**The Official Day 1 Patriots Draft Thread**

moosekill said:

Name calling doesn't really show your maturity well.

I would argue we didn't trade out of the "sweet spot" of the draft, rather we traded into this years "sweet spot" and hopefully picked up a pick which could put us into next year's draft "sweet spot"

Click to expand...

Bottom line is, we passed up on some very good talent, talent that could have helped make this team better, even immediately. Also, we lose out on possibly picking other positions of need, because they didn't address it with pick #28, meaning, using #33 to say pick up an offensive skill position of need, perhaps a deep threat like Torrey Smith, they most likely HAVE to grab a pass rusher at 33. They could have done that at 28. Having Heyward and Smith helps two weaknesses better than an unknown pass rusher at 33 and a #1 pick that'll most likely be traded next year. I'll make it simple, the talent available at 28 and 33 is usually better than the talent available at 33 and 56. Hopefully they use all 3 picks in round 2 on two pass rushers and a deep threat receiver, though I doubt they use all 3 second round picks.

Guess we have to wait til 2nd round plays out before we get on BB too much. Is next year suppose to be a rich draft or something? Why do we need another 1st next year? We have a LOT of picks.

Kicking_Game said:

And who do you like at 33 over Heyward, Wilkerson, and Ingram?

Click to expand...

I'm with you. As Gruden said referring to the Jimmy Smith pick, sometimes door one is open. Just open it. I could just picture Ingram lining up in the backfield with Tom Brady. Brady, for the first time since Corey Dillon, not having to carry the whole offense on his shoulders. Hayward and Wilkerson seemed solid too--"value" as they say.

scott99 said:

Bottom line is, we passed up on some very good talent, talent that could have helped make this team better, even immediately. Also, we lose out on possibly picking other positions of need, because they didn't address it with pick #28, meaning, using #33 to say pick up an offensive skill position of need, perhaps a deep threat like Torrey Smith, they most likely HAVE to grab a pass rusher at 33. They could have done that at 28. Having Heyward and Smith helps two weaknesses better than an unknown pass rusher at 33 and a #1 pick that'll most likely be traded next year. I'll make it simple, the talent available at 28 and 33 is usually better than the talent available at 33 and 56. Hopefully they use all 3 picks in round 2 on two pass rushers and a deep threat receiver, though I doubt they use all 3 second round picks.

Click to expand...

Talent according to whom? Mel Kiper? The draft is such a crap shoot, and for that matter professional football is a crap shoot. How many of those players you think are going to be amazing end up being busts? How many get hurt in training camp and never play a down. If you put all your eggs in one basket you are itching to get burned. Compounding that even more is the salary cap. Getting a bunch of 2nd rounders signed for cheap money vs 1 or 2 for high dollars makes a lot of salary cap sense. Is it always right, no, is it often right, yes sir.

Kicking_Game said:

A 3-4 DE is a huge need, and now there is no one to pick....

Click to expand...

(1) 34 DE is not a huge need
(2) There are plenty of defensive linemen
(3) You are stupid

jays52 said:

Grid, never let your detractors stop you my eccentric friend. I've got your back. The Solder pick was scheme-perfect and the trade-out fortified the future rounds. I can't wait to see how the future rounds play out.

Not to sound like a douche (and, yeah, this is gonna sound douchey) I'm glad to see that many of the projections we harped on remained true.

Especially Jordan.

As much as I hate self reverence I was executing a perfect celebratory booty dance when Jordan was taken by a 43 team.

Click to expand...

AMEN!!

And, again: AMEN.

It was truly a magnificent 1st Round, Brother Jay.

An A+.

And you have clearly earned that Booty Dance, sir!! Rock ON, Brother Jay!! :rocker:

mac said:

I'm with you. As Gruden said referring to the Jimmy Smith pick, sometimes door one is open. Just open it. I could just picture Ingram lining up in the backfield with Tom Brady. Brady, for the first time since Corey Dillon, not having to carry the whole offense on his shoulders. Hayward and Wilkerson seemed solid too--"value" as they say.

Click to expand...

I really would have been happy with Heyward at 17. I think he was undervalued in this draft. This was the draft to get our 3-4 DE, and we passed.

mac said:

I'm with you. As Gruden said referring to the Jimmy Smith pick, sometimes door one is open. Just open it. I could just picture Ingram lining up in the backfield with Tom Brady. Brady, for the first time since Corey Dillon, not having to carry the whole offense on his shoulders. Hayward and Wilkerson seemed solid too--"value" as they say.

Click to expand...

Last year we had a 1000 yard rusher, was he a first rounder? I forget, how bout that third down back we had, was he a first rounder too? Running backs are a crap shoot, even high first rounders, especially rb's with some injury concerns. I think you have a very good chance of getting a rb in the second round who has a much better career than Ingram will.

andrewgarrr said:

(1) 34 DE is not a huge need
(2) There are plenty of defensive linemen
(3) You are stupid

Click to expand...

You can lump me in with the FO of Pittsburgh, New York, and New Orleans. I'm sure they're stupid as well?

Froob said:

Why do we need another 1st next year?

Click to expand...

So we can trade it for a 2nd and a 2013 1st. Why else?

Which would you rather have -- a 1st round pick once, or an infinite supply of once-per-year 2nd round picks?

andrewgarrr said:

(1) 34 DE is not a huge need
(2) There are plenty of defensive linemen
(3) You are stupid

Click to expand...

Not nice, but I did laugh when I read this.

jays52 said:

As much as I hate self reverence I was executing a perfect celebratory booty dance when Jordan was taken by a 43 team.

Click to expand...

You didn't have to post it online....

