On Team Building, Free Agency, and the Draft

With FA and the start of the new league year a few days away, I've been think a lot about the general process of team building, and thought it might be worth discussing some general approaches:

1. In no other major sport that I can think of is there 30% yearly roster turnover. Free agency and the salary cap drive this, and keep things fresh. Each year is drastically different than the previous one, even for the stable teams. Football is highly dependent on cooperative play, so changing that 30% of your roster can dramatically change the chemistry of your entire team, so that you essentially have to build a new team each year.

2. As a general approach, the successful teams generally seem to be the ones that develop their core players through the draft. The Patriots, Ravens, Steelers, Packers and Seahawks all fall into that category. For the Patriots, almost all of the key players - the ones that you want to build around long term and really don't want to let get away - were developed through the draft: Tom Brady, Rob Gronkowski, Jerod Mayo, Devin McCourty, Chandler Jones, Dont'a Hightower, Jamie Collins, Nate Solder and Sebastian Vollmer currently, and guys like Vince Wilfork, Richard Seymour, Logan Mankins and (shudder) Aaron Hernandez in the past. This has the advantage that you don't throw big money at players until they are known quantities with proven ability to perform in your system. In the case of Hernandez, the calculus went disastrously wrong because of off-field issues.

3. Attempting to fill acute needs through the draft is generally in opposition with building a strong talent base through the draft. It leads to reaching to fill specific positions, and passing up more talented options. The more freedom you have to move around in the draft and to not have to fill specific needs, the more you can focus on building a talent base for the long term. The draft also has a sizable inherent failure rate, so diversification and stockpiling of talent makes sense as a general approach. Some successful teams explicitly attempt to factor this uncertainty in their draft approach: BB by trading down, the Ravens by accumulating extra comp picks.

4. In order to not use the draft to address acute needs, free agency comes into play. Upgrading talent through free agency is much riskier than plugging holes, because you generally pay a premium to upgrade talent. There are 2 problems with this: (1) you are to a large extent paying for past performance with another team, under different circumstances; and (2) it is difficult to extrapolate this to future performance in a new situation, where failure can be very costly. So unless you are very certain that you are getting something special or are getting it at a significant discount (e.g., Revis in 2014, the Moss trade in 2007, even though that wasn't strictly a FA situation) it's risky to spend on big name FAs.

5. As a theory, I would argue that the vast majority of players in the NFL are eminently replaceable, and are separated in ability by only a small amount. Only a small percent are the rare difference makers who would likely succeed wherever they play. The majority of those that have been productive in a past situation often were in a good environment to succeed, and may struggle to duplicate that success elsewhere. Many of them get ridiculously overpaid in free agency. The cardinal sin in free agency is to pay excessively for a player that's only marginally better than someone you could get for a fraction of the cost. Brian Hartline was over-valued in 2013, now he seems to be under-valued; he's roughly comparable to Cecil Shorts, who is likely to get a much bigger pay day this year.

Looking at this year's FA class, it is pretty predictable that Pernell McPhee, Brandon Graham, Jerry Hughes, Terrance Knighton and CJ Spiller are all going to be over-valued and over-priced. It's probably sound to let guys like Shane Vereen test the market, just as the Pats let Julian Edelman do last year. Both players have significant value, but both are replaceable if the market over-values them. The Pats ended up getting Edelman back for very reasonable money, and got Brandon LaFell for excellent value as well, whereas Eric Decker - a very solid #2 receiver, but a replaceable talent - signed for far more than both combined (5 years/$36.25M with $15M guaranteed, compared to 4 years/$17M for Edelman and 3 years/$9M for LaFell, with a combined $11M guaranteed). The Broncos got more productivity out of Emmanuel Sanders, who replaced Decker at less than half the cost (3 years/$15M with $6M guaranteed).

