4/17 Draft Daddy 2 Round Mock

[DaBruinz]

I wouldn't. I'm not going to argue his virtues with you as I've rarely seen him play - but I do know that Belichick has never drafted a guy with one year's experience at his position in the first round, he has taken proven, long term starters with lots of film on them and multiple seasons for college opponents to prepare for him, adjust to him and take him more seriously than they likely took Barwin last year. He may be great but our history of #1 picks doesn't include players like him.

Logan Mankins had zero film with him being a guard. Wilfork had zero film as a NT. Mayo had never been an ILB.

And I could go into the litany of different "Belichick has never dones" that have been broken over the past 4 years.

BB has proven that he's willing to change and adapt with the needs of the team and with the talent available. That, more than anything, should make you step back and say "hmm" about Barwin...Now, I am not advocating taking Barwin in the 1st. But if BB did, it wouldn't surprise me.

 

[BelichickFan]

Logan Mankins had zero film with him being a guard. Wilfork had zero film as a NT. Mayo had never been an ILB.

That's a cop out, they had played similar positions long term. Far different from a DE who had been a TE until the year before. You want to compare that to an OT to OG or an OLB to an ILB ? Get a grip.

 

[jays52]

Actually, a 1-gap 3-tech being drafted to play a 2-gap 0-tech is a much bigger leap than 43 DE to a 34 OLB. Which is really saying something considering just how disparate those positions are.

 

[BelichickFan]

And I could go into the litany of different "Belichick has never dones" that have been broken over the past 4 years.

I never said it can't happen not that it won't happen. I said I would be very surprised. This is different from "never having drafted a LB" or "wouldn't use a #1 on an OG". There is a safety element to drafting a guy who has played 3 or so years at a position similar to what you're drafting him for. It will never be identical going from college to pro or 4-3 to 3-4 but a DE one year off of being a TE doesn't fit the normal way we do things. That doesn't mean we won't take him but it doesn't fit the standard operating procedure around here.

 

[BelichickFan]

Actually, a 1-gap 3-tech being drafted to play a 2-gap 0-tech is a much bigger leap than 43 DE to a 34 OLB. Which is really saying something considering just how disparate those positions are.

One year at DE, dude, one year. If Barwin were a three year starter at DE it would be somewhat different. I'm not sure I agree with you depending on what you're asking the OLB to do but that's another discussion.

 

[jays52]

One year at DE, dude, one year. If Barwin were a three year starter at DE it would be somewhat different. I'm not sure I agree with you depending on what you're asking the OLB to do but that's another discussion.

One year has nothing to do with his ability to transition. He was a highly productive football player his entire career, not a one year wonder. Sure, he played defense his senior year, but he could arguably have been a 1st round tight end if he stayed on offense. To be honest, his lack of ingrained muscle memory makes him a more viable prospect to move to OLB. If you've played four years in a row with your hand in the dirt and aren't used to playing in space, it can be a significant detriment to learning linebacker. Further, there is no precedent for BB drafting an OLB early. For all we know, he may feel the same way.

 

[BelichickFan]

One year has nothing to do with things. He was a highly productive football player his entire career, not a one year wonder. Sure, he played defense his senior year, but he could have arguably have been a 1st round tight end if he stayed on offense.

Well we'll see in a week. You may be right but I don't think he's going in the first round. His athleticism intrigues me and there is some safety in that he could be a decent TE prospect if he is a bust on defense. But he doesn't fit what we've all seen Belichick do in the first round and taking guys with more than one year at a position with some relevance to what they would play for us is a much bigger M.O. than the "not taking a guy at this position or that position" thing that DB is referring to. That's why Sanchez is extra risky too, less film, less opponents' gameplannig and adjusting from game to game and year to year based on that less experience at the position.

 

[BelichickFan]

Further, there is no precedent for BB drafting an OLB early. For all we know, he may feel the same way.

I have felt that a #1 pick on a guy moving from DE to OLB added enough risk that it would have to be the perfect guy for Belichick to do it. Barwin adds even more risk given the one year of play at DE. I am NOT saying Belichick won't do it, just that I think it's very unlikely because it adds risk. Sure, Wilfork presented risk, they all do, but this is a uniquely risky player IMO.

 

[jays52]

I have felt that a #1 pick on a guy moving from DE to OLB added enough risk that it would have to be the perfect guy for Belichick to do it. Barwin adds even more risk given the one year of play at DE. I am NOT saying Belichick won't do it, just that I think it's very unlikely because it adds risk. Sure, Wilfork presented risk, they all do, but this is a uniquely risky player IMO.

No dispute there, none whatsoever. That said, given the nature of drafting a 34 OLB, don't you think that experience at a position he wont play in a scheme we don't use is relatively moot?

 

[BelichickFan]

No dispute there, none whatsoever. That said, given the nature of drafting a 34 OLB, don't you think that experience at a position he wont play in a scheme we don't use is relatively moot?

