PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

The Patriots will pick a RB in the first 2 rounds


Hard call indeed. As much as it looks like a lines-first draft, Vereen MUST be replaced and Johnson is the kind of versatile skill player that Josh & co. could have a field day with. I could picture him making a significant impact.

I've gotten to the point where I would love Gurley if he's available in the 1st (unlikely), or Coleman/Johnson somewhere on day 2. I think all 3 would add a significant dimension to the offense. I'm happy with one of those 3 in addition to a couple of players on each side of the line.
 
I made this thread in the assumption that either Vereen or Ridley walk (or both). The Patriots do not have a true top tier RB even with them. I think it is a spot that is very upgradable if BB wants to do so.

Look at the regular season and playoffs

Regular season - 18th in total rushing yards. 22nd in YPA. They had a few big games against mostly bad run Ds but a lot of games were very meh to bad.

In the playoffs the games were like this.

Ravens - 14 yards (completely shut down)
Colts - 177 yards (able to exploit a bad run D)
Seattle - 57 yards on 21 attempts (not able to run effectively)

So the Pats run game last year in the playoffs only factored in a game they we could have won easily without it. In tough games against tough Ds it was useless.

Now you can upgrade that with Guards of course but to be honest looking at the Pats RBs they just were not all that good at running.

Also I think the Pats fans are generally turned off by the idea cause of the mental scars left by the Maroney miss or being afraid of picking a Trent Richardson. I am not worried about that part of it. RBs tend to bust a lot less than other positions when picked high or at least no more.

Now I am not so for picking a RB. I am just saying I think it will happen looking at how things stand.


well....the pats took what they had to take.......the entire world knew you can throw at will against the Ravens....so they did.....The Colts are historically weak in the trenches......then they took what is by far the best passing defense in the NFL and picked 'em apart so that in the end, it looked like they weren't even there.

by the way, I disagree that the pats were ineffective running against the seahawks....the seahawks had to consider the run and that slowed them down and eventually gassed them
 
I would be all for Gurley in the first but it may take a move up to get him. If the Cowboys tag Murray then I would laugh my ass off if the Patriots traded up with them and jumped over the Colts at the last second to take the RB they covet. Deflate that mothaf...ers....
 
well....the pats took what they had to take.......the entire world knew you can throw at will against the Ravens....so they did.....The Colts are historically weak in the trenches......then they took what is by far the best passing defense in the NFL and picked 'em apart so that in the end, it looked like they weren't even there.

by the way, I disagree that the pats were ineffective running against the seahawks....the seahawks had to consider the run and that slowed them down and eventually gassed them

Some fair points made here. I disagree with a few.

The Pats took what they could and attacked what the other team did bad when they could. That however really only applies to the run aspect of their O. To continue the way things are would be to say we will run against bad run D teams and against teams that can stop an average to below average run game we will pass on them regardless of how good their pass D is.

They passed mostly at will against all 3 teams. They did not need to worry about how good or bad that teams pass D was cause they were just plain good at it. I would like that at least in part from the run game. I want the Pats OL and RBs to line up against a team and run well regardless if they are a strong or weak run D (I don't mean 200 yards but able to turn out a respectable 100 with a decent average).

Also I think the running game had little to do with them gassing the Seahawks or really slowing them down. I think it was play total and long drives. They ran 19 times (that does not include 2 by Brady which were not real runs anyway) and passed 50 times. I think the sustained short passing game is what slowed them down more than anything else. Also I don't think Seattle feared our run game enough to be slowed much by it. That is my guess anyway.
 
Last edited:
David Johnson is the player I find myself circling back to more and more. Hard to even call him an RB -- possibly closer to Hernandez than Vereen -- but as a total skill package I think he'd be a perfect addition to this offense.

I'd prefer Abdullah who I think is one of the best in class, but have Johnson just behind. Johnson would be a very interesting piece for Josh to use.
 
David Johnson is the player I find myself circling back to more and more. Hard to even call him an RB -- possibly closer to Hernandez than Vereen -- but as a total skill package I think he'd be a perfect addition to this offense.

David Johnson's mockdraftable chart as a WR

image.jpg
 
Re: David Johnson as a WR:

99th Percentile on the bench press and we already know he's a good blocker. If Amendola is cut, David Johnson taking his role would be good. Would like to see what Josh could do with Johnson and Blount on the field at the same time.
 
OK, so what I'm hearing is that David Johnson will fill our needs at RB, WR and TE. Efficient! ;)

(BTW, anybody have insights on Javorius Allen?)
 
This is my new prediction for this draft year and the more I think about it the more sure I am about it.

Lets look at the reasons why.

Reason 1: Past history indicates they will.

In Patriots History under BB the Pats have used high draft capital 3 times on a RB.

2004 - Traded for Corey Dillion (2nd), 2006 - Drafted - Lawrence Maroney (1st) , 2011 - Drafted Vereen (2nd).