If I were the Pats, my strategy for 2015 would be:

1. Re-sign Revis and McCourty if at all possible, unless the market grossly over-values them
2. Re-sign as many of the solid but replaceable guys as the available cap space will allow at reasonable cost, and let them go if the market over-values them. This includes Shane Vereen, Stevan Ridley, Akeem Ayers, Dan Connolly, Alan Branch and Jonathan Casillas. Of those, Vereen and Ayers are the most likely to be over-valued.
3. Either drastically reduce Danny Amendola's contract or replace him at low cost.
4. For players who need to be replaced, target low-cost replacements with upside. These include guys like DT Kenrick Ellis, RB Pierre Thomas and WRs Brian Hartline or Eddie Royal. If the market ends up over-valuing those guys, find other targets. Avoid the early feeding frenzy, don't fixate on individual players, don't overspend on anyone, and don't go after big names unless they are available at significant discount and don't break your budget (e.g., Percy Harvin, Andre Johnson). But fill as many holes as possible so that you don't need to reach to plug holes in the draft.
5. Draft to add long-term talent, not to plug holes for 2015. If players can contribute significantly this year so much the better, but it's not essential. Many of the guys who are high on my current draft priorities - Todd Gurley, Marcus Hardison, Ali Marpet, Max Valles and DeAndre Smelter, for example - aren't likely to be big producers in 2015, but have significant long-term potential.

I think this is very consistent with how the Pats have operated in the past, and consistent with their general approach to risk management. I think it's proven to be a much more prudent and sustainable approach than the kind of "all in" splurge on big names that we saw last year with the Broncos, for example. I think that with prudent decision-making and a little bit of luck, it may well be possible to put together a roster that is as strong or stronger than what the Pats had in 2014.

Thoughts?

Good stuff, is all. Revis is a difference maker, but it's possible to patch elsewhere. I still say, though otheres disagree, that wilfork is the next hardest to replace in the short term, without spending as much or more than he might settle for (or he might get his asking price on the right team). I know he's old, but we've seen what happens when you can't hold in the trenches.

always liked vereen, but his type isn't hard to replace. Not the same, but there are lots of scat back/KR, there's White, they could basically run a camp of quick RB?/WR who haven't been able to stick. Sad to say, McCourty's not unique. with Revis and Browner, if they have a solid D line, they have safeties behind great linebackers. RB is a strong group in the draft, I understand, so Rid and Vereen might be savings.

It all comes Down to Revis. If he stays you trying to get as many of they other FAs back also.

But if he leaves, then I really hope BB and Patriots basicly take a "redshirt" year, even when they do that they should be in playoff, but simply removeing all stinky contracts ( Mayo, Dola, Hooman etc ) Moves Arrington back to safety ( beleaves gonna happen anyway ) and take the 20m+ Dead Money Cap hit this year. Useing rest of Money to Lock up Hightower, Collins, Jones and Solder to long term deals and if Money. Mayby you even bring back and lock up Ayers?

I hope for option A - But also hope BB and Patriots would be smart and ready to use option B type of season.

RayClay said:

Good stuff, is all. Revis is a difference maker, but it's possible to patch elsewhere. I still say, though otheres disagree, that wilfork is the next hardest to replace in the short term, without spending as much or more than he might settle for (or he might get his asking price on the right team). I know he's old, but we've seen what happens when you can't hold in the trenches.

always liked vereen, but his type isn't hard to replace. Not the same, but there are lots of scat back/KR, there's White, they could basically run a camp of quick RB?/WR who haven't been able to stick. Sad to say, McCourty's not unique. with Revis and Browner, if they have a solid D line, they have safeties behind great linebackers. RB is a strong group in the draft, I understand, so Rid and Vereen might be savings.

Click to expand...

I think McCourty is an interesting case. I could argue it both ways. I thought the Pats would tag him, but they chose to let him test FA. If the market overpays for him and he's not willing to take a good but lesser offer from the Pats (something in the neighborhood of what Kareem Jackson got from Houston yesterday) then I think they'll move on. He is very, very good at what he does, and he has a lot of value, but he is replaceable.

Some of the potential "best bargains" in FA according to Greg Bedard:

http://mmqb.si.com/2015/03/06/nfl-free-agency-bargains/

Funny reading this and then immediately after that the Bills have

Adam Schefter ‏@AdamSchefter 5m5 minutes ago
LeSean McCoy and Bills have agreed on a $16M first year total with $26.5M total guaranteed and $40M over 5 years, per @RosenhausSports

Thus why they haven't been to the playoffs in forever.

