Barwin runs a 4.47 at pro day

[mayoclinic]

Here's where I am on Barwin at this point: I think he is the #1 OLB prospect among those likely to be available at #23. That's all.

Am I convinced he's destined to be an All-Pro? Nope. Do I recognize the risk? Yep. Do I realize that six months ago he wasn't even a defender, let alone a day-1 draft pick? Of course, that's why he's likely to be available at #23. Because of his inexperience, period.

The others in the discussion -- English, Maybin, Matthews & Johnson -- all have huge question marks, too. If that makes you look to other positions like DL or OL for value at #23, that's extremely reasonable. But you have to be prepared that all 5 of your iffy OLB options may be gone by gone by #34, because that's what happens with pass rushers.

:youtheman: (or, to be more precise, woman).

I'm exactly where you are. I think Barwin is my #1 3-4 OLB prospect, at a position of need, with a high upside. That makes him worth consideration at #23, though he is by no means a sure thing. I think that all of the other prospects (adding Everett Brown, Robert Ayers and Clint Sintim to your list) have at least equal concerns. I think that he may not last till #34 because pass rushers tend to go early, but if we can wait and get him later I'm all for it. And I'm willing to consider other positions at #23 (until recently I favored William Beatty in the 1st and Barwin at #34), though right now I don't see a compelling alternative.

 

[bucky]

Here's the first post were I evaluated Barwin's value, projecting him as a solid early second, with the possibility he could rise into the late first round. It's 'only' a month and a half ago, not "two" months, but it was 'post' All-Star games and 'pre' Combine. So yes, his athleticism moves him into the first round, just the same as those kids patchick has tracked. http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...rry-english-patriot-material.html#post1277581

Okay, Miami (OH) and Akron are MAC teams, Marshall is Conference USA - while neither is a BCS conference, they are both solid mid-major conferences who regularly play against SEC, Big-10, and other conferences you seem to find respectable.

Eastern Kentucky is indeed from the next level down - the same level as Appalachian State who provided a wake-up call to Michigan a while back - players from that level are drafted into the NFL all the time and many of the "major" colleges schedule games with good lower level programs to give their kids a tune-up game, and to give the lower level kids some national exposure. Eastern Kentucky may have played at a lower level, but they were 'a playoff' team at their level, which makes them a dangerous opponent for any 'major' college who falls asleep at the switch, again, ask Michigan.

South Florida is a Big East team. They were a bowl team the past two seasons and were a pre-season Top 20 pick. Their tackles may not have set the world on fire, but they do get to practice against one of the premiere edge rushers in the NCAA - George Selvie. I believe Barwin gave them as much trouble as Selvie does in practice.

Yep, Barwin struggled against Oklahoma and Phil Loadholt who was a preseason first round projection draft pick who has since slid into the second round. I'm going to have to ask you to consider whether Barwin's limited stat line for that game could have had anything to do with the fact he was playing his 'second' game as a starter at DE and his first game against BCS competition? To be fair, you might consider factoring that into your assessment. Barwin did accumulate 4 TT and 1 QBH working against that road grader left side of Oklahoma's OL - both of whom are second round projections and were invited to the Senior Bowl.

Connecticut and projected first round LT William Beatty are next in your argument. Okay then, Barwin only had 2 TT, 1 TFL, and 1 PD - that's really not a bad stat line against a top LT. Connecticut also played Virginia, so we get to compare Barwin's performance with his draft peer, Clint Sintim, pretty cool eh? The four year 3-4 OLB Sintim had 5 TT. Yes, that's a period, no TFL, no QBH, no sacks, no PD, no FF, no FR. I admit 5 TT is quite respectable, but if NE is looking for pass rush help in this draft, and many fans consider that a priority, the rookie defensive player got just a tad more into the QB's face than the veteran defensive player - if the stat line is to be believed. Connecticut also played South Florida and the NFL Draft Scout #1 ranked DE for the class of 2010, George Selvie. Sadly, Selvie struggled all season with nagging injuries, so it's not exactly a fair comparison, especially when we see that Selvie had 1 TT... Do we make an "excuse" for Selvie or do we just say that Barwin's performance against William Beatty compares favorably to two of the better edge rushers who also played against Connecticut this past season?

I have no hope of convincing you of Barwin's value, you've got bad cases of Mamula-itis and 40 fixation fear, but your competition arguments aren't as strong as you would have, both on the team level and on the individual level.