BB historically does not like to pay RBs but he in the past he has shown value in them by investing draft picks. The circumstances of picking up these backs are interesting.

2004 - The Patriots had a good D and solid WR core.
2006 - Same as 2004.
2011 - Same as 2004.

Let me explain a bit about 2006 and 2011.

In 2006 going into the draft the Patriots had a solid D and still had Deion Branch and were probably counting on keeping him. Contract talks broke off in May after the draft. They probably did not expect Branch to hold out and thought this RB would offer the last peice of an otherwise balanced team.

In 2011 the Pats had just drafted Hernandez and Gronk a year ago and had WRs in place. They thought they had plenty of pass catching options. The D was not perfect but decent. It had McCourty coming off a ROTY caliber season looking like a potential #1 CB. Vet signings of Andre Cater, Haynesworth. This was an off season not unlike this year when they loaded up but just missed on a few big things and a few players did not pan out/got injured. This was a plan to have a complete team so BB thought he would draft a RB high (and one in the 3rd too).

The pattern is clear. BB worries about RB last. Once he feels he has everything else he is willing to spend premium picks to get one he believes is good.

Reason 2: This RB class is really good.

I don't believe there is a HOF back in this draft. I think there are several "Hall of very good" RBs though. This is the deepest RB draft I have seen in quite some time. This works in favor of this argument cause even though BB does draft with a mind towards positions a lot he almost never picks someone at a spot they are not worthy of. By the time 32 and 64 rolls around (assuming no trade ups or downs) there will be at least 1 if not more RBs that are good value.

Reasons 3: BB does not pay for RBs.

BB values RBs but in a very specific way it appears to me. They are worth using high assets to get but not worth keeping for high dollars. He would rather use a pick to get a RB on a low contract than spend for one. This year also makes going after one of the high priced RBs in FA particularly impractical due to other needs to fill. So if we assume BB wants to get a RB on the cheap he either A) Needs to trade for one or B) Needs to draft one. As far as i know there is no cheap top RB who can trade for right now like the Dillon situation (which i will remind you BB didn't mind using a 2nd round pick for a 2-3 year player)

Keep in mind this is not the pick i want the Pats to make automatically. Just the one i think they will.
Am I the only one who likes Blount? At least enough to not use a 2nd round pick in a RB by committee?
 
Am I the only one who likes Blount? At least enough to not use a 2nd round pick in a RB by committee?

I like Blount too, but he's inconsistent (see AFC championship Game and SuperBowl) and only under contract for one more year. Personally if we're taking a RB in rounds 1-2 then I want Todd Gurley who is better than Blount or a Shane Vereen replacement which wouldn't affect Blount. If we're not getting either, then I'm fine rolling with what we have (with maybe a Ridley re-signing).
 
Am I the only one who likes Blount? At least enough to not use a 2nd round pick in a RB by committee?

I like Blount enough. He is fairly average though. When you look at starting RBs in the NFL for 2015 Blount is not in the top half. That is not to say he sucks cause he does not but he is fairly average with certain match ups that he does well against and certain ones he does not.

If he is your lead back then even if you invest a large amount into your OL you will always have limitations with it. That is not to say you can not win with him cause you've proven you can. Just a lot of guys can help you more.
 
Last edited:
Am I the only one who likes Blount? At least enough to not use a 2nd round pick in a RB by committee?

I'm fine with Blount, but I think that replacing Shane Vereen is critical and I'm not ready to assume James White is the answer after an invisible rookie season. Both Vereen and Kevin Faulk were 2nd-round picks.
 
Off the top of my head who breaks longer runs than Blount after contact?
 
That's what I like about him.
 
3rd down back? IMO Vereen's the superior receiver (such as running routes) but pure 3rd down back Bush might be better if he can pick up the blitz. He's probably shiftier and the injury prone thing? Hasn't Vereen been out more than he's been in?
 
A little outside the pocket but Blount is shifty in space and in his chances seems to be able to catch/run with it. Any chance Blount could become a 3d down back and resign Ridley to pound it? Can Blount block? Not the traditional speed but I keep going back to Blount breakaway speed.
 
Before Bill drafts a RB or WR, he first absolutely must draft the next Logan Mankins.
 


TRANSCRIPT: Eliot Wolf’s Pre-Draft Press Conference 4/18/24
Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/18: News and Notes
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 4/17: News and Notes
Tuesday Patriots Notebook 4/16: News and Notes
Monday Patriots Notebook 4/15: News and Notes
Patriots News 4-14, Mock Draft 3.0, Gilmore, Law Rally For Bill 
Potential Patriot: Boston Globe’s Price Talks to Georgia WR McConkey
Friday Patriots Notebook 4/12: News and Notes
Not a First Round Pick? Hoge Doubles Down on Maye
Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/11: News and Notes
Back
Top