I agree with your post. BB has commented on these theories and how he consults Jerry West on team building with a cap and that was West's biggest advice. Don't overpay for all but exceptional talent.

everlong said:

Funny reading this and then immediately after that the Bills have

Adam Schefter ‏@AdamSchefter 5m5 minutes ago
LeSean McCoy and Bills have agreed on a $16M first year total with $26.5M total guaranteed and $40M over 5 years, per @RosenhausSports

Thus why they haven't been to the playoffs in forever.

I agree with your post. BB has commented on these theories and how he consults Jerry West on team building with a cap and that was West's biggest advice. Don't overpay for all but exceptional talent.

Click to expand...

e.g., Your GRONKs and JJ Watts.

everlong said:

Funny reading this and then immediately after that the Bills have

Adam Schefter ‏@AdamSchefter 5m5 minutes ago
LeSean McCoy and Bills have agreed on a $16M first year total with $26.5M total guaranteed and $40M over 5 years, per @RosenhausSports

Thus why they haven't been to the playoffs in forever.

I agree with your post. BB has commented on these theories and how he consults Jerry West on team building with a cap and that was West's biggest advice. Don't overpay for all but exceptional talent.

Click to expand...

That's ludicrous. I assume McCoy no longer objects to being traded to the Bills.

The FA market is unpredictable. Some guys will get massively overpaid. You don't want to be in the market for those guys. It's not always easy to predict. I had DT as a potential FA target for the Pats 2 years ago, and he got a ridiculous deal from the Browns within hours of FA opening. Those are the situations where you laugh and move on. The Pats got Tommy Kelly, a far more productive player, for a fraction of the price. That didn't work out as planned due to injuries, but at least the investment was a small one.

Generally, it's the teams that are desperate that are leading the feeding frenzy. They often have lots of cap space because they've slashed and burned. Going from cap hell to massive amounts of cap space is not the way to build a stable long-term foundation.

Mayo, I really enjoyed your post. Thanks for all your work recently (and same for Manx, etc). I jotted down a few thoughts as I read through your OP.


3. (on drafting for need)

Bill definitely prefers to try to fill holes in Free Agency, allowing him to be more flexible during the draft and pick the best players available rather than having to focus mainly on need.

4. (on upgrading talent in free agency)

I think Bill got burnt on the Adalius Thomas signing in 2007. Looked a good move at first, but he never truly replicated his Ravens form. Obviously it all went downhill as soon as the team started to struggle (BB: "I just can't get them to play the way they need to"), and he was highlighted as one of the worst influences in the locker room that year.

In retrospect, thank God we've got Bill Belichick. Because there's many head coaches who were excellent when things were going well, but never managed to turn things round after bad years. BB axed a lot of players after that season.

5. (on the vast majority of NFL players being eminently replaceable)

You're right, but only because most teams misuse many of their players. Bill's one of the few coaches who will "never ask a player to do something he can't do", and that's to his credit.

Look at Logan Ryan. He's an average corner with mercurial talent - sometimes he looks great, other times he just doesn't seem to get it. Reminds me of Darius Butler a lot in that way. Anyway, my point is that he has a role here - reserve outside corner, comes on in sub packages, and the coaches know that he matches up well against speed receivers (e.g. Torrey Smith).

Other teams might try to force him into a starting role, but they won't win games doing that because he'll give up too many plays against average receivers (again, see Darius Butler). Yet he has a genuine role here and unless he decides to try to be a starter somewhere else, I think we'd try to hold onto him long-term.

Ninkovich is another great example of how players are replaceable on some teams but not others. He bounced around the Saints and Dolphins until he wound up here, and straight away made himself invaluable to a coach like BB. Now he's a starting DE averaging 8 sacks a year, and he's practically a cult hero in some parts (and rightly so).

So much of the game is mental over physical, and that's why the Vernon Gholston's of this world will never make it in the NFL, whereas the Ninkoviches, who are average physically but will work their balls off every day to make it in the pros...they're the ones that stick around.


