Post OTAs roster projections

patchick · Jun 24, 2014

KontradictioN said:
One of those names does not belong in that post. Can you guess which one it is?

Personally, I'd call it two. Not only is Dennard a legitimate press corner with a bargain-basement contract, but keeping Finch is essentially a proxy for cutting Vereen or White.

Brady6 · Jun 24, 2014

patchick said:
Personally, I'd call it two. Not only is Dennard a legitimate press corner with a bargain-basement contract, but keeping Finch is essentially a proxy for cutting Vereen or White.

I think at the end of the day we will keep at least one of Wendell and Connolly, along with Dennard and Arrington. I could see Finch going to the practice squad but we do not really need a third string 3rd down RB on the team, which is what he would equate to behind Vereen and White.

No knock on Finch, maybe he is an impressive player, but outside of Gronkowski I would say Vereen is potentially our most talented offensive weapon so we would want him on the field as often as possible and any snaps taken from Finch would like have to come at the expense of Vereen.

Kontradiction · Jun 24, 2014

patchick said:
Personally, I'd call it two. Not only is Dennard a legitimate press corner with a bargain-basement contract, but keeping Finch is essentially a proxy for cutting Vereen or White.

Cutting Vereen? White I could see, but not Vereen. You might be overrating Finch just a tad.

patchick · Jun 24, 2014

KontradictioN said:
Cutting Vereen? White I could see, but not Vereen. You might be overrating Finch just a tad.

I meant exactly the opposite of overrating Finch -- I'm baffled that so many are giving him a strong shot at making the roster. He'd be the 3rd (and IMO least attractive) option as a pass-catching RB. I don't see how you could carry all three of them, so when I see a projection of Finch on the 53 I read it as a willingness to cut Vereen or White, which seems wildly unlikely to me.

mcmurtry86 · Jun 24, 2014

Brady6 said:
That is assuming we start with a 3 WR set, in which case I would tend to agree that would be the top 3.

I do not view 3 WRs as our base offense personally. I think McDaniels has shown that he runs more conventional offensive sets. I also think that if you are running the football on early downs LaFell is one of the best blocking WRs in the NFL so he would be a good player to have on the field.

The Patriots used a FB only about 25% of the time last year and used 2 TE's pretty rarely when Gronk was out.

And we're talking about Josh McDaniels, right? Because his first go-round with the Pats was 3-4 WR heavy. He's rarely used a FB except in short yardage situations and he has typically underutilized his TE's compared to many other OC's (including Bill O'Brien)

Brady6 · Jun 24, 2014

patchick said:
I meant exactly the opposite of overrating Finch -- I'm baffled that so many are giving him a strong shot at making the roster. He'd be the 3rd (and IMO least attractive) option as a pass-catching RB. I don't see how you could carry all three of them, so when I see a projection of Finch on the 53 I read it as a willingness to cut Vereen or White, which seems wildly unlikely to me.

I completely agree, Finch is being compared to Danny Woodhead and that is why people are so high on him, but he is very different from Woodhead. They share similar height but Woodhead was a solid 20+ heavier and was significantly stronger and more athletic.

Kontradiction · Jun 24, 2014

patchick said:
I meant exactly the opposite of overrating Finch -- I'm baffled that so many are giving him a strong shot at making the roster. He'd be the 3rd (and IMO least attractive) option as a pass-catching RB. I don't see how you could carry all three of them, so when I see a projection of Finch on the 53 I read it as a willingness to cut Vereen or White, which seems wildly unlikely to me.

Okay, I gotcha now. And I agree. Guess I should go have another cup of coffee. Running a little slow this morning.

Brady6 · Jun 24, 2014

mcmurtry86 said:
The Patriots used a FB only about 25% of the time last year and used 2 TE's pretty rarely when Gronk was out.

And we're talking about Josh McDaniels, right? Because his first go-round with the Pats was 3-4 WR heavy. He's rarely used a FB except in short yardage situations and he has typically underutilized his TE's compared to many other OC's (including Bill O'Brien)

I think he under used the tight ends because he did not have any viable options at tight end, will that be any different in 2014 maybe not. As far as the offense goes, I am talking about the base, the lineup that we start the game with, and in most cases last season that was not a 3 wide receiver offense. Even when it was it did not consist of 2 slot WRs, Slater started the Broncos game.

Marqui · Jun 24, 2014

Uh, there's exactly 0% chance Vereen or White is getting cut.

patchick · Jun 24, 2014

Marqui said:
Uh, there's exactly 0% chance Vereen or White is getting cut.

