2011 Offseason Outlook - Linebacker

[JackBauer]

No one is going to claim that Harris wouldn't be an upgrade, but the degree of improvement isn't commensurate with the cost, especially when you're signing a guy who gives you essentially the same skill set that you've already got on the roster in Spikes.

Mayo-Spikes-Guyton-Fletcher has the makings of a terrific young ILB rotation, and I cannot fathom why you'd choose to expend a second round draft pick on a guy who, by all accounts, acquitted himself quite well in his rookie season, only to turn around and throw big money at a talented but athletically limited replacement.

 

[bucky]

No one is going to claim that Harris wouldn't be an upgrade, but the degree of improvement isn't commensurate with the cost, especially when you're signing a guy who gives you essentially the same skill set that you've already got on the roster in Spikes.

Mayo-Spikes-Guyton-Fletcher has the makings of a terrific young ILB rotation, and I cannot fathom why you'd choose to expend a second round draft pick on a guy who, by all accounts, acquitted himself quite well in his rookie season, only to turn around and throw big money at a talented but athletically limited replacement.

Why? Because I want to improve the team! Because I want to have a defense out on the field without having them be liability against either the pass or rush. That's the problem with almost everyone in our front 7 - Pryor, TBC, Guyton, Wright, Ninkovich, and to a lesser extent G. Warren and are all liabilities against the run. Spikes, T. Warren, Brace, Cunningham, and even to some extent Wilfork are liabilities against the pass. It's OK to have some players who are situational. But when you have to shuttle 5-6 players off the field depending on the package you want to play, it means you have a bunch of limited players. Can Spikes become as good as David Harris? I supposed he can and I hope he does. But as of right now, he is not even as good as David Harris was as a rookie. And I'm not sure why we're all so worried about the cost. Even if there is a cap this year, the Pats will be one of the best-equipped teams to handle it with plenty of room.

 

[Deus Irae]

You can evaluate player by player, but the top ILBs are still paid more than the top OGs.

Top guards are making 8. Top LBs are making 9. It's not as if you're looking at the difference between QB and kicker here.

Harris has been a 3 down player for the Jets since he entered the league - playing for Mangini as well as Ryan. As for BB, he used the same ILBs on all 3 downs back when he had dependable ones - Bruschi and Phifer. Against the Jets, it was Mayo and Fletcher on 3rd downs. You can't tell me Harris wouldn't be an upgrade there.

When the Patriots were playing the 3-4 and had healthy linebackers, the ILBs for the base defense were Johnson and Bruschi. However, comparing Phifer to Harris makes no sense anyway. Phifer could actually cover in passing situations. Harris cannot.

Harris is not worth the money when the team already has Spikes/Guyton.

 

[JackBauer]

Why? Because I want to improve the team!

As with any situation, you have to look at it in terms of a cost/benefit analysis. If you don't, then it actually makes sense to go out and sign players like Asomugha and Harris.

Because I want to improve the team! Because I want to have a defense out on the field without having them be liability against either the pass or rush. That's the problem with almost everyone in our front 7 - Pryor, TBC, Guyton, Wright, Ninkovich, and to a lesser extent G. Warren and are all liabilities against the run. Spikes, T. Warren, Brace, Cunningham, and even to some extent Wilfork are liabilities against the pass. It's OK to have some players who are situational. But when you have to shuttle 5-6 players off the field depending on the package you want to play, it means you have a bunch of limited players. Can Spikes become as good as David Harris? I supposed he can and I hope he does. But as of right now, he is not even as good as David Harris was as a rookie. And I'm not sure why we're all so worried about the cost. Even if there is a cap this year, the Pats will be one of the best-equipped teams to handle it with plenty of room.

So your complaint is that the front seven is rife with one-dimensional players, so to remedy that situation you want to throw big money at another one-dimensional player?

 

[bucky]

So your complaint is that the front seven is rife with one-dimensional players, so to remedy that situation you want to throw big money at another one-dimensional player?

I don't know why we have to go around in a circle. I don't consider Harris a 1 dimensional player at all.

 

[JackBauer]

I don't know why we have to go around in a circle. I don't consider Harris a 1 dimensional player at all.

Have you watched him in coverage? Did you watch the Jets-Pittsburgh game? The Jets linebackers are notorious for being below average in coverage; hence the lingering susceptibility to the TE. If you think the guy is worth 6-7 MM a year at a position of little need, more power to you. I would surmise that BB and the FO don't agree.