If I'm the Pats, I employ you as assistant GM...and if they can't afford you (), they should follow this list - much the same as yours.

1. Re-sign Revis unless he demands stupid money, and do our best on McCourty without over-valuing him. The aim should be to come back with at least one of them.
2. Re-sign the solid players you named at fair prices. Emphasise the value of playing on championship teams, but accept the reality that some players, quite rightly, just want to get paid.
3. Solve the WR3 position, which (due to Amendola) we're spending too much on.
4. Look for undervalued free agents with upside. Those currently at sub-par franchises will have an interest in coming to play for the Super Bowl champs. (it feels damn good saying that)
5. Draft for the long-term, though if we stick at #32, take a solid player in the 1st rather than a low floor/high ceiling guy (such as Easley). That 5th year option shouldn't be underestimated in value, and I'd be very happy if we traded from 32 into early Round 2 if we thought our guy would still be on the board.


A final thought...I'd really like Stevan Ridley back. Give him an incentive-heavy one year prove-it deal, tell him he'll get plenty of carries and see what happens. He's popular in the locker-room, and with the number of departures we're expecting (Wilfork, Vereen, possibly McCourty), I think we'd reap the psychological benefit of bringing back at least one of the popular free-agents for another run.

My preference is to keep McCourty and Revis. Pretty sure we're going to keep Revis. Not so sure about McCourty. A signing like Jared Odrick would take the sting out of losing McCourty.

Nonentity said:

Mayo, I really enjoyed your post. Thanks for all your work recently (and same for Manx, etc). I jotted down a few thoughts as I read through your OP.

4. (on upgrading talent in free agency)

I think Bill got burnt on the Adalius Thomas signing in 2007. Looked a good move at first, but he never truly replicated his Ravens form. Obviously it all went downhill as soon as the team started to struggle (BB: "I just can't get them to play the way they need to"), and he was highlighted as one of the worst influences in the locker room that year.

In retrospect, thank God we've got Bill Belichick. Because there's many head coaches who were excellent when things were going well, but never managed to turn things round after bad years. BB axed a lot of players after that season.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the kind comments.

Adalius Thomas was a player who excelled in a talented LB corps, and the Pats overpaid for him. The Ravens would probably have loved to keep him, but not at that price. He was a solid player for 2 years but not a difference maker, then things went south in 2009 and the team chemistry took a huge hit. BB was smart to cut his losses.

Outside FAs are always a bit of an unknown quantity and a gamble. I think even with Revis the Pats were more comfortable doing a short term deal and seeing how he fit with the rest of the team.

The smart teams keep the guys who they think are really important. They also are willing to let a lot of other guys walk who are valuable contributors, but whose market price exceeds their their value. I expect that will probably be the case with Shane Vereen. Sadly, it could happen with Devin McCourty.

Nonentity said:

5. (on the vast majority of NFL players being eminently replaceable)

You're right, but only because most teams misuse many of their players. Bill's one of the few coaches who will "never ask a player to do something he can't do", and that's to his credit.

Look at Logan Ryan. He's an average corner with mercurial talent - sometimes he looks great, other times he just doesn't seem to get it. Reminds me of Darius Butler a lot in that way. Anyway, my point is that he has a role here - reserve outside corner, comes on in sub packages, and the coaches know that he matches up well against speed receivers (e.g. Torrey Smith).

Other teams might try to force him into a starting role, but they won't win games doing that because he'll give up too many plays against average receivers (again, see Darius Butler). Yet he has a genuine role here and unless he decides to try to be a starter somewhere else, I think we'd try to hold onto him long-term.

Ninkovich is another great example of how players are replaceable on some teams but not others. He bounced around the Saints and Dolphins until he wound up here, and straight away made himself invaluable to a coach like BB. Now he's a starting DE averaging 8 sacks a year, and he's practically a cult hero in some parts (and rightly so).

So much of the game is mental over physical, and that's why the Vernon Gholston's of this world will never make it in the NFL, whereas the Ninkoviches, who are average physically but will work their balls off every day to make it in the pros...they're the ones that stick around.