Close to it, I agree. Which brings us back to the question, why is Roy Finch the popular choice as this year's UDFA success story?

He's not a freak athlete, or a high-profile college player who fell due to injury or off-field problems, or a prospect at a shallow roster position. In fact, he's not even the top-rated UDFA at his position this year -- that would be Stephen Houston, who also seems like a better fit given the current roster makeup. So why have so many people focused on Finch?

strngplyr · Jun 24, 2014

If any UDFA RB makes the roster it will be Stephen Houston in place of Brandon Bolden, not
Roy Finch over anybody.

Finch is just the hyped up guy playing without pads because he has a fun play style. He's Demps 2.0 right now.

Houston would fill a legitimate need as (in my opinion) an upgraded version of Bolden. He looks like a better pass catcher and runner (yes, he obviously hasn't done either in NFL yet while Bolden has, in limited fashion), his frame better suits the Ridley back-up role, and I think we need another back with good size after seeing how effective the Ridley and Blount duo was at times last year.

Houston would be the most "deceptive" back on the roster in terms of rushing and receiving opportunities, right now it's basically a run with Ridley and a pass with Vereen.

mcmurtry86 · Jun 24, 2014

Brady6 said:
I think he under used the tight ends because he did not have any viable options at tight end, will that be any different in 2014 maybe not. As far as the offense goes, I am talking about the base, the lineup that we start the game with, and in most cases last season that was not a 3 wide receiver offense. Even when it was it did not consist of 2 slot WRs, Slater started the Broncos game.

So the lineup on the first play of the game = "base"? Because I think most people associate the term "base" (with regard to either offense or defense) as the personnel grouping which plays the highest number of snaps.

jsull87 · Jun 24, 2014

Here's what mine looks like right now... geez there are some tough call in there:

QB (3) Brady, Mallett, Garoppolo
RB (4) Ridley, Vereen, Bolden, White
FB/TE (1) Devlin
TE (2) Gronkowski, Hoomanawanui
WR (6) Edelman, Amendola, Dobson, LaFell, Thompkins, Boyce
C (2) Connolly, Stork
G (4) Mankins, Cannon, Kline, Halapio
T (3) Solder, Vollmer, Fleming

DE (4) Jones, Ninkovich, Buchanan, Smith
DT (5) Wilfork, Kelly, Easley, Armstead, Jones
ILB(3) Mayo, Hightower, Beauharnais
OLB(2) Collins, Anderson
CB (5) Revis, Dennard, Ryan, Arrington, D Swanson
SS (3) Harmon, Wilson, Ebner
FS (2) McCourty, Chung
ST (4) Gostkowski, Allen, Aiken, Slater

Suspended 1st 4 games: Browner

Total players: 53
Created with Pats Picker: http://patspicker.patsfans.com

I personally think one out of Wendell or Connolly don't make it. It's just a gut feeling. Another Cut that i think may happen is Will Smith, but i am giving him the benifit of the doubt for now as there were reports he was looking ok in minicamp.

Armstead is another i think could go. Bringing in Silinga or Vellano. Just depends if we want a penetraitor in Vellano or a Wilfork backup in Silinga.

Our OL has great flexabiltiy in this scenario with Wendell cut. If anybody goes down there is very good depth to cover it.

Swanson is my dark horse to make the team for the moment at CB.

A couple of draft picks don't make it but that's expected with this much depth and the FA aditions of LaFell, Browner and Smith with no real outgoings and with Revis and Anderson replacing Talib and Fletcher.

bbell31 · Jun 24, 2014

Agreed on Finch bein a long shot the way the team is setup but he's too talented to not get on practice squad at least. I give finch a 17% chance of makin final cut. Lol. Might be the sickest dude the on team with the ball in his hands not counting Edelman. Just not the smartest & very small. Odds r very against him but watched his every game at Ou & the guy makes unbelievable plays w the ball n his hands almost every time it seemed

mgteich · Jun 25, 2014

mcmurtry86 said:
So the lineup on the first play of the game = "base"? Because I think most people associate the term "base" (with regard to either offense or defense) as the personnel grouping which plays the highest number of snaps.

The base is the group of positions used on the first defensive or first offensive play, NOT the group that get the most snaps.