 

[ATippett56]

The first part of your comment explains why the second one is so wrong. You clearly dislike Connoly and approach the game that way. I saw Connoly give up 1 sack, but he was solid the rest of the game. Is he a great OL? No. Can you play and win with him? Yes.

You can't win with Connolly in the AFC playoffs. A major upgrade is needed at the right guard position.

Meanwhile, the Guyton/Spikes duo contributed nothing positive and gave up 2 huge plays - Tomlinson TD and 60 yard catch by Cotchery.

Darius Butler was responsible for the NY Jets slot receiver.

Now, to the crux of my entire point - it's a lot easier to upgrade a guy like Connoly at the G position, that it is to upgrade at ILB.

According to whom?

I agree. Not sure what the OLB position has to do with this discussion at all though.

All the inside linebackers on the New England Patriots roster are still on their rookie contracts. There is room for further development for the New England Patriots inside linebackers. Spikes and Fletcher were both rookies.

Logan Mankins is more valuable to the New England Patriots than the addition of David Harris of the NY Jets especially considering the aging of the New England Patriots offensive line.

IMO, if we bring back Light, we'll be just fine at Guard with the combination of Neal, Connoly, Kaczur, Wendell, and a 2nd round draft pick. On the other hand, if we bring back both Light and Mankins, we're set at OL for 2011. But I'm not going to argue this point any further because this is a LB thread.

Matt Light turns 33 years of age next season and Stephen Neal turns 35 years of age next season. Stephen Neal is injury prone and has missed 24 regular season games in the last four seasons. Stephen Neal can't be relied upon if the New England Patriots quality for the playoffs. Nick Kaczur turns 32 years of age next season and is recovering from back surgery. Kaczur is a question mark for the 2011 NFL Season. Upgrading the New England Patriots offensive line is one of the highest priorities for the 2011 NFL Season.

 

[bucky]

Top guards are making 8. Top LBs are making 9. It's not as if you're looking at the difference between QB and kicker here.

You're skewing the numbers a little. There are a lot of Guards making 7, but only Jahri Evans is making 8. On the other hand, Willis is making 10 and a bunch of guys are making 8+. But after Lewis, Urlacher, Dansby, and Demeco Ryans, it begins to fall off. Which again brings up my point that you're choosing to ignore. Very good ILBs - of which Harris is one - don't come along that often.

When the Patriots were playing the 3-4 and had healthy linebackers, the ILBs for the base defense were Johnson and Bruschi. However, comparing Phifer to Harris makes no sense anyway. Phifer could actually cover in passing situations. Harris cannot.

Harris is not worth the money when the team already has Spikes/Guyton.

Harris is not as good as Phifer in coverage, and neither is Mayo. But both are complete enough to play a lot and improve the defense overall. Spikes can play the occasional TJ role and give either of the 2 a break. Guyton is basically a jag. Fletcher is intriguing.

 

[bucky]

Have you watched him in coverage? Did you watch the Jets-Pittsburgh game? The Jets linebackers are notorious for being below average in coverage; hence the lingering susceptibility to the TE. If you think the guy is worth 6-7 MM a year at a position of little need, more power to you. I would surmise that BB and the FO don't agree.

Ah yes! The Steelers really exploited those LBs - to the tune of 133 passing yards. And Heath Miller killed them with 2 receptions!

 

[bucky]

The two biggest areas of the weakness on the New England Patriots defense is the 3-4 outside linebacker position and the 3-4 right defensive end position. The New England Patriots desperately need pass rushers from those two positions.

No argument there. I don't expect a top echelon FA at either position simply because they aren't there (unless Woodley becomes available), but I do expect upgrades at both via FA and/or draft.

 

[Deus Irae]

What I'm saying here is that Mankins is not head and shoulders above the rest of the league, like Hannah was. He gets beat plenty of times.

Hannah got beat too. Again, the Hanna comment is meaningless. Harris is no Ray Lewis, if you want to play that game.

No. You cannot get 95% of Harris using Spikes and Guyton.

Yes, you can.

You are refusing to listen to the central point of my argument although I've stated it many times. ILB position is a lot harder to fill than Guard. Especially for this scheme. And Harris has already proven that he can excel in it.

I'm not refusing to listen about anything. Your argument is just a poor one.

 

[bucky]

I'm not refusing to listen about anything. Your argument is just a poor one.

If my argument is so poor, then why have the Pats had such problems getting good ILB for the past 6 years since Phifer retired?