Click to expand...

I think you need to differentiate between a player filling a role, or having value, and being easily replaceable.

Shane Vereen clearly fills an important role, and does it well. He has value. I'm sure the team would like to keep him. But he is replaceable, and if the market over-values him, the Pats should be able to find a replacement at reasonable cost - I've suggested Pierre Thomas, for example. Logan Ryan in your example is a decent role player who has some value on his rookie deal, but he is definitely replaceable. Rob Ninkovich has tremendous value, and the Pats rewarded him appropriately; but I'd classify him as a "great fit" rather than as someone who can't be replaced. Bill Belichick commented this season on Akeem Ayers showing a lot of traits similar to Ninkovich, for example.

Just because a player is replaceable doesn't mean they should be replaced. Fitting your system and having a proven track record are important. But it does mean that you shouldn't break the bank for them.

Guys on the Pats who I think can't be replaced include Brady, Gronk, Revis, Hightower and Collins. That's about 10% of the final roster. Another 10-20% are guys who wouldn't be that easy to replace. The rest are readily replaceable.

As usual mayo's post is well-thought out but I think the argument is too structured: free agency is for this, the draft is for that. I would expect that the way the Pats approach these things is in line with what Belichick says, there being three ways to generally improve your team: draft, free agency, trades.

What your strategy is in each of them each year depends on (a) what you think is out there (b) what you think other teams think is out there (c) what you have, and good decisions from a roster-building standpoint come about when you look at it as arbitrage and not as a list of ordered rules. I think the Pats try to build their roster depth through all three avenues. I think they try to fill holes through all three avenues.

mayoclinic said:

2. As a general approach, the successful teams generally seem to be the ones that develop their core players through the draft. The Patriots, Ravens, Steelers, Packers and Seahawks all fall into that category. For the Patriots, almost all of the key players - the ones that you want to build around long term and really don't want to let get away - were developed through the draft: Tom Brady, Rob Gronkowski, Jerod Mayo, Devin McCourty, Chandler Jones, Dont'a Hightower, Jamie Collins, Nate Solder and Sebastian Vollmer currently, and guys like Vince Wilfork, Richard Seymour, Logan Mankins and (shudder) Aaron Hernandez in the past. This has the advantage that you don't throw big money at players until they are known quantities with proven ability to perform in your system. In the case of Hernandez, the calculus went disastrously wrong because of off-field issues.

Click to expand...

For all of the core players you listed that were added in the draft, all of them except Brady and Hernandez you could make the case that they were drafted to fill holes. Mankins and Mayo specifically, who incidentally are the players who would have been considered tremendous reaches if they had crapped out. Or lets take Collins, who we now think the Pats would have taken in the 1st round had they not been able to trade back. Was coverage LB not a smoking hole on this roster? Didn't we all have nightmares of rookie Dont'a Hightower trying gamely to cover 20 yard flag routes on a H-back?

It makes sense to "build your team" through the draft because you get ~7 guaranteed cheap players each year. And it appears teams "fill holes" through FA because at the start of the league year that's when teams have the most holes to fill. But if we're talking "value" and building a roster surely there is no more value to be found that getting a rookie who can fill a hole for almost all of the four years of his rookie deal.

Nice post Mayo.

A year ago or two on nfl.com a graph was posted showing win percentages and free agents signed vs draft picks over the past 10 years or something. It agreed with your theory that most teams who built threw the draft had the highest win percentage except the Patriots who was among the leaders with free agent players. Only a team like the Patriots could do it both ways.

Devin McCourty reportedly re-signing for 5 years / $47.5M. Pats keep a core player in his prime who is hard to replace. Revis is really the only other "irreplaceable" piece. Lock him up and the 2014 defense can essentially be kept intact. Vince Wilfork (the 2014 version) is replaceable at lower cost. Akeem Ayers is valuable but not irreplaceable, and and Branch and Casillas are good cheap depth but eminently replaceable. Add in a potentially healthy Dominique Easley and the further development of Jamie Collins and Dont'a Hightower, and the defense could be better this year.