No problem. I'll give you the fact that you've been very high on Barwin since pre-combine. And that's great. Props to you if he works out. But you can't argue the competition thing. It's really not a quantitative argument, just pure logic. Barwin hasn't played defense or practiced pass-rushing techniques. He's able to beat the majority of the competition based purely on athleticism and effort. This is not a bad thing. But as the competition improves, those 2 things are not enough - especially when it comes to coverage and stopping the run.

 

[bucky]

Here's where I am on Barwin at this point: I think he is the #1 OLB prospect among those likely to be available at #23. That's all.

Am I convinced he's destined to be an All-Pro? Nope. Do I recognize the risk? Yep. Do I realize that six months ago he wasn't even a defender, let alone a day-1 draft pick? Of course, that's why he's likely to be available at #23. Because of his inexperience, period.

The others in the discussion -- English, Maybin, Matthews & Johnson -- all have huge question marks, too. If that makes you look to other positions like DL or OL for value at #23, that's extremely reasonable. But you have to be prepared that all 5 of your iffy OLB options may be gone by gone by #34, because that's what happens with pass rushers.

OK. It may well be that Barwin will be the best OLB prospect at 23. Does that mean you take him over players at other positions who present less risk and a higher floor? Even if the need is slightly higher at OLB? Would you still want Barwin at 23 if Jason Taylor signs before the draft? To me, it's a pretty simple - there's no way right now - based on his body of work - that Barwin can be projected as a starting OLB for this team at any point in time. And as such, he doesn't qualify as a 1st round pick, no matter how much upside he may have.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

OK. It may well be that Barwin will be the best OLB prospect at 23. Does that mean you take him over players at other positions who present less risk and a higher floor? Even if the need is slightly higher at OLB? Would you still want Barwin at 23 if Jason Taylor signs before the draft? To me, it's a pretty simple - there's no way right now - based on his body of work - that Barwin can be projected as a starting OLB for this team at any point in time. And as such, he doesn't qualify as a 1st round pick, no matter how much upside he may have.

Especially if Jason Taylor signs right now. If we fans are so dead set on getting an edge rush we are willing to take a player who is fully in retirement-to-Hollywood mode to get one, why not try to draft a kid to develop?

 

[mayoclinic]

OK. It may well be that Barwin will be the best OLB prospect at 23. Does that mean you take him over players at other positions who present less risk and a higher floor? Even if the need is slightly higher at OLB? Would you still want Barwin at 23 if Jason Taylor signs before the draft? To me, it's a pretty simple - there's no way right now - based on his body of work - that Barwin can be projected as a starting OLB for this team at any point in time. And as such, he doesn't qualify as a 1st round pick, no matter how much upside he may have.

OK, I got it. You don't like Barwin as a 1st round pick. We disagree, that's all. Not the end of the world.

For me, yes, I would still consider Barwin at 23 if we got Jason Taylor before the draft. If anything, I'd like it even better. I think Taylor would be a great mentor and role model for Barwin, and that playing behind Taylor for 2 years would be the best possible way to break Barwin in.

I personally go for the higher ceiling in a 1st round prospect. I don't want a solid role-player, I want a pro-bowl caliber player. So far, of our 1st round picks at 20 or later in the BB era, Wilfork, Mankins, Mayo and Meriweather look to be (or to be becoming) pro-bowl caliber guys. Maroney and Watson have pro-bowl caliber talent (and were probably picked because of their high ceiling) but haven't played up to it. Dan Graham was probably more of a low-floor guy filling a specific need, and he played out pretty much as expected. I think that BB has shown that he is intrigued by high ceiling guys in the late 1st - not necessarily a good thing, as I would much rather have had Karlos Dansby than Watson in 2004.

I don't expect you to agree, which, again, is fine.

 

[bucky]

OK, I got it. You don't like Barwin as a 1st round pick. We disagree, that's all. Not the end of the world.

For me, yes, I would still consider Barwin at 23 if we got Jason Taylor before the draft. If anything, I'd like it even better. I think Taylor would be a great mentor and role model for Barwin, and that playing behind Taylor for 2 years would be the best possible way to break Barwin in.

I personally go for the higher ceiling in a 1st round prospect. I don't want a solid role-player, I want a pro-bowl caliber player. So far, of our 1st round picks at 20 or later in the BB era, Wilfork, Mankins, Mayo and Meriweather look to be (or to be becoming) pro-bowl caliber guys. Maroney and Watson have pro-bowl caliber talent (and were probably picked because of their high ceiling) but haven't played up to it. Dan Graham was probably more of a low-floor guy filling a specific need, and he played out pretty much as expected. I think that BB has shown that he is intrigued by high ceiling guys in the late 1st - not necessarily a good thing, as I would much rather have had Karlos Dansby than Watson in 2004.

