Six Picks - Six Needs

I see six needs and six picks in the first four rounds. Under Belichick, barring injury, these players have always made the 53. We also have three late picks.
==================================
As of today, I would double dip at OG and CB. Obviously, Belichick could have additions in the next five weeks that will change our needs.
=================================
Given that Belichick trades up and down, I am hopping for six picks in the first four rounds.
=================================
MY PRIORITIES
CB
OG
DT
RB
OG
CB
============================
I understand that a great value at another position could fall into our laps (e.g. at WR). I just think of these six choices as a base case.
====================

That seems reasonable, though I think that the second offensive lineman could be a tackle/guard prospect, depending on the likelihood of a long term extension for Nate Solder. If the Pats are just looking for 2 OGs, I'm not sure the 2nd has to be taken in the top 4 rounds.

Why is it ppl question Nate Solder?

Because lt s are very expensive in the fa market. So your premise is wrong.

Not sure I see two CB, we need quality more than quantity. I'm fully expecting a first round CB, if there's a good one there, but I doubt we'll take a second one until later in the draft as a shot.

I would replace your second CB with WR, it seems clear we wanted some WR competition this offseason. A rookie is far different than a Hartline or a Stevie but I don't think Bill wants to go into next year with what he's got.

In terms of our team I would disagree with RB as we have tons of quantity but it's such a deep draft at RB, I could see us diving in there at some point.

I hate the "position by round" thing as it's so dependent on who's there but if value fits need I'm looking at :

1) CB
2) DT
3a) OG
3b) WR
4a) RB
4b) OG

Even with so many picks in the top 100, it's hard for me to conceive of making 6 straight draft picks based on perceived immediate needs. I really only see 3 players/positions that I'm fully expecting the Patriots to draft:

- High-ceiling CB with some size
- Athletic DT
- OL of some stripe who could play LG

And 4 that there's very little chance of them drafting:

- QB
- In-line TE
- K
- P

After that, it seems to me more like a free-for-all based on available talent and trade-forward opportunities. Some targets certainly look likelier than others, e.g. a versatile RB and a big WR in the middle rounds, maybe a LS late. But in general, the situation looks very fluid to me.

patchick said:

Even with so many picks in the top 100, it's hard for me to conceive of making 6 straight draft picks based on perceived immediate needs. I really only see 3 players/positions that I'm fully expecting the Patriots to draft:

- High-ceiling CB with some size
- Athletic DT
- OL of some stripe who could play LG

And 4 that there's very little chance of them drafting:

- QB
- In-line TE
- K
- P

After that, it seems to me more like a free-for-all based on available talent and trade-forward opportunities. Some targets certainly look likelier than others, e.g. a versatile RB and a big WR in the middle rounds, maybe a LS late. But in general, the situation looks very fluid to me.

Click to expand...

I'm hoping that's the order we address it in too; CB, DT and G. I do think we might be able to hit on a wr or rb at 97, 101 or 131 though.

patchick said:

Even with so many picks in the top 100, it's hard for me to conceive of making 6 straight draft picks based on perceived immediate needs. I really only see 3 players/positions that I'm fully expecting the Patriots to draft:

- High-ceiling CB with some size
- Athletic DT
- OL of some stripe who could play LG

And 4 that there's very little chance of them drafting:

- QB
- In-line TE
- K
- P

After that, it seems to me more like a free-for-all based on available talent and trade-forward opportunities. Some targets certainly look likelier than others, e.g. a versatile RB and a big WR in the middle rounds, maybe a LS late. But in general, the situation looks very fluid to me.

Click to expand...

I agree with that list, but I also think the Pats can use another LB, with Mayo and Hightower coming off injuries which might keep them off the field for the start of the season, I wouldn't mind a LB being drafted to a)be the third or fourth LB b)insurance

makoute said:

I agree with that list, but I also think the Pats can use another LB, with Mayo and Hightower coming off injuries which might keep them off the field for the start of the season, I wouldn't mind a LB being drafted to a)be the third or fourth LB b)insurance

Click to expand...