All of the offensive FAs are replaceable: Shane Vereen, Stevan Ridley, Dan Connolly. It all comes down to cost and who else is available on the market within budget constraints. The cap space is tight but workable. I think there's a good chance that the 2015 team can be more talented than the 2014 version.

Should we use a few mins on Salary Cap and the changes the cap does every year. If teams keep getting 10? mill more every year, then in 6 years the cap hits 200. 5-7 years ago where it was 100 mill or so, haveing a QB getting around 1/6 of the total cap was "ok". Imagine 1/6 of 200!.. Anyway it also makes me thinking, mayby when its time to sign Jones, Collins, Hightower etc Make it 6-7 years deals. Numbers may seem abit rich the first year, but after 3-4 years, suddenly the numbers are at the low end. At the end it could potential be cheap?

mayoclinic said:

All of the offensive FAs are replaceable: Shane Vereen, Stevan Ridley, Dan Connolly. It all comes down to cost and who else is available on the market within budget constraints. The cap space is tight but workable.

Click to expand...

I wonder if a players position is considered when compensatory picks are determined. Obviously, a great CB will get a bigger contract than a great RB in FA.

In other words, if somebody overpays for Vereen (lets say 3.5-4m APY) I wonder whether we would still get a higher compensatory pick than a theoretical 7m contract for a CB.

Luxusdk said:

Numbers may seem abit rich the first year, but after 3-4 years, suddenly the numbers are at the low end. At the end it could potential be cheap?

Click to expand...

I have been saying for some time now that when looking at contract numbers we should maybe normalize them to percentages of the cap or some other relative metric instead of looking at absolute numbers.

unoriginal said:

As usual mayo's post is well-thought out but I think the argument is too structured: free agency is for this, the draft is for that. I would expect that the way the Pats approach these things is in line with what Belichick says, there being three ways to generally improve your team: draft, free agency, trades.

What your strategy is in each of them each year depends on (a) what you think is out there (b) what you think other teams think is out there (c) what you have, and good decisions from a roster-building standpoint come about when you look at it as arbitrage and not as a list of ordered rules. I think the Pats try to build their roster depth through all three avenues. I think they try to fill holes through all three avenues.

For all of the core players you listed that were added in the draft, all of them except Brady and Hernandez you could make the case that they were drafted to fill holes. Mankins and Mayo specifically, who incidentally are the players who would have been considered tremendous reaches if they had crapped out. Or lets take Collins, who we now think the Pats would have taken in the 1st round had they not been able to trade back. Was coverage LB not a smoking hole on this roster? Didn't we all have nightmares of rookie Dont'a Hightower trying gamely to cover 20 yard flag routes on a H-back?

It makes sense to "build your team" through the draft because you get ~7 guaranteed cheap players each year. And it appears teams "fill holes" through FA because at the start of the league year that's when teams have the most holes to fill. But if we're talking "value" and building a roster surely there is no more value to be found that getting a rookie who can fill a hole for almost all of the four years of his rookie deal.

Click to expand...

You make some great points, and it is no doubt not as rigid as what I suggested in the OP. There are exceptions to every rule, and opportunities in all areas of player acquisition. But in general, I think that BB places a priority on filling holes in FA so that he doesn't have to reach to do so in the draft, and can use the draft as a more long-term talent development mechanism. There are exceptions - 2010 was an unusually strong TE draft, and the Pats eventually went into the draft with nothing at TE knowing that they would address the position in the draft, coming away with Gronk and Hernandez. But even then BB reportedly attempted to trade for Greg Olsen from Chicago, which fell through because of the amount of compensation that the Bears wanted (a 2nd round pick, IIRC).