 

[patsboy44]

Mayo is a god in my eyes. Best LB around.

 

[bucky]

Your rational behind a David Harris free agent acquisition has no merit whatsoever since he is no better than Gary Guyton is pass coverage and no better than Brandon Spikes in run defense.

Even if that were the case, you would then be able to get bye if you knew exactly when the other team was going to run and when they were going to pass. The minute you've got Spikes in there on a passing down, you're already worse. And I'm sure I mentioned already that Spikes is one indiscretion away from being suspended for a full season and has exhibited less than great judgment already?

As for Mankins, I'm telling you right now BB and Kraft are not going to make him the highest paid Guard in the NFL. Not unless they plan to move him to OT.

 

[JackBauer]

The minute you've got Spikes in there on a passing down, you're already worse.

Please explain how having Harris instead would remedy the situation?

 

[Deus Irae]

If my argument is so poor, then why have the Pats had such problems getting good ILB for the past 6 years since Phifer retired?

Now you're not even being rational. Seriously... Phifer? You must have missed that whole "Ted Johnson/Ted Bruschi/Junior Seau" era.

The choice isn't David Harris v. absolutely nobody. It's Harris (at up to $9 million) v. Spikes/Guyton (at under $2 million). And, when the Patriots go into sub packages on passing downs, Harris will be watching the games from the sidelines. How is that different from Spikes?

 

[Mike the Brit]

Why the New England Patriots should think outside their system when making draft decisions - ESPN Boston

An article by Reiss arguing that the Patriots should look for a pure edge-rushing OLB like Matthews because they spend so much time in their sub package.

He may be right, but I'm surprised that he doesn't reflect on the fact that the Patriots have already tried going down that route -- without success. What else was Derek Burgess supposed to be?

 

[Sciz]

Why the New England Patriots should think outside their system when making draft decisions - ESPN Boston

An article by Reiss arguing that the Patriots should look for a pure edge-rushing OLB like Matthews because they spend so much time in their sub package.

He may be right, but I'm surprised that he doesn't reflect on the fact that the Patriots have already tried going down that route -- without success. What else was Derek Burgess supposed to be?

Run defense while in subpackages was iffy all season. Adding a guy like Matthews or Von Miller is just going to make that worse. What that report tells me is that the team needs more of a McGinest guy, who is at his best when rushing or playing the run, and not as much of an asset in coverage.

 

[jmt57]

Future Focus: Outside linebacker - New England Patriots Blog - espnBoston - Mike Reiss

Stat check: Banta-Cain played the highest total of snaps (66.7 percent), followed by Cunningham (50.9 percent) and Ninkovich (47.0 percent). Playing-time-wise, Moore came on strong late in the year, averaging 45 snaps in the final four regular-season games.

Storyline not to be overlooked: Cunningham’s development. The 2010 second-round draft choice tailed off at the end of the season, which might have been tied to a calf injury. The offseason between a player’s rookie and second season is often the time for the biggest jump in improvement, and that could be threatened in the event of a lockout.

Future: Cunningham is signed through 2013, followed by Banta-Cain (2012), Ninkovich (2011), Moore (2011) and Murrell (2011).

Final thought: This is one of the most challenging positions to project in the draft, which makes selecting a player in the first round more of a risk. But with three of the draft’s first 33 picks, and six of the first 92, the Patriots figure to invest highly in the position.

I don't agree with that last underlined sentence. To me you could probably say the same thing about any position; I don't think there is any such thing as a "safe position" that you can invest a high draft pick on with little or no concern about the risk of it not working out. I'm not sure what Reiss' point is there or why he felt it was necessary to say that.

Regardless of the risk of a draft pick possibly being a bust, there is no question in my mind that OLB is at minimum one of the top three positions on the roster that needs to be upgraded. It would be far riskier to not invest heavily in the OLB position this offseason.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Future Focus: Outside linebacker - New England Patriots Blog - espnBoston - Mike Reiss



I don't agree with that last underlined sentence. To me you could probably say the same thing about any position; I don't think there is any such thing as a "safe position" that you can invest a high draft pick on with little or no concern about the risk of it not working out. I'm not sure what Reiss' point is there or why he felt it was necessary to say that.

Regardless of the risk of a draft pick possibly being a bust, there is no question in my mind that OLB is at minimum one of the top three positions on the roster that needs to be upgraded. It would be far riskier to not invest heavily in the OLB position this offseason.

Agreed. Its only a risk if the player from a physical and skill standpoint not equipped to play at the NFL level.