If we keep all of our picks, or trade back and get more. I can see that. Is Mayo affordable beyond this year? If we hit a home-run, could have his replacement. I'm keeping an eye on Ramik Wilson - OLB - Georgia. Ran 4.77 at the combine. 4.62 and 4.68 on his pro-day. Gil Brandt said he looked good in his drills and drops at th pro day. NFL.com scouting report isn't as positive.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...ut-wonder-conley-builds-on-nfl-draft-intrigue

http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/ramik-wilson?id=2552320

Luxusdk said:

Why is it ppl question Nate Solder?

Click to expand...

I don't question Nate Solder at all. I think he's a fine LT, and the Pats would like to have him as their LT for the next 5 years. I question that a long term deal for Nate Solder is a given, for 2 reasons:

1. David
2. Dunn

Dunn represented Wes Welker, and things got a bit testy with the Pats. Robert Kraft wasn't happy about Dunn's role, and claimed that he "overvalued" Welker's market value:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap10...ert-kraft-wes-welkers-agent-overvalued-client

Dunn also represented Aaron Hernandez and Shane Vereen.

My assumption is that Dunn will be looking for top 5 LT money for Solder, something north of $10M/year, along the lines of what Ryan Clady and Joe Thomas got. I'm guesing the Pats will value him more like Jared Veldheer and Russell Okung ($7-8M/year). It wouldn't shock me at all if things get testy.

As we've seen over and over again, the Pats are willing to move on from a player they like if they don't like his market price. It happened with Welker, and it happened with Revis.

If the Pats draft 2 OLs, I expect that at least one of them will have tackle/guard versatility to help keep their options open. Someone like TJ Clemmings, Jake Fisher or Donovan Smith could be very appealing.

I wish the Patriots would only draft for positions they understand well and leave the rest to either very low level picks or free agency. They clearly are good at drafting linebackers, interior defensive linemen, exterior defensive linemen, offensive guards, offensive tackles, offensive centers, and they are somewhat good at drafting tight ends. In other words, the bigger, more powerful the player, the more successful they seem to be, and the more nimbler "skill-player", not so good.

Why not just spend their first 4-5 picks on picks they will nail and then leave the CB, S, and WR positions to free agency and some 5th to 7th round picks? They seem to have an equal chance of hitting a late round pick like Asante Samuel, David Givens, or Julian Edelman, as they do on higher picks at the skill positions. They are terrible at drafting these guys in the top 100.

Ice_Ice_Brady said:

I wish the Patriots would only draft for positions they understand well and leave the rest to either very low level picks or free agency. They clearly are good at drafting linebackers, interior defensive linemen, exterior defensive linemen, offensive guards, offensive tackles, offensive centers, and they are somewhat good at drafting tight ends. In other words, the bigger, more powerful the player, the more successful they seem to be, and the more nimbler "skill-player", not so good.

Click to expand...

FYI, what you've identified is a league-wide trend, not just a Patriots quirk. Skill positions are hardest to project and have the highest bust rates -- and yet most of the best skill players are drafted high, so you have to take a chance to find a Devin McCourty, etc.

patchick said:

FYI, what you've identified is a league-wide trend, not just a Patriots quirk. Skill positions are hardest to project and have the highest bust rates -- and yet most of the best skill players are drafted high, so you have to take a chance to find a Devin McCourty, etc.

Click to expand...

'

Maybe you are right- that's a good point, and it would be a zero sum gain in that place with free agency meaning higher prices for those positions. However, there are some teams that are better at drafting certain positions than others. The Steelers always seem to get good wide receivers and pass rushers, for example, yet they can't draft good offensive linemen. The Seahawks are clearly, beyond any chance of luck or anomaly, better at drafting defensive backs. Maybe it is the systems these teams use which makes it an easier evaluation for scouts; I really don't know.

Ice_Ice_Brady said:

The Seahawks are clearly, beyond any chance of luck or anomaly, better at drafting defensive backs.

Click to expand...

"Beyond any chance of luck or anomaly?" Have to disagree.