I don't expect you to agree, which, again, is fine.

I actually wanted Dansby myslef in 2004. I wonder how much the whole Potson thing and his perceived attitude affected where he got drafted. It's interested that you say BB likes ceiling guys, because to me it appears to be just the opposite. Guys like Wilfork, Warren, Mankins, Mayo - all were safe picks to me. Watson was probably the one guy whose production wasn't anywhere near his potential.

 

[captain stone]

Thanks for the correction. I forgot that Siler went in the 7th.

Avril was a popular Pats pick last year, with many mocks having us trading up for him in the 2nd round. We obviously passed on him at 63, 69 and 78, so Belichick clearly saw something he didn't like, or preferred Crable (who he publicly stated would have been his pick at 69).

I wouldn't jump to judge Crable. He looked fine in preseason. I think he needed to bulk up and get stronger last year. We weren't drafting him based on his expected rookie productivity. I'd give him at least another year before judging him. After all, Mike Vrabel was a "bust" in Pittsburgh.

I really hope you're right, Mayo. I do remember that Crable made a lot of plays in the backfield - both sacks & TFLs - for Michigan in '07. Having a natural nose for the ball is a terrific, almost unteachable, attribute. I'm looking forward to seeing pictures of him in TC, compared to last year. Belichick's own confidence in Crable may manifest itself in the earliness in which he selects an OLB. I believe we need another one, anyway, plus a savvy vet like Jason Taylor. I also hope that our needs at SS, CB, SILB & OL are addressed early & often.

P.S.: This has turned into one heckuva well-written thread, with cogent, passionate & persuasive arguments on both sides. Well done.

P.P.S.: I was high on Mark Anderson as a late 3rd/early 4th DE-to-OLB conversion, based on his COD times at the combine, during the '06 draft. I know that he plays 4-3 DE for da Bears, but do you think that he could've made the transition to a NEP 3-4 OLB?

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

I really hope you're right, Mayo. I do remember that Crable made a lot of plays in the backfield - both sacks & TFLs - for Michigan in '07. Having a natural nose for the ball is a terrific, almost unteachable, attribute. I'm looking forward to seeing pictures of him in TC, compared to last year. Belichick's own confidence in Crable may manifest itself in the earliness in which he selects an OLB. I believe we need another one, anyway, plus a savvy vet like Jason Taylor. I also hope that our needs at SS, CB, SILB & OL are addressed early & often.

P.S.: This has turned into one heckuva well-written thread, with cogent, passionate & persuasive arguments on both sides. Well done.

P.P.S.: I was high on Mark Anderson as a late 3rd/early 4th DE-to-OLB conversion, based on his COD times at the combine, during the '06 draft. I know that he plays 4-3 DE for da Bears, but do you think that he could've made the transition to a NEP 3-4 OLB?

I'd have given Anderson a shot.

 

[JoeShmoe]

OK, I got it. You don't like Barwin as a 1st round pick. We disagree, that's all. Not the end of the world.

For me, yes, I would still consider Barwin at 23 if we got Jason Taylor before the draft. If anything, I'd like it even better. I think Taylor would be a great mentor and role model for Barwin, and that playing behind Taylor for 2 years would be the best possible way to break Barwin in.

I personally go for the higher ceiling in a 1st round prospect. I don't want a solid role-player, I want a pro-bowl caliber player. So far, of our 1st round picks at 20 or later in the BB era, Wilfork, Mankins, Mayo and Meriweather look to be (or to be becoming) pro-bowl caliber guys. Maroney and Watson have pro-bowl caliber talent (and were probably picked because of their high ceiling) but haven't played up to it. Dan Graham was probably more of a low-floor guy filling a specific need, and he played out pretty much as expected. I think that BB has shown that he is intrigued by high ceiling guys in the late 1st - not necessarily a good thing, as I would much rather have had Karlos Dansby than Watson in 2004.

I don't expect you to agree, which, again, is fine.

