The Most Questionable 2014 Draft Choice

If there's something we can predict year in and year out, it's that Bill Belichick will make up question his drafting decisions, and that there will definitely be some surprises. No doubt about it.

PatsWickedPissah said:

If we stick to what seemingly is BB's belief it seems he's saying that no TE or other position of need available at the time was worth it. Maybe he's seen Harrison stepping up or thinks he'll sign Keller or he thinks UDFA can upgrade the position.

Click to expand...

Mike Reiss asked Belichick over the weekend about any possibility of Mark Harrison moving to the TE position, PWP. After all, Reiss was one of the drum bangers for this idea.

Belichick came back the response of "that's not currently in our plans," for whatever it may be worth.

I certainly agree with your general premise of another TE stepping in and (hopefully) giving us an upgrade over last season's debacle, and that Belichick obviously felt differently than we did as fans. One would think that he has some kind of plan at the position, so that's the most important part of your post in my opinion.

I thought I'd throw in the anecdote about Reiss' conversation though, because I found it interesting.

Brady6 said:

I will go on record and say one of the primary reasons I do not like Garopollo pick is that it implies the end of the Tom Brady era is approaching and that is not a time I want to think of.

Click to expand...

Too Bad That the way of the World.

Why does everyone assume that Brady will start till the day he retires? Unitas didn't. Namath didn't, Jurgenson didn't. Did Marino or Favre? What about Montana?. He lost his job in SF and had to leave for KC. So most don't. Elway announced he was retiring when he was Brady's age.

TFB is already on borrowed time.

AzPatsFan said:

Too Bad That the way of the World.

Why does everyone assume that Brady will start till the day he retires? Unitas didn't. Namath didn't, Jurgenson didn't. Did Marino or Favre? What about Montana?. He lost his job in SF and had to leave for KC. So most don't. Elway announced he was retiring when he was Brady's age.

TFB is already on borrowed time.

Click to expand...

The rules protecting Quarterbacks are a little different from then to now. Also, there have been great advances in medicine, training, recovery etc. I don't agree Brady is on borrowed time. He's shown no signs of decline. That may well happen in the coming seasons but to date, it has not.

AzPatsFan said:

Too Bad That the way of the World.

Why does everyone assume that Brady will start till the day he retires? Unitas didn't. Namath didn't, Jurgenson didn't. Did Marino or Favre? What about Montana?. He lost his job in SF and had to leave for KC. So most don't. Elway announced he was retiring when he was Brady's age.

TFB is already on borrowed time.

Click to expand...

One thing I'm hoping for is that Brady's excellent work ethic and physical condition comes into play. We're certainly lucky in that sense, that he normally is one of the most physically hard working players on the entire team.

Another aspect that I think may come into play is the fact that Brady doesn't really have to rely on his legs, so barring a catastrophe, I think he can see at least 3-4 more years with his quick release and system that is designed on helping to prolong his career by allowing him to get rid of the ball quickly on shorter timing routes.

I wouldn't envision too many scenarios where he's not starting though. I think we're seeing Tom play at a very high bar still. Actually, if someone is playing better than Tom Brady in the sense that he's good enough to overtake his starting job (whatever Brady's age may be at that time), I would have to think that we're a very lucky fanbase indeed.

ausbacker said:

The rules protecting Quarterbacks are a little different from then to now. Also, there have been great advances in medicine, training, recovery etc. I don't agree Brady is on borrowed time. He's shown no signs of decline. That may well happen in the coming seasons but to date, it has not.

Click to expand...

I respectfully suggest that I think you aren't looking. His long ball, never great, is now gone. His pocket elusiveness is going away. He is still very good, but not as great as he was.

supafly said:

One thing I'm hoping for is that Brady's excellent work ethic and physical condition comes into play. We're certainly lucky in that sense, that he normally is one of the most physically hard working players on the entire team.

Another aspect that I think may come into play is the fact that Brady doesn't really have to rely on his legs, so barring a catastrophe, I think he can see at least 3-4 more years with his quick release and system that is designed on helping to prolong his career by allowing him to get rid of the ball quickly on shorter timing routes.

I wouldn't envision too many scenarios where he's not starting though. I think we're seeing Tom play at a very high bar still. Actually, if someone is playing better than Tom Brady in the sense that he's good enough to overtake his starting job (whatever Brady's age may be at that time), I would have to think that we're a very lucky fanbase indeed.