In 2011 the Seahawks just opted for quantity, drafting 3 DBs in the space of 20 picks starting in round 5. One of them was cut before the season even started; one of them was Richard Sherman. In 2010 the Seahawks drafted DB Walter Thurmond in round 4, and only took a flier on Kam Chancellor a round later. Etc.

It's in the nature of chance that some results will be well above average. Are the Seahawks good at assessing DBs? Probably, yep. Have they also gotten lucky? Surely.

patchick said:

"Beyond any chance of luck or anomaly?" Have to disagree.

In 2011 the Seahawks just opted for quantity, drafting 3 DBs in the space of 20 picks starting in round 5. One of them was cut before the season even started; one of them was Richard Sherman. In 2010 the Seahawks drafted DB Walter Thurmond in round 4, and only took a flier on Kam Chancellor a round later. Etc.

It's in the nature of chance that some results will be well above average. Are the Seahawks good at assessing DBs? Probably, yep. Have they also gotten lucky? Surely.

Click to expand...

They are clearly looking for some qualities from players, despite which rounded they are drafted in.

Let's take a look at their drafts since 2010, when Pete Carroll and crew took over. I'll include all picks, including both hits and misses. I will list them below by round and include the year.

1- Earl Thomas, 2010
4- Walter Thurmond, 2010
5- Richard Sherman, 2011
5- Max LeGree, 2010
5- Kam Chancellor, 2010
5- Tharold Simon, 2013
6- Eric Pinkins, 2014
6- Jeremy Lane, 2012
6- Winston Guy, 2012
6- Byron Maxwell, 2011

This is a remarkable group of players, considering there is only one pick in the first three rounds and two in the first four.

Of these players, it would be hard to argue that Thomas, Sherman, Chancellor, Thurmond (when healthy), Lane (nickel back), or Maxwell are not solid starters; although Brady picked on Simon in the Super Bowl, Simon was not a good matchup for the Patriots because of his lankiness. I'll leave Simon off and suffice to say that six out of ten picks are solid starters.

Thomas, Sherman, and Chancellor are All-Pro players, while Maxwell just signed the second biggest deal of any CB this offseason. Maybe Maxwell won't turn out to be great, but let's just say he is in between elite and non-elite, considering some team is paying him a lot of money as a #1 corner. So, let's say that three and a half of those ten picks are elite, with three of them being arguable the best at their positions.

Take a look at who the Patriots have drafted over the last fourteen years under Belichick. Using 12 picks in the first three rounds (as opposed to 1 pick for Seattle) and 25 picks overall (as opposed to 10 for Seattle), the Patriots have not come close to approaching the overall value of Seattle's drafting for defensive backs. In particular, Seattle owns the late rounds; if you look at how the Patriots have drafted in the late rounds (5, 6, and 7), you'll see that it is very, very unlikely to actually get any value there. Seattle has gotten, Sherman, Chancellor, Simon, Lane, and Maxwell- five starters in the later rounds, whereas the Patriots have gotten only Dennard, who may get cut next offseason.

1- Devin McCourty, 2010
1- Brandon Meriweather, 2007
2- Tavon Wilson, 2012
2- Ras-I Dowling, 2011
2- Pat Chung, 2008
2- Darius Butler, 2008
2- Terrence Wheatley, 2008
2- Eugene Wilson, 2003
3- Logan Ryan, 2013
3- Duron Harmon, 2013
3- Brock Willilams, 2001
3- Ellis Hobbs, 2005
4- Jonathan Wilhite, 2008
4- James Sanders, 2005
4- Antowan Harris, 2000
4- Asante Samuel, 2003
4- Gus Scott, 2004
5- Dexter Reid, 2004
6- Jamea Thomas, 2013
6- Leonard Myers, 2001
6- Mike Richardson, 2006
7- Alfonzo Dennard, 2012
7- Willie Andrews, 2006
7- Christian Morton, 2004
7- Malcolm Williams, 2007

So, you can call it luck or an anomaly, or whatever you want, but this sure would be a lot of luck that continues its luckiness over and over. Am I saying the Seahawks will not have a bad draft or two, or that they are infallible? Of course not. I am merely showing that it is clear they have a less random and more predictable way of evaluating talent for their system. Not to say their system doesn't make it easier to draft players, just that they are more likely to hit on defensive backs through the draft than the Patriots.

