Check. I'd guess a 3rd-4th rounder with his versatility and upside. There are reports some teams are still considering him as a TE, so possibly he could have cracked the 2nd round, though I doubt it.
$.02 If Barwin had another year producing at the same level at DE, he would be a top-10 pick.
Check. Walterfootball has Sergio Kindle going #3 in their early 2010 mock. Kindle as another 6'4" 254# LB with Barwin-like athleticism. He was my other 3-4 OLB choice this year, but chose to go back to Texas. With 2 years starting ability and some experience at both DE and OLB, he will make a ton of money next year.
$.03 If Matthews had another year producing at the same level at DE/OLB, he would be a late-2nd rounder.
Not quite so sure about this. I think that Matthews is benefitting from a lot of hype right now, and I think he would level off. But 2 years of starting production is always better than 1 year. I think he would probably be a 2nd round pick, not so sure about the late part. Best case he would be a late 1st rounder.
$.04 If English had another year producing at the same level at DE, he would be exactly the same prospect he is now.
Agreed. WYSIWYG with English. Solid, productive 4-3 DE and pass rusher. Not clear he has the athleticism to play in space or the ability to read and react. One more year would be exactly the same player.
$.05 If Barwin or English had put up the same production for USC, Barwin/English would be a top-10 pick.
Agreed. Barwin would be another Taylor Mays phenom at USC, where productivity is overlooked.
$.06 It's easy to over-project Barwin's realistic upside by getting carried away with his measurables.
Not sure I agree here. My assessment of Barwin's upside has nothing to do with his measurables, it has to do with his combination of athleticism, versatility, motor, intelligence, drive, etc. I would rephrase this: "It's easy to over-project Barwin's most likely outcome by getting carried away with his upside."
$.07 It's easy to over-project Barwin's realistic bust potential by thinking everybody else is getting carried away with his measurables.
Agreed.
$.08 Barring a Wilfork-style surprise, anybody the Pats take at #23 will seem like lousy value. This is not because they're actually a bad choice or a weak prospect at that point in the draft, it is because the talent board is so dense that they're not obviously better than a dozen other guys. But in the end, collecting good talent matters more than getting "good value."
Partially agreed. I don't see any Wilfork-like miracles occurring, or any Mayo-like instant starters. But I think that the value at 23 is much better than the values at 24 in 2007 or at 21 in 2006. Much better. I think the value at 20-32 in this draft is exactly the same as the value at 11-20, so I think we will get a really good player.