Click to expand...

I never said he wasn't playing at a great level. But its not what it once was. All those great immortals eventually showed that they weren't; and Brady is just as human too. Belichick took the ball away, or at least never gave it back, to several very talented QBs in Kosar, Testaverde and Bledsoe. He might have to do the same for Tom.

The more tape I watch on Jemea Thomas, the more I like him. Hadn't really heard of him before the draft but I can definitely see him competing for a spot at SS

AzPatsFan said:

I respectfully suggest that I think you aren't looking. His long ball, never great, is now gone. His pocket elusiveness is going away. He is still very good, but not as great as he was.

Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree @AzPatsFan. Personally, I don't want Brady to be as great as he was in his "prime". I don't want to see 2007 Brady ever again. I want to see a Defense that pulls its weight and makes it easier for Brady to hand the ball off to Ridley and Vereen and an Offensive Line that gives him time in the pocket. IMO, Brady doesn't need the deep ball if his accuracy remains strong. It also helps if the skill position players run the routes they're supposed too.

Ausbacker, you're doing whatever the opposite of damning with faint praise is I think. Even if you keep the lid on superhuman feats of aerial virtuosity until the three dogfights you get in in a year, in a perfect world, you need to be able to take the cork out of that bottle at will. It sounds like you're arguing that from a team perspective it's better not to have the temptation to duplicate 2007. Okay I guess. Maybe. Maybe BB really, really would like to be able to say "The balance can switch back to D... Seattle showed it and we need to at least build that direction." I'm all for it, yay, whoopie, enough of this backyard throw-a-bomb-every-play arena league stuff right?

But when you're deciding whether you want the full range of abililties in your QB, the answer can't be "no, because then you're just tempted to set records." Come on.

Now that said, Brady can end as he began: a guy who knows exactly what to do with the guys he has on the field, a guy who can rely on his defense to stop the other guy and rely on his running game to play keepaway, etc. And when we need that long ball on one of those two or three plays on which the game turns, let's hope we still get it. Biology (and tape) tells you he doesn't have what he had in 2007. Question is does he have Elway had in the late 90s.

When the curtain falls again, I want Brady to have a couple more rings and the way to get them isn't purely through his own hand. But is it preferable to be able to accurately wing the ball 50 or 60 yards in the air? Call me crazy but Imunna say yes.

Brady6 said:

What is his story? I know very little about him.

Click to expand...

My opinion, he reminds me of Steve Smith. Guy just a beast. If he was taller then 5'8 he would have been drafted much earlier.

AzPatsFan said:

Too Bad That the way of the World.

Why does everyone assume that Brady will start till the day he retires? Unitas didn't. Namath didn't, Jurgenson didn't. Did Marino or Favre? What about Montana?. He lost his job in SF and had to leave for KC. So most don't. Elway announced he was retiring when he was Brady's age.

TFB is already on borrowed time.

Click to expand...

In the past four seasons, Brady has a 63.95% completion percentage, 18305 passing yards, 134 touchdown passes, and 35 interceptions; his average season is 4576 yards, 33.5 touchdowns, 8.75 interceptions, and a 100.65 QB rating during that period. The team has a 51-13 regular season record over that period, has been to 1 Super Bowl, 3 AFFCGs, has won 4 division titles, and 1 conference championship.

PatsFanInVa said:

Ausbacker, you're doing whatever the opposite of damning with faint praise is I think. Even if you keep the lid on superhuman feats of aerial virtuosity until the three dogfights you get in in a year, in a perfect world, you need to be able to take the cork out of that bottle at will. It sounds like you're arguing that from a team perspective it's better not to have the temptation to duplicate 2007. Okay I guess. Maybe. Maybe BB really, really would like to be able to say "The balance can switch back to D... Seattle showed it and we need to at least build that direction." I'm all for it, yay, whoopie, enough of this backyard throw-a-bomb-every-play arena league stuff right?

Click to expand...

I don't disagree with anything you've put forward @PatsFanInVa I just don't see showtime Offenses walking away with the Lombardi all that often. I've been calling for balance for some time.

PatsFanInVa said:

But when you're deciding whether you want the full range of abililties in your QB, the answer can't be "no, because then you're just tempted to set records." Come on.