So, yes, I agree with you 100% that they are both good and lucky, but much more good than lucky.

patchick said:

"Beyond any chance of luck or anomaly?" Have to disagree.

In 2011 the Seahawks just opted for quantity, drafting 3 DBs in the space of 20 picks starting in round 5. One of them was cut before the season even started; one of them was Richard Sherman. In 2010 the Seahawks drafted DB Walter Thurmond in round 4, and only took a flier on Kam Chancellor a round later. Etc.

It's in the nature of chance that some results will be well above average. Are the Seahawks good at assessing DBs? Probably, yep. Have they also gotten lucky? Surely.

Click to expand...

The Seahawks are also clearly still uncomfortable with drafting at the back of the draft. Their draft successes came in 2010-2012, when they drafted in the first half of the draft. Earl Thomas, Russell Wilson, Russell Okung, Bruce Irvin, Bobby Wagner, KJ Wright, Kam Chancellor and Walter Thurmond were all taken in the top half of their respective rounds. The one time during that period when the Seahawks drafted later on, they reached for James Carpenter at #25 in 2011, which didn't pan out. Since 2013 they have drafted 25rd, 32nd and 31st. During that period they've traded away their 1st round pick twice (2013 for Percy Harvin, along with a 2014 3rd, and 2015 for Jimmy Graham) and traded back once (2014, to 45 for Paul Richardson). Though it's early, they have yet to draft a starter or impact player in the last 2 drafts:

2013: RB Christine Michael, DT Jordan Hill, WR Chris Harper, DT Jesse Williams, DB Tharold Simon, TE Luke Wiilson, RB Spencer Ware, OG Ryan Seymour, LB Ty Powell, DT Jared Smith, OT Michael Bowie

2014: WR Paul Richardson, OL Justin Britt, DE Cassius Marsh, WR Kevin Norwood, OLB Kevin Pierre-Louis, DT Jimmy Staten, OL Garrett Scott, DB Eric Pinkins, FB Kiero Small

Some of those guys will undoubtedly contribute, but most are developmental prospects, and there were a couple of likely reaches in there.

BB is very comfortable drafting from the back of the draft, and has a terrific track record given poor draft position.

Interest discussion. Here's my take

1. Unless someone can convince me that one of the CB's that might fall to us at #32 can be shut down CB, I'd have to pass on picking one that high.

2. The rarest athlete on the planet is the impact player at 300+ lbs, either on the offensive or defensive lines, simply because there are so few of them. Given that, I would hope then that BB would eschew the knee jerk impulse to grab a CB, and stick to the policies that kept him on top and get the best OL/DL available that early (or in a trade down)

3. As far as I can see, the CB's are falling further and further behind the physical abilities of the WR's. Every year another half dozen or more 6'4 220 lbs giants get sprung on the league, yet the DB's aren't keeping up. Except for his length, Brandon Browner was nothing special as a CB.....but because of that length he became special....in the right system.

4. Maybe its time to take a lesson from the TE position, and dip into the Basketball world and find some 6'3-5 "althletes", who aren't going to make in the NBA and begin developing them into the NFL CB's of the future. Just a thought.

5. So my question to the forum, IS there anyone out there, who fits the need. Is there a "shutdown CB" in this draft. I don't think so. And if not, isn't picking a lesser CB at 32 become a reach. Finally, is there another developmental big guy like Browner or Sherman out there that could be worth developing.

patchick said:

Even with so many picks in the top 100, it's hard for me to conceive of making 6 straight draft picks based on perceived immediate needs. I really only see 3 players/positions that I'm fully expecting the Patriots to draft:

- High-ceiling CB with some size
- Athletic DT
- OL of some stripe who could play LG

And 4 that there's very little chance of them drafting:

- QB
- In-line TE
- K
- P

After that, it seems to me more like a free-for-all based on available talent and trade-forward opportunities. Some targets certainly look likelier than others, e.g. a versatile RB and a big WR in the middle rounds, maybe a LS late. But in general, the situation looks very fluid to me.