GIFSoup

It seems like every year folks forget that only about 1/3 of the first round picks will ever be a really solid starter and even fewer than that will be probowlers. But the commentary invariably seems to regard all first round picks as gold that the Patriots missed. Go back to past drafts results and see how many names you recognize now.

I have always thought that Belichick's underlying philosophy is to pass on the flashier players with significant risk in favor of picking players who appear to have much better odds at being a solid starting player, even if not likely a superstar. The fact that the players he ends of picking are so often not on the 'favs' list of everybody has a lot to do with exactly that I believe.

In his first five years, if you look at how many starters he got out of his drafts it was pretty impressive. Then for some inexplicable reason there were a number of years after that when the results were simply not that good, especially in terms of higher round draft picks that didn't work out at all or were starters you always felt were somewhat marginal starters. Then last year, ironically without Pioli, he was back to the old form. I for one am hoping that this years draft follows in the mode of getting a lot of solid starters.

In the heat of the draft, everyone seems to forget what Belichick has repeated many many times - and that is that they look for potential value far more than position needs. Even though everybody seems to forget that, the draft results really bear that out. That's why there is so much moaning on the board when 'needs' seem to be disregarded. And indeed 'needs' are secondary while best potential of the remaining players is given far more weight.

And while most folks are 'critical' of Belichick trading out of first round picks, a number of folks have commented on exactly why. And that is that the dispassionate analysis of past drafts has shown that the best results (in terms of players who are at least solid starters) FOR THE DOLLAR is indeed partway into the second round. So the 'best value' range is from the bottom end of the first round through the top third or so of the second round. Think back and you'll see that past drafts show that this is how Belichick regards the value of first round picks and second round picks. Keep in mind that most of the higher first round picks cost big dollars and are relatively high risk.

So if you get upset with Belichick's draft, take it as an opportunity to reflect on how he is approaching it and that the pick you are upset about was made with the above considerations in mind.

And we all hope that he 'nails' it this year !!

Dufflebagz said:

You didn't have to post it online....

GIFSoup

Click to expand...

That was so heterosexual it offended me.....************, f the kidding around. Now I have the terrifying image of a man-satchel engrained in my brain for the next two days. d%#*!@t.

mac said:

I'm with you. As Gruden said referring to the Jimmy Smith pick, sometimes door one is open. Just open it. I could just picture Ingram lining up in the backfield with Tom Brady. Brady, for the first time since Corey Dillon, not having to carry the whole offense on his shoulders. Hayward and Wilkerson seemed solid too--"value" as they say.

Click to expand...

Plenty of Vet running backs are out there, alot of GMs didn't have Ingram as the #1 RB either.

People drinking too much of the media cool aid.

Ingram nearly fell out the first... What a great talent he is.

Also look at the recent history of backs and where they are drafted. Infact please take the #1 back fromm all 32 sides and see where they were drafted. then tell me it was a mistake.

arrellbee said:

In his first five years, if you look at how many starters he got out of his drafts it was pretty impressive. Then for some inexplicable reason there were a number of years after that when the results were simply not that good, especially in terms of higher round draft picks that didn't work out at all or were starters you always felt were somewhat marginal starters. Then last year, ironically without Pioli, he was back to the old form. I for one am hoping that this years draft follows in the mode of getting a lot of solid starters.

Click to expand...

We took Nate Solder because Scar worked him out and said he was good. Our recent draft success isn't because Pioli is gone, it's because McDaniels isn't in the draft room. Those 2006-2009 drafts were some of the worst in Belichick's career, and those high offensive skill player busts (Chad Jackson, Maroney, O'Connell) were worked out by McDaniels. Look at McDaniel's talent judgment in Denver - it was horrible (Hillis, Alphonso Smith, Cutler, Marshall, even trading with NE for Maroney).

DropKickFlutie said:

We took Nate Solder because Scar worked him out and said he was good. Our recent draft success isn't because Pioli is gone, it's because McDaniels isn't in the draft room. Those 2006-2009 drafts were some of the worst in Belichick's career, and those high offensive skill player busts (Chad Jackson, Maroney, O'Connell) were worked out by McDaniels. Look at McDaniel's talent judgment in Denver - it was horrible (Hillis, Alphonso Smith, Cutler, Marshall, even trading with NE for Maroney).

Click to expand...

Right on the money I would say.

DropKickFlutie said:

We took Nate Solder because Scar worked him out and said he was good. Our recent draft success isn't because Pioli is gone, it's because McDaniels isn't in the draft room. Those 2006-2009 drafts were some of the worst in Belichick's career, and those high offensive skill player busts (Chad Jackson, Maroney, O'Connell) were worked out by McDaniels. Look at McDaniel's talent judgment in Denver - it was horrible (Hillis, Alphonso Smith, Cutler, Marshall, even trading with NE for Maroney).

Click to expand...

Last I knew, guys like Terrence Wheatley and Shawn Crable were on the defensive side of the ball. Blaming McDaniels is ridiculous.

Fencer said:

So we can trade it for a 2nd and a 2013 1st. Why else?

Which would you rather have -- a 1st round pick once, or an infinite supply of once-per-year 2nd round picks?

Click to expand...

Indeed. More bang for the buck, heh. One could guess that Belichick is looking at the 'strength' and value of the current draft board and I think we can surmise that if he trades for next years picks over using picks this year that he figures his odds are at least possibly for better value another year. I think folks may be forgetting that he actually used quite a few picks last year - and look how many of those contributed !

BB just hates drafting in the first round, and he will continue to hate it until a reasonable rookie cap is in place.

Who can blame him? Why pay some unknown more then the majority of starters? It makes zero sense.

The way it is now guarantees that some so called player and supposed sure things will get guaranteed millions, and yet they will never make an impact if they ever even play a down in the NFL.

It must change.