Click to expand...

I don't consider long range throws high percentage plays. It's the least of my concern when evaluating the play of a Quarterback. I would like Brady to make the throws he needs to make. If that's something over 30 yards, so be it. Would I like Brady to throw the deep ball with accuracy more often than not? Sure. Is it of critical importance to me? No.

PatsFanInVa said:

Now that said, Brady can end as he began: a guy who knows exactly what to do with the guys he has on the field, a guy who can rely on his defense to stop the other guy and rely on his running game to play keepaway, etc. And when we need that long ball on one of those two or three plays on which the game turns, let's hope we still get it. Biology (and tape) tells you he doesn't have what he had in 2007. Question is does he have Elway had in the late 90s.

Click to expand...

We are in agreement.

PatsFanInVa said:

When the curtain falls again, I want Brady to have a couple more rings and the way to get them isn't purely through his own hand. But is it preferable to be able to accurately wing the ball 50 or 60 yards in the air? Call me crazy but Imunna say yes.

Click to expand...

Of course it's preferable to have every skill at your disposal @PatsFanInVa and I sure as hell would like to see Brady cap off a magnificent career with another Lombardi or two in a Patriots uniform.

ausbacker said:

The rules protecting Quarterbacks are a little different from then to now. Also, there have been great advances in medicine, training, recovery etc. I don't agree Brady is on borrowed time. He's shown no signs of decline. That may well happen in the coming seasons but to date, it has not.

Click to expand...

To be fair, at least 6 years of Brady's career has been played without those rules and, even after, he's still taken quite a few hellacious shots. I was on board with a QB as soon as this year because more QB's in NFL history have declined at or before 40 than those who have continued to play at a high level. So it's not the idea that I'm not a fan of, just the player. Hope he proves me wrong one day.

Brady6 said:

None what proof do you have that they were not going? Considering Jacksonville traded into #61 to draft him that would indicate that they were trying to be in front of New England.
I have more proof to support my belief in the fact that Jacksonville traded in front of us than you do to support your belief.

Click to expand...

Let's work through the logic tree as to why Jacksonville went to #61.

Let's assume that Robinson was the highest, by a significant margin, player on their board for the following scenarios.

1) Extreme value -- the Jaguars were not willing to take a risk that he would be taken by a team between slots #61 and #70. It could have been a trade to insure that they get what they saw as a 1st round or high 2nd round value or at least the last guy before a serious talent cliff. Getting as high as possible for a reasonable value is the key here.

2) Avoid the Patriots who are sure to draft Robinson-- your theory where #61 is critical.

3) Avoid the Patriots or anyone else between 62 and 69 from taking Robinson -- #61 per se is less critical, just a good value and stress reduction.

4) Avoid the Patriots or anyone else between 62 and 69 from trading their pick to another team that really likes Robinson

Any of these scenarios are plausible scenarios --- #61 is not indicative that the Jaguars trade was pushed by their estimation that the Patriots were going to take Robinson -- who knows, maybe the Jags mocked Fredercowiz or Garapolo or Nix to the Pats, and were really worried about Seattle or Houston -- but the 49ers offered a good deal for the move.

fester said:

Let's work through the logic tree as to why Jacksonville went to #61.

Let's assume that Robinson was the highest, by a significant margin, player on their board for the following scenarios.

1) Extreme value -- the Jaguars were not willing to take a risk that he would be taken by a team between slots #61 and #70. It could have been a trade to insure that they get what they saw as a 1st round or high 2nd round value or at least the last guy before a serious talent cliff. Getting as high as possible for a reasonable value is the key here.

2) Avoid the Patriots who are sure to draft Robinson-- your theory where #61 is critical.

3) Avoid the Patriots or anyone else between 62 and 69 from taking Robinson -- #61 per se is less critical, just a good value and stress reduction.

4) Avoid the Patriots or anyone else between 62 and 69 from trading their pick to another team that really likes Robinson

Any of these scenarios are plausible scenarios --- #61 is not indicative that the Jaguars trade was pushed by their estimation that the Patriots were going to take Robinson -- who knows, maybe the Jags mocked Fredercowiz or Garapolo or Nix to the Pats, and were really worried about Seattle or Houston -- but the 49ers offered a good deal for the move.