There are "needs" at almost every position at some level or another, and most draft picks can be seen as filling a need. It was obvious last year that the Pats would target a center at some point in the draft, and the draft was deep in center prospects. But they re-signed Ryan Wendell and they had Dan Connolly, so they weren't dependent on reaching for a center. They got Bryan Stork in the early 4th round, and it was a bonus that he was ready to start immediately.

mayoclinic said:

Devin McCourty reportedly re-signing for 5 years / $47.5M. Pats keep a core player in his prime who is hard to replace. Revis is really the only other "irreplaceable" piece. Lock him up and the 2014 defense can essentially be kept intact. Vince Wilfork (the 2014 version) is replaceable at lower cost. Akeem Ayers is valuable but not irreplaceable, and and Branch and Casillas are good cheap depth but eminently replaceable. Add in a potentially healthy Dominique Easley and the further development of Jamie Collins and Dont'a Hightower, and the defense could be better this year.

All of the offensive FAs are replaceable: Shane Vereen, Stevan Ridley, Dan Connolly. It all comes down to cost and who else is available on the market within budget constraints. The cap space is tight but workable. I think there's a good chance that the 2015 team can be more talented than the 2014 version.

Click to expand...

Very replaceable. I acknowledge that he was good in the Super Bowl run. It's laughable how the main board over-rates Shane Vereen. I'd like to sign a free-agent 3rd down back and draft an every down back to groom behind Blount as an eventual starter. We also return Aaron Dobson and Gaffney. T. Wright and J. Boyce have another year to figure it out. I feel the offense will be better in 2015. We can add a LG, WR, RB and TE in the first 4 rounds.

We lose VW and Ayers from our defense. Fingers crossed on keeping Revis. We will bring back these guys; Mayo, Dennard and Buchanan. I think we'll sign Branch and Casillas. I'd like to draft a DT and DE in those first 4 rounds. Maybe, Hardison and Chickrillo. I don't think our blitz schemes were as aggressive as they could have been. Now that BB and Patricia can see how well the back 7 is in coverage. I think we can put more pressure on qb's which will lead to more turnovers

patsfaninpa said:

Very replaceable. I acknowledge that he was good in the Super Bowl run. It's laughable how the main board over-rates Shane Vereen. I'd like to sign a free-agent 3rd down back and draft an every down back to groom behind Blount as an eventual starter. We also return Aaron Dobson and Gaffney. T. Wright and J. Boyce have another year to figure it out. I feel the offense will be better in 2015. We can add a LG, WR, RB and TE in the first 4 rounds.

Click to expand...

I love Vereen, and he was very good for us last year, especially down the stretch. But "very good" doesn't mean he's not replaceable. I'd take Pierre Thomas at $1.5-2M/year any day. Like you, I'd draft an every down back to groom as a starter (Todd Gurley, Jay Ajayi, Tevin Coleman or David Johnson).

I would sign Brian Hartline if the money is reasonable and cut Amendola with a post June 1 designation, and sign Thomas. Percy Harvin is enticing, but I doubt he'll take reasonable money, and there are too many issues. Hartline would be an upgrade for Amendola, and Thomas would be a solid Vereen replacement. Then I'd draft a RB and take DeAndre Smelter on day 3, giving Dobson and Boyce one more year to prove themselves. If possible, I'd pick up someone like Lance Kendricks on the cheap. The offensive skill positions would be set, at very reasonable cost, allowing the team to focus on the lines.

patsfaninpa said:

We lose VW and Ayers from our defense. Fingers crossed on keeping Revis. We will bring back these guys; Mayo, Dennard and Buchanan. I think we'll sign Branch and Casillas. I'd like to draft a DT and DE in those first 4 rounds. Maybe, Hardison and Chickrillo. I don't think our blitz schemes were as aggressive as they could have been. Now that BB and Patricia can see how well the back 7 is in coverage. I think we can put more pressure on qb's which will lead to more turnovers

Click to expand...

I'm pretty confident Revis will be back. I'm hoping that we can keep Ayers, and add a cheap DT like Kenrick Ellis. Don't forget the Lombardi connection. Rand Getlin reports that the Pats could be in the running for Jabaal Sheard, who could be a great alternative to Ayers (personally, I'd take Sheard and Ayers over Mayo if I could - I think they'd offer more versatility in both base and sub). Ahtyba Rubin could also be an option at NT. It all depends on the market and how pricey guys are. All of these guys are good, but none is so much better than the others that I'd break the bank for them, which is one of the points of the OP.