

Can't see them not going for LB, CB, S and RB instead of going BPA in 2007. Too many players to choose from. There has to be someone on the board better for our needs than a OL or DL when we pick if we haven't met that need. You'll have a hard time convincing me a Staley at say #28 is better to grab than a McCauley or a Rouse or a Merriweather (not my favorite) that might be rated in the high to mid second round rating. Those guys help the team in 2007 and beyond. Staley helps but more beyond. I'd sacrifice o few rating points that a guy like Kipper concludes for a guy we can use. I agree another OL would be great but after the war chest is full, cousins.
DW Toys

We'd only have a hard time because you've already convinced yourself that you aren't going to listen. Staley could very well come in and be the starting RT this year. Then, in 2008, with a year under his belt, he could be moved to LT with Light moving to the RT position. Staley would solidify the line more so than Kaczur or O'Callaghan.

 

[DW Toys]

Sorry, but the Patsw DON'T say they draft BPA. They say they draft best VALUE available. And it was the case last year based on what they viewed was the best value. People always seem to forget that the Pats view value as Tangibles * Intanglibles * Need. Also take into consideration that the Pats probably had already decided that Corey Dillon was done after last year. So that would allow them to groom Maroney for a year without ALL the pressure being on him.



Ok. Consider yourself corrected. They went with best VALUE based on their draft boards. Not the ratings from Scout.COM, Blesto, or any of the other hundreds of draft sites out there.





We'd only have a hard time because you've already convinced yourself that you aren't going to listen. Staley could very well come in and be the starting RT this year. Then, in 2008, with a year under his belt, he could be moved to LT with Light moving to the RT position. Staley would solidify the line more so than Kaczur or O'Callaghan.

Cousin, Lets agree that we can disagree.
I respect your viewpoint and you are a very well prepared fan.
I say it was not a coincident that the Pats filled holes last year with BPA. I guess you and I will never know how they actually came to a conclusion on the fellow they drafted.
Maybe I am not a Staley fan. He's O.K. and of equal talent to what we have a few notches either way. I don't see him as an instant probowler. Still think our "needs" outweigh this choice.
DW Toys

 

[sebman2112]

IMO LB, CB, S and running back are a need more than OL. We always say the Pats are a BPA team.

Interesting observation about the Pats 2006 draft. They say the Pats draft BPA. I do not believe it was the case last year. I hope it's not this year. We need what there happens to be a pretty decent supply of.
Yes I understand that if Joe Thomas fell to #24 we would need to get him or maybe even Branch or Carriker or even a Brady Quinn (All most likely never).

They knew they needed an RB to spell Corey in 2006 and as you see with retirement it was a good thing. The needed an WR and got the supposed best one (we'll see) They needed a K and got one, The wanted a Willie M. replacement and went after Mincey although he was not a fit here. They needed a TE to replace Fauria and got two. They needed a NT to back Wilford and got Smith (we'll see). They need a KR and got one from Baylor, who worked out better as an ST guy (that's o.k.) Correct me if I am wrong but last year for the most part, The Godfather and Pioli broke the so called Pats (BPA) mold and went mostly needs?

Can't see them not going for LB, CB, S and RB instead of going BPA in 2007. Too many players to choose from. There has to be someone on the board better for our needs than a OL or DL when we pick if we haven't met that need. You'll have a hard time convincing me a Staley at say #28 is better to grab than a McCauley or a Rouse or a Merriweather (not my favorite) that might be rated in the high to mid second round rating. Those guys help the team in 2007 and beyond. Staley helps but more beyond. I'd sacrifice o few rating points that a guy like Kipper concludes for a guy we can use. I agree another OL would be great but after the war chest is full, cousins.
DW Toys

When the Patriots selected Maroney he was considered by the Patriots, some experts, and myself to have been the second best RB in the draft (after Bush) so I would consider that BPA/BPA at a position of need. Chad Jackson was considered the best WR in the entire draft by some of the experts I talked to, and some thought he would go 14th overall, so I think getting him in the second round would fall under best player available/best player available at a position of need. The Patriots almost selected Jackson at 21, because they also had him rated as the number 1 WR in last years draft. If he comes back from this injury and plays up to his potential you'll see why the Patriots, some experts, and I thought he was going to be good.

 

[mgteich]

I would not be surprised if Griffin and Staley were the highest value by far on our draft board at 24 and 28.

I would be very satisfied with the picks.

 

[TruthSeeker]

I actually think I will be happy no matter who we pick in the first round. If they go with a WR or TE or OL with one of their #1 picks, I wouldn't be upset, I've learned many many times that Belichick & Pioli sure know what they are doing, way more than I'd know what to do. My only complaint that ever worked out to be true was when they picked Bethel (F*cking) Johnson over Anquan Boldin in 2003. That has been my nickname for Bethel Johnson since the draft in 2003. I just had a sick feeling that it was a huge mistake, and unfortunately I was right, 4 years later we STILL don't have a receiver as good as Boldin.

I have been wrong about my tirades for almost 7 years now, I was wrong about Deion Branch (was rated a 6th rounder by Sporting News), Mankins, David Thomas, and many others who have (or may) worked out. Now I just sit back and enjoy the ride.

On a side note, I hope we pick the punter Sepulvada (spelling ?) in the mid rounds, he's a helluva punter, and Miller is getting up in age.

 

[DW Toys]

When the Patriots selected Maroney he was considered by the Patriots, some experts, and myself to have been the second best RB in the draft (after Bush) so I would consider that BPA/BPA at a position of need. Chad Jackson was considered the best WR in the entire draft by some of the experts I talked to, and some thought he would go 14th overall, so I think getting him in the second round would fall under best player available/best player available at a position of need. The Patriots almost selected Jackson at 21, because they also had him rated as the number 1 WR in last years draft. If he comes back from this injury and plays up to his potential you'll see why the Patriots, some experts, and I thought he was going to be good.

I agree with you on Chad. Hope he works out.
DW Toys