Click to expand...

I base my opinion on the fact that the Patriots traded #93 to Jacksonville, which indicated to me that the Jags would have sought out a trade with the Patriots at #62 instead of going to #61 had they not felt Belichick would draft Robinson.

That said it could be just the way the trade aligned and my perception could be wrong.

AzorianPats said:

My opinion, he reminds me of Steve Smith. Guy just a beast. If he was taller then 5'8 he would have been drafted much earlier.

Click to expand...

They are very similar athletically; Smith is almost two inches taller though.

Smith
Combine Invite: yes
Height: 5090
Weight: 184
40 Yard Dash: 4.41
20 Yard Dash: 2.51
10 Yard Dash: 1.51
225 Lb. Bench Reps:
Vertical Jump: 38 1/2
Broad Jump: 10'01"
20 Yard Shuttle: 4.25
3-Cone Drill: 7.44

Gallon
Combine Invite: Yes
Height: 5074
Weight: 185
40 Yard Dash: 4.45
20 Yard Dash: 2.51
10 Yard Dash: 1.56
225 Lb. Bench Reps: 15
Vertical Jump: 39 1/2
Broad Jump: 10'10"
20 Yard Shuttle: 4.26
3-Cone Drill: 7.07

mgteich said:

Given who was available, this was NOT the choice of Garrapolo, the highest rated player on the board, and few others available that were of reasonable value.

The most questionable choice was clearly the choice of Easley. I am NOT criticizing the choice, just pointing out the obvious. There were many fine alternatives on the board at just about every position.

29 DT Easley
30 S Ward
31 CB Roby
32 QB Bridgewater
35 OT Bitanio
37 DT Hageman
38 TE Jenkins
39 WR Lee
40 LB Van Nuy
43 OC Richburg

Click to expand...

See if you can track how many college defensive players too injured to work out before draft (by work out I mean run the 40, classic combine stuff) went on to become NFL impact players. The list is non-existent. Even A. Cromartie who missed his entire final year at FSU was able to run and blew everyone away, justifying his 1st rd grade.

I'm not saying it's impossible that Easley become great, just that it is highly improbable on many levels. Obviously his college tape is fun to watch. Just because Seattle wants someone does not mean the player is worth it : see Bruce Irvin etc. So the crowing over "we stole him from Seattle" means nothing.

Still Easley is part of the family and I am now a huge supporter, so hope for the best.

I have bigger problem with Garoppolo.
HE's 6'2'' already short for an NFL QB, but crouches like a scared rabbit in the pocket so that he plays like he's 5'9''.

He has happy feet, looks afraid to take a hit, and plays more like David Carr than David Carr's brother plays like David Carr. By that I mean no pocket presence.

I am dumbfounded by this selection. Hoyer and Mallett much better QB prospects.
This pick has McDaniels fingerprints all over it, and that is not good news. Best case scenario Manziell beats Hoyer out next year, Pats get him back when Mallett is gone to be a back-up.

In sum Garoppolo is short and plays short, has no pocket presence, has happy feet and looks skittish in the pocket. Can't win em all in the draft, let's just move on and hope for the best.

Agnostic on the JAG's NFL outlook, but sad that BB didn't have your film review before making the pick

PatsWickedPissah said:

Agnostic on the JAG's NFL outlook, but sad that BB didn't have your film review before making the pick

Click to expand...

Not sure if you're being sarcastic, but I can see how some of Garoppolo's traits can win admirers. When the pocket is clean he is very accurate, with that quick release people talk about. He is an engaging charismatic guy. The new QB contact rules have made it easier for small QBs to survive in the NFL and even thrive. So you can look at all this, and if you're an ambitious QB coach with a Napoleon complex, you might say to yourself: "I like this kid, yeah he's short, but he's got tools and moxie, and I can make him great because I'm a great coach."

But courage in the pocket and the instinct to not fear the rush, keep your eyes downfield and deliver the ball, that's something you either have or don't. Can't really be taught, because under pressure all rules break down, fight or flight takes over and you are what you are. Height makes that downfield vision problem much easier to overcome, which is one reason it's a key factor in evaluating NFL QBs. Tall QBs naturally have better vision and are less distracted by the chaos in front of them.

I'm rooting for him and hope I'm wrong.