Bunting Mock Draft 2/10

[MaineMan]

I don't think you can ever have too many good corners.

Especially if your pass rushers are among the worst in football.

It never occurred to me that being tied for 14th in sacks and being three short of making it into the top ten means that you're "among the worst in football."

 

[Deus Irae]

I posted this in another thread, but it seems that it needs to be pointed out again and again. I'll modify it just enough to remove the part that was specific to the post I was replying to:

Patriots sack rankings:

2000: 25
2001: 13
2002: 20
2003: 6
2004: 3
2005: 23
2006: 5
2007: 2
2008: 14
2009: 23
2010: 14

Sack rankings seem to track the Patriots success and failure under Belichick pretty darned well.

Anyone who belittles sacks is missing a lot of the picture. In the Patriots system, INDIVIDUAL sack totals are relatively unimportant. Team sack totals, however, show a high degree of correlation with the team's ability to get the job done, because the defense is designed to work as one symbiotic organism, with coverage leading to sacks and sacks leading to coverage.

 

[MaineMan]

I posted this in another thread, but it seems that it needs to be pointed out again and again. I'll modify it just enough to remove the part that was specific to the post I was replying to:




Anyone who belittles sacks is missing a lot of the picture. In the Patriots system, INDIVIDUAL sack totals are relatively unimportant. Team sack totals, however, show a high degree of correlation with the team's ability to get the job done, because the defense is designed to work as one symbiotic organism, with coverage leading to sacks and sacks leading to coverage.

Yep.

Good info, BTW. Thanks. Also interesting to note that, in 2008, 30 sacks was good for 14th, but 31 sacks was good for only 23rd in 2009 and 36 sacks in 2010 was only good for 14th as well.

Anyway, I think the Pats 10-yr average is around 39 sacks with seasons that extended into the Conference Championship game and beyond averaging something like 43 sacks.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

I wouldn't be shocked if they drafted a CB if they thought he was the BPA however your prevailing point for a while now has been that the Patriots don't need a pass rusher. The stats were to prove a point that they do. I did put in the caveat that they don't include pressures to be balanced but the inference is if you're getting sacks you're probably getting some near misses along the way as well. Ditto with the Butler post. He had good coverage.

You get far to defensive and confrontational. All we have is a difference of opinion. No need not to keep it civil.

I'm being "controntational" because I have zero wish to debate needs.

Here is my point:

If the value @17 is the CB, don't be shocked if we draft a CB because Bill Belichick says we can never have too many corners. Also I provided some alternative points that MAY provide some other ideas that Belichick could consider.



For years, people can't figure out the Belichick draft trade theory. If he doesn't have someone he wants he'll trade the pick vs drafting a guy he doesn't want.
People may not agree, that's fine, but don't be shocked or not understand that it will most likely happen.

Yes, my wish list is:

#1 secondary-maybe that's why it came easier to me why BB would draft a CB.

Dline rotation that can bring pressure with 4 guys. Anybody can have an opinion on players. However, it's a basic problem if you don't consider if players are going to return and what they offer.

Smart, flexible linebackers. "Flexibility" does include the ability to bring pressure.

My wants are for a pass rush that comes from various directions and personnel with the option for pressure from four Dline guys. I would also not waste a first rounder on a pass rush specialist.

Also, I'm not doing the drafting so the best I can do is study the drafting dude.

 

[DonBlackmon55]

It never occurred to me that being tied for 14th in sacks and being three short of making it into the top ten means that you're "among the worst in football."

Sacks are the most useless statistic to judge a defense. There've been teams, and in some cases even players getting 3,4,5,7, 8,9 sacks in one game, and nothing for next many games.

Its about bringing pressure. Negative plays are result of pressure ! And sack is one type of negative play resulting from pressure, as are forced int, incompletions, QB strips/fumble etc. Of all the teams, Pats should know that very well considering what happened to our OL in some SB's losses...Bears, Packers, G-men, and then following year in Rd 1 vs Ravens. On the other hand when our team handled the pressure from Panthers and Eagles vaunted Defensive front, or likes of "Lights Out" clown in SD we were SB champs, or moved deeper into playoffs.

 

[Deus Irae]

Sacks are the most useless statistic to judge a defense. There've been teams, and in some cases even players getting 3,4,5,7, 8,9 sacks in one game, and nothing for next many games.

Its about bringing pressure. Negative plays are result of pressure ! And sack is one type of negative play resulting from pressure, as are forced int, incompletions, QB strips/fumble etc. Of all the teams, Pats should know that very well considering what happened to our OL in some SB's losses...Bears, Packers, G-men, and then following year in Rd 1 vs Ravens. On the other hand when our team handled the pressure from Panthers and Eagles vaunted Defensive front, or likes of "Lights Out" clown in SD we were SB champs, or moved deeper into playoffs.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/13/735991-bunting-mock-draft-2-10-a-page2.html#post2481031

 

[DonBlackmon55]

I'm being "controntational" because I have zero wish to debate needs.

Here is my point:

If the value @17 is the CB, don't be shocked if we draft a CB because Bill Belichick says we can never have too many corners. Also I provided some alternative points that MAY provide some other ideas that Belichick could consider.