Mayo, how about a scenario where we trade up with #23 and #89 into the 19-20 range and try amd go for Oher or Britton? Then get the best OLB and S left on the boards in round 2 (I think Barwin will still be there at #34) and one of Chung/Delmas/Moore further down

Whats the no.1 priority on this team? Protect Brady and give him time and with Neal injury prone, question marks over Kazcur and the O-Line in general getting older and prone to having some very bad days, I see this as a chance to move up and get a starting tackle

 

[mayoclinic]

Mayo, how about a scenario where we trade up with #23 and #89 into the 19-20 range and try amd go for Oher or Britton? Then get the best OLB and S left on the boards in round 2 (I think Barwin will still be there at #34) and one of Chung/Delmas/Moore further down

Whats the no.1 priority on this team? Protect Brady and give him time and with Neal injury prone, question marks over Kazcur and the O-Line in general getting older and prone to having some very bad days, I see this as a chance to move up and get a starting tackle

I think a Day 1 OT is a wonderful idea. I'm comfortable with Light/Kaczur/LeVoir/Britton/O'Callaghan, but I think there is plenty of room to upgrade and for the long-term. I think that Light could potentially move to RT and that Kaczur could be both a swing tackle and potentially move to RG to replace Neal. So I like the idea.

Who you target and how high you take an OT depends on your draft board and valuation of prospects. Of the commonly rated "first day" OTs, 3 are not on my own draft board for the Pats altogether:

- Michael Oher. Great athleticism but his intelligence and work ethics are questionable. He takes plays off. I don't want Brady out for another season because my LT decided to take the play off. So no, I wouldn't trade up for Oher around 19. But if BB feels differently and considers Oher a top 10 pick, and he slides a bit, then it's quite possible.
- Andre Smith. Lots already said here. More of a road grader than I like for the Pats, plus his weight and post-season meltdown issues. But the talent is there if BB felt differently about him.
- Philip Loadholt. Another huge roadgrader, this time with poor footwork. Taller than the Pats like, and has trouble with speed rushers.

My first day OT draft board for the Pats looks something like this:

1. Jason Smith. Top 5 pick.
2. Eugene Monroe. Top 5 pick.
3. William Beatty. 1st-2nd round pick.
4. Eben Britton. 1st-2nd round pick.
5. Jamon Meredith. Mid-late 2nd round pick.
6. Troy Kropog. Late 2nd/early 3rd round pick.

So I have Britton behind William Beatty (based on Beatty's superior footwork, agility and athleticism and my projection of him as a better long-term LT prospect, even though Britton is probably more ready), and probably wouldn't reach for him. I might take Britton at #34 if my top 3 LTs are gone. I see Beatty going somewhere between 20 and 40 right now. I had previously had him as my #1 prospect at #23, but right now I think I would take Barwin based on my estimate that Barwin may not last till 34 and that Barwin has a better chance of reaching his ceiling than Beatty does. But it's just a guess.

 

[JoeShmoe]

Mayo .. great answer .. im not sure Beatty falls to #34 though .. wheras I think Barwin does

Theres also IMO a drop off from Britton/Beatty whereas potentially frm Barwin to English, Sintim etc it isnt so pronounced

That said if we could walk away with Beatty, Barwin and Delmas/Chung via some possible trading (as per your earlier trade ideas) then I think thats a good day. I also really hope we get Brinkley as an ILB

Do you have any OG in the 3rd/4th that you like?

 

[mayoclinic]

Mayo .. great answer .. im not sure Beatty falls to #34 though .. wheras I think Barwin does

Theres also IMO a drop off from Britton/Beatty whereas potentially frm Barwin to English, Sintim etc it isnt so pronounced

That said if we could walk away with Beatty, Barwin and Delmas/Chung via some possible trading (as per your earlier trade ideas) then I think thats a good day. I also really hope we get Brinkley as an ILB

Do you have any OG in the 3rd/4th that you like?

I'm equally happy with Beatty at 23/Barwin at 34 or Barwin at 23/Beatty at 34. It's just a question of who is most likely to last to #34.

Your dropoff argument is reasonable, but I could also argue that the need is greater at OLB than at OT, that Beatty is likely to be 1-2 years away from being ready, and that Barwin is closer to being an ideal 3-4 OLB candidate than Beatty is to being an ideal OT candidate (though I really like both of them). I would agree with you about Beatty, Barwin and Delmas/Chung (I would add William Moore) being a great 1st day. If we could somehow get Robert Ayers, Eric Wood or Jarron Gilbert in the 2nd that would be ideal.

I personall prefer Jason Phillips to Jasper Brinkley at ILB, but I can understand the Brinkley argument.

 

[MetalBleachers]

I personall prefer Jason Phillips to Jasper Brinkley at ILB, but I can understand the Brinkley argument.