Consider why this is the case. Let us say that we start with 4 DB's, but are usually ahead (most top teams). Then we would be in a nickel well more than half the time. We might even start in the nickel against some teams. But our "base" defense would still be using 4 rather 5 or 6 defensive backs.

mgteich · Jun 25, 2014

jsull87 said:
Here's what mine looks like right now... geez there are some tough call in there:

QB (3) Brady, Mallett, Garoppolo
RB (4) Ridley, Vereen, Bolden, White
FB/TE (1) Devlin
TE (2) Gronkowski, Hoomanawanui
WR (6) Edelman, Amendola, Dobson, LaFell, Thompkins, Boyce
C (2) Connolly, Stork
G (4) Mankins, Cannon, Kline, Halapio
T (3) Solder, Vollmer, Fleming

DE (4) Jones, Ninkovich, Buchanan, Smith
DT (5) Wilfork, Kelly, Easley, Armstead, Jones
ILB(3) Mayo, Hightower, Beauharnais
OLB(2) Collins, Anderson
CB (5) Revis, Dennard, Ryan, Arrington, D Swanson
SS (3) Harmon, Wilson, Ebner
FS (2) McCourty, Chung
ST (4) Gostkowski, Allen, Aiken, Slater

Suspended 1st 4 games: Browner

Total players: 53
Created with Pats Picker: http://patspicker.patsfans.com

I personally think one out of Wendell or Connolly don't make it. It's just a gut feeling. Another Cut that i think may happen is Will Smith, but i am giving him the benifit of the doubt for now as there were reports he was looking ok in minicamp.

Armstead is another i think could go. Bringing in Silinga or Vellano. Just depends if we want a penetraitor in Vellano or a Wilfork backup in Silinga.

Our OL has great flexabiltiy in this scenario with Wendell cut. If anybody goes down there is very good depth to cover it.

Swanson is my dark horse to make the team for the moment at CB.

A couple of draft picks don't make it but that's expected with this much depth and the FA aditions of LaFell, Browner and Smith with no real outgoings and with Revis and Anderson replacing Talib and Fletcher.

mgteich · Jun 25, 2014

I think Siliga is an almost lock as a backup to Wilfork. Armstead is a long shot at this point, although he could make the squad (just not instead of Siliga).

captain stone · Jun 25, 2014

Yeah, replace Armstead with Siliga and the Error Repeater with Jemea Thomas, and this is pretty much
how I see Bill finalizing his 53.

mcmurtry86 · Jun 25, 2014

mgteich said:
The base is the group of positions used on the first defensive or first offensive play, NOT the group that get the most snaps.

Consider why this is the case. Let us say that we start with 4 DB's, but are usually ahead (most top teams). Then we would be in a nickel well more than half the time. We might even start in the nickel against some teams. But our "base" defense would still be using 4 rather 5 or 6 defensive backs.

So let's say the Pats kick off to start the game, the opposing team returns the ball to the Pats 1. The Pats first defensive snap is in heavy goal line D. You're saying the heavy D would be "base"? I don't think so and I don't think the majority of people would make that interpretation.

"Base" implies the "base" of the playbook - the biggest portion of it. Imagine a pyramid with the "base" on the bottom and the specialty rarely called packages on the top.

If a team is considered a "base 3-4" and opens the game in a 4-2-5 nickel, we wouldn't consider them a "base nickel" team.

Really "base defense" has long referred to 4-3, 3-4 or (in the 80's) the 46. It was the grouping from which most defensive plays and concepts for a team's playbooks came from and the formation which was most heavily utilized. As the league has become more specialized, the term "base" is colloquially used to refer to a 3-4 or 4-3 scheme but is generally understood as the formation which is most commonly used. If a team runs 3-3-5 for 60% of their snaps, they would be a base 3-3-5 team. Just like in 2004, the Patriots were a base 3-4 team, despite having games where their first series was played in 4-2-5 or 3-3-5.

Brady6 · Jun 25, 2014

mcmurtry86 said:
So the lineup on the first play of the game = "base"? Because I think most people associate the term "base" (with regard to either offense or defense) as the personnel grouping which plays the highest number of snaps.

Sometimes I think you just argue things for the sake of arguing things. The Patriots use many different formation and personnel packages, I am not exactly sure what you are debating here, I tried to consider a position you may have but nothing of logic comes to mind. If you want to consider the 3 wide receiver the base that is fine, it has not been since 2009 but you can consider the 6 OL, 3 TE a base for all I care. It is meaningless to me.

If you have something worthy of discussion let me know otherwise...

Post OTAs roster projections

Moderatrix

Pro Bowl Player

On my retirement tour.

Moderatrix

Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

Pro Bowl Player

On my retirement tour.

Pro Bowl Player

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Moderatrix

In the Starting Line-Up

Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

In the Starting Line-Up

On the Game Day Roster

PatsFans.com Veteran

PatsFans.com Veteran

PatsFans.com Veteran

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

Pro Bowl Player

Similar threads