Click to expand...

I agree with you with regard to the big three needs that should be addressed by pick 100 or so.

ADDITIONAL NEEDS
I agree that the situation is very fluid beyond getting our top 3 needs in the top 100 pr so.

I do think that we need a RB. If Connolly or another vet isn't signed, I want another OL in the top 100.
I'm ambivalent about a WR.

mayoclinic said:

The Seahawks are also clearly still uncomfortable with drafting at the back of the draft. Their draft successes came in 2010-2012, when they drafted in the first half of the draft. Earl Thomas, Russell Wilson, Russell Okung, Bruce Irvin, Bobby Wagner, KJ Wright, Kam Chancellor and Walter Thurmond were all taken in the top half of their respective rounds. The one time during that period when the Seahawks drafted later on, they reached for James Carpenter at #25 in 2011, which didn't pan out. Since 2013 they have drafted 25rd, 32nd and 31st. During that period they've traded away their 1st round pick twice (2013 for Percy Harvin, along with a 2014 3rd, and 2015 for Jimmy Graham) and traded back once (2014, to 45 for Paul Richardson). Though it's early, they have yet to draft a starter or impact player in the last 2 drafts:

2013: RB Christine Michael, DT Jordan Hill, WR Chris Harper, DT Jesse Williams, DB Tharold Simon, TE Luke Wiilson, RB Spencer Ware, OG Ryan Seymour, LB Ty Powell, DT Jared Smith, OT Michael Bowie

2014: WR Paul Richardson, OL Justin Britt, DE Cassius Marsh, WR Kevin Norwood, OLB Kevin Pierre-Louis, DT Jimmy Staten, OL Garrett Scott, DB Eric Pinkins, FB Kiero Small

Some of those guys will undoubtedly contribute, but most are developmental prospects, and there were a couple of likely reaches in there.

BB is very comfortable drafting from the back of the draft, and has a terrific track record given poor draft position.

Click to expand...

I think the problem with their 2013 draft was that it was clearly for needs in the future. Willson stepped in a showed some skill, as did Simon. Of the whole, I would bet simon will end up being a heck of a player, and showed great signs before his injury.

Richardson looked like he may be a player as we'll before injuries. That being said, that is really a lot of unknowns and a lot of question marks from two drafts that could have put them at back to back superbowls, with a strong outlook at a third. Now, they have a strong core, but no clear sign where the extra help is going to come from.

patfanken said:

Interest discussion. Here's my take

1. Unless someone can convince me that one of the CB's that might fall to us at #32 can be shut down CB, I'd have to pass on picking one that high.

2. The rarest athlete on the planet is the impact player at 300+ lbs, either on the offensive or defensive lines, simply because there are so few of them. Given that, I would hope then that BB would eschew the knee jerk impulse to grab a CB, and stick to the policies that kept him on top and get the best OL/DL available that early (or in a trade down)

3. As far as I can see, the CB's are falling further and further behind the physical abilities of the WR's. Every year another half dozen or more 6'4 220 lbs giants get sprung on the league, yet the DB's aren't keeping up. Except for his length, Brandon Browner was nothing special as a CB.....but because of that length he became special....in the right system.

4. Maybe its time to take a lesson from the TE position, and dip into the Basketball world and find some 6'3-5 "althletes", who aren't going to make in the NBA and begin developing them into the NFL CB's of the future. Just a thought.

5. So my question to the forum, IS there anyone out there, who fits the need. Is there a "shutdown CB" in this draft. I don't think so. And if not, isn't picking a lesser CB at 32 become a reach. Finally, is there another developmental big guy like Browner or Sherman out there that could be worth developing.

Click to expand...

In quick response, I think yes, Byron Jones' upside is shutdown corner. Don't forget, aside from the forty which we don't know, Jones is one of the top two or three in this draft athletically and will be one of the top athletes in the NFL period. He might be more Jamie Collins than Jamie Collins.

As for a developmental CB, I'd go with Nick Marshall. Has excellent size and intriguing skills and good athleticism. Could also be used in different ways on offense too. He's intriguing in a Julian Edelman way.