Brinkley's production in the SEC, his size, and his slow, steady recovery from his knee injury put him a little ahead of Phillips for me. But I'd say they're close in rank, albeit for different reasons.

 

[captain stone]

I'd have given Anderson a shot.

Esp. when considering that one of the 4th-rounders was used for Garrett Mills, and the 5th-rounder for Ryan O'C, who has always seemed a square peg in the round hole of the Pats' OL philosophy.

So...if we are looking at OLB & OT with 23 & 34, then who should we look for at CB, and when should we take him?

 

[patchick]

So...if we are looking at OLB & OT with 23 & 34, then who should we look for at CB, and when should we take him?

Joe Burnett in the 4th.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Esp. when considering that one of the 4th-rounders was used for Garrett Mills, and the 5th-rounder for Ryan O'C, who has always seemed a square peg in the round hole of the Pats' OL philosophy.

So...if we are looking at OLB & OT with 23 & 34, then who should we look for at CB, and when should we take him?

Lardarius Webb with the 5th comp.

 

[captain stone]

I hope you 2 wild 'n crazy kids are funnin' with me, 'cause we need to draft CBs as early as perhaps one of our 2nd-rounders. Ass-u-ming that the top 5 - MJenkins, VDavis, ASmith, DButler & DJMoore - are gone by #47, I would start to consider Sean Smith, Kevin Barnes, Sherrod Martin & maybe Jairus Byrd. Then again, I'd prob. choose Patrick Chung ahead of any of 'em.

But I suppose that's a subject for another thread.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

I hope you 2 wild 'n crazy kids are funnin' with me, 'cause we need to draft CBs as early as perhaps one of our 2nd-rounders. Ass-u-ming that the top 5 - MJenkins, VDavis, ASmith, DButler & DJMoore - are gone by #47, I would start to consider Sean Smith, Kevin Barnes, Sherrod Martin & maybe Jairus Byrd. Then again, I'd prob. choose Patrick Chung ahead of any of 'em.

But I suppose that's a subject for another thread.

Funnin' you Cap? Not a bit. At the moment the roster has Hobbs and Wilhite returning as the starters who ended the season, veteran stud muffins Springs and Bodden, then Wheatley and Richardson (projecting Spann to S). Drafting another Day One CB creates competition, but it doesn't really address a need or upgrade the position. That leaves drafting a kid or two Day Two to provide camp depth and a development prospect for the Practice Squad. Either Burnett or Webb are good choices who flash some solid potential.

 

[captain stone]

Surely you can't be comfortable with the talent-challenged Richardson & Wilhite, the height-challenged & injury-prone Wheatley & Hobbs (who's also a UFA at season's end), the youth-challenged & injury-prone Shawn Springs, and sure thing but UFA-to-be Leigh Bodden?

Sorry, but we need at least one top-64-caliber CB from the draft, pref. of the 6' 190 variety.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Surely you can't be comfortable with the talent-challenged Richardson & Wilhite, the height-challenged & injury-prone Wheatley & Hobbs (who's also a UFA at season's end), the youth-challenged & injury-prone Shawn Springs, and sure thing but UFA-to-be Leigh Bodden?

Sorry, but we need at least one top-64-caliber CB from the draft, pref. of the 6' 190 variety.

Comfortable? Sure, why not? I've disagreed with your heartburn over Hobbs and Co. before, no need for me to change now.

But if you insist, my favorite Day One CB is 5'9" 193 lb. Alphonso Smith. Unfortunately his change of direction numbers at the Combine were a bit slower than I like. Now some folks here like 6'3" 214 lb Sean Smith of Utah, who did put up excellent change of direction numbers, sadly the one time I watched him play he looked to be the one Alabama was picking on and seemed to be out of position a lot. I never noticed that so much with his 5'9" buddy on the other side. :confused2: I've also read where he's not that physical, which leaves me quite uncomfortable with him.

In the mid-rounds there's Keenan Lewis of Oregon State, he's a 6'1" 195 man-to-man CB who started for four years. Kevin Barnes of Maryland is about the size you want, he's got the quicks I want, but he missed most of his senior year with an injury so he's got that caution flag. Sherrod Martin of Troy is another one with size/quickness, but he's a FS who some are projecting outside to CB. Mike Mickens of Cincinnati is also about the size you are looking for, he's still recovering from a late season knee injury and is just getting back into shape.

Those five are about it, Smith is a high two, Martin and Mickens 2-3s, the other two 3-4s.