That is a viable point, that a college DE to pro OLB would have enough of a change in skillset required that it may lessen the 3 years at TE/1 year at DE for Barwin.

I do agree with DaBruinz that the "won't draft a LB", "won't draft an OG", "won't draft a RB" in the first round thing is a little silly. And, again, I will not and am not saying that we won't draft a DE to switch to OLB. But I still think it's an additional risk enough that I'll believe it when I see it; especially this year with SO MANY of those guys that we can get one in the second or third round when we're risking less. If we take Barwin we will clearly think he's special IMO and that would excite me. However I fully expect a Butler, Marino, Maualuga type where Belichick can be more assured that he's getting, worst case, a good player. The second round is where he seems more willing to take a risk with the likes of Chad Jackson and Bethel Johnson.

 

[mayoclinic]

In the best of all worlds (for me, at least) we would be guaranteed to have Connor Barwin at 34, Louis Delmas at 47, and Jarron Gilbert or Eric Wood at 58. Then we could use 28 on Malcolm Jenkins/Darius Butler/Rey Maualuga/Knowshon Moreno/Donald Brown - whichever one BB valued most highly assuming they were still available at 23.

But without the benefit of hindsight, if BB values any one guy highly enough he is likely to "reach" for them. It happened with both Warren and Mankins. If BB thinks the "right" 3-4 OLB conversion guy is there - whether it is Barwin or one of the others - then picking him at 23 is not unreasonable, if there is a significant chance that they won't last till 34.

 

[VJCPatriot]

However I fully expect a Butler, Marino, Maualuga type where Belichick can be more assured that he's getting, worst case, a good player.

I wasn't aware that Dan Marino was available in this year's draft...

PS Maulagua is just as risky if not riskier a pick than Barwin considering how badly he looks on film and how easily he gets overpowered and put on the ground. Guys like Shawn Nelson, a TE were doing this as recently as the senior bowl. Doesn't sound like the best fit for a 3-4 defense if he can't even shed blocks and gets swallowed up by tight ends and guards.

 

[BelichickFan]

PS Maulagua is just as risky if not riskier a pick than Barwin considering how badly he looks on film

That's my point - there's so much film on him that if Belichick likes him then he has 30 or so games of reason to like him. Low risk. If the film says he can't do it, we won't take him. There's three times as much evidence for what Maualuga can do defensively as there is for Barwin.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

That's my point - there's so much film on him that if Belichick likes him then he has 30 or so games of reason to like him. Low risk. If the film says he can't do it, we won't take him. There's three times as much evidence for what Maualuga can do defensively as there is for Barwin.

I do believe that BB looks at ALL games a prospect plays maybe even high school games in certain circumstances.

One of the reasons I struggle with Barwin is the lack of tape and in the tape I see, he takes on blocks with the wrong shoulder and generally gets by on superior athletisim as opposed to football skills.

Will his football knowledge/skills ever equal his raw athletic skills? If you think so you have to take him, if not, you pass on him.

 

[pats63]

That's my point - there's so much film on him that if Belichick likes him then he has 30 or so games of reason to like him. Low risk. If the film says he can't do it, we won't take him. There's three times as much evidence for what Maualuga can do defensively as there is for Barwin.

dude,you are on the money...less risk/Barwin would be TE if pick by the pats

 

[mgteich]

What exclusive information do we have? Almost all the analysts have Maualuga as a first round talent, expecting him to develop to be a stud at ILB. Perhaps we don't have respect for ANY of these analysts. Okay,that's fine. Then perhaps, just perhaps, we have some faith in the scouts of the patriots and the scouts that develop the draft information exclusively for the patriots.

Belichick and the scouts will have plenty of information on Maualuga. If he is drafted, it will be because he has almost no risk at all. It is not a linebacker from Southern Cal that everyone has watched for years that has the risk of the unknown.

One open question is whether Maualuga is ready to start for a 3-4 defense in 2009. A second is whether there is more value when we pick or consider moving up. A third question is whether Belichick is comfortable with using a later pick for our addition at ILB. The question is NOT whether Belichick will be surprised after drafting Maualuga.

That's my point - there's so much film on him that if Belichick likes him then he has 30 or so games of reason to like him. Low risk. If the film says he can't do it, we won't take him. There's three times as much evidence for what Maualuga can do defensively as there is for Barwin.

 

[TriplecHamp]

I wasn't aware that Dan Marino was available in this year's draft...

PS Maulagua is just as risky if not riskier a pick than Barwin considering how badly he looks on film and how easily he gets overpowered and put on the ground. Guys like Shawn Nelson, a TE were doing this as recently as the senior bowl. Doesn't sound like the best fit for a 3-4 defense if he can't even shed blocks and gets swallowed up by tight ends and guards.

Yeah he decided to come out early. -___-