For years, people can't figure out the Belichick draft trade theory. If he doesn't have someone he wants he'll trade the pick vs drafting a guy he doesn't want.
People may not agree, that's fine, but don't be shocked or not understand that it will most likely happen.

Yes, my wish list is:

#1 secondary-maybe that's why it came easier to me why BB would draft a CB.

Dline rotation that can bring pressure with 4 guys. Anybody can have an opinion on players. However, it's a basic problem if you don't consider if players are going to return and what they offer.

Smart, flexible linebackers. "Flexibility" does include the ability to bring pressure.

My wants are for a pass rush that comes from various directions and personnel with the option for pressure from four Dline guys. I would also not waste a first rounder on a pass rush specialist.

Also, I'm not doing the drafting so the best I can do is study the drafting dude.

I actually very much like the idea of adding another good cover corner. With Bodden coming back, Mc"Lock"ty, a draft pick, and Butler, that very nice CB depth.

With DL depth returnining with Wright, Warren, Pryor, and already added LB in Spikes and Cunningham, I could see us trading #28 for next year pick, or trade down into Rd 2. BB won't shell $$ for 2 first Rd picks. Money is better used to sign a FA if they can pry Hali or Woodley.

So,

DE/OLB , and low level WR - FA addition
#17 - CB
#28 - traded for 2012 picks
#33 - OG/Center
#60 - OT/DT
#74 - RB
#92 - DE (developmental type)

rest of the picks are crap shoot and would not be surprised of they package them to move around in the draft if they have specific player or two in mind

I don't see more than 5-6 players BB will bring onto this team from the draft.

 

[DonBlackmon55]

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/13/735991-bunting-mock-draft-2-10-a-page2.html#post2481031

Which is why I expect a CB if one of the top one's available at #17. We've already learnt over many years BB won't invest in LB in Rd1 unless he get's top echelon talent.

DL Rd1 picks he's been very good talent judge - Sey, Wilfork, Warren(from the ultimate bust DL class of 2003 with Robertson, Kennedy, J. Sulliavan, M. Haynes, McDougle, Joseph...only Ty and Kevin Williams still around). Sey, Ty, Wilfork were all top 10 talent, and we lucked getting Vince in 20's. Don't see that elite DL talent this yr.

 

[MaineMan]

Sacks are the most useless statistic to judge a defense. There've been teams, and in some cases even players getting 3,4,5,7, 8,9 sacks in one game, and nothing for next many games.

Its about bringing pressure. Negative plays are result of pressure ! And sack is one type of negative play resulting from pressure, as are forced int, incompletions, QB strips/fumble etc. Of all the teams, Pats should know that very well considering what happened to our OL in some SB's losses...Bears, Packers, G-men, and then following year in Rd 1 vs Ravens. On the other hand when our team handled the pressure from Panthers and Eagles vaunted Defensive front, or likes of "Lights Out" clown in SD we were SB champs, or moved deeper into playoffs.

It's about bringing pressure. Yeah, I think most of us get that. Unless someone has paid for access to Pro-Football-Focus stats that include QB hits and pressures, as well as TFL, the most any of us has to go by as a crude estimate of pressure is sacks. And it doesn't seem extremely unreasonable to guess that a team that gets more sacks is also getting more "near-miss" pressures.

In terms of the other results of pressure, the Pats led the league in INTs in 2010 and, IIRC, were also pretty high on the FF list.

 

[Shelterdog]

I actually very much like the idea of adding another good cover corner. With Bodden coming back, Mc"Lock"ty, a draft pick, and Butler, that very nice CB depth..... Money is better used to sign a FA if they can pry Hali or Woodley.

We aren't prying Hali or Woodley.

I am completely stunned by the number of people who want to use #17 on a rookie corner.

You all know that player isn't going to start if Bodden and McCourty are healthy, right?

You all know that payer may not even be our nickel or dime back because Butler and Arrington are halfway decent players with more experience-and corners usually take some time to develop-and by the way BB also likes using a third safety as the nickel back a lot of the time so the third corner doesn't even play that much in a lot of games. You all realize this, don't you?

You all must surely understand that Connolly, Ninkovich and Kaczur are all probable starters with the roster set up the way it is right now?

You all must know Wendell moves into the starting lineup with Mankins holds out, and that Thomas Clayton-a 2007 draftee with 17 career rushing yards-is our number three running back.

You can't have too many corners but you can have too few running backs, linebackers, or guards. The team has such terrible talent at other positions that I simply can't fathom placing corner as a top need.

 

[Deus Irae]

Which is why I expect a CB if one of the top one's available at #17. We've already learnt over many years BB won't invest in LB in Rd1 unless he get's top echelon talent.

DL Rd1 picks he's been very good talent judge - Sey, Wilfork, Warren(from the ultimate bust DL class of 2003 with Robertson, Kennedy, J. Sulliavan, M. Haynes, McDougle, Joseph...only Ty and Kevin Williams still around). Sey, Ty, Wilfork were all top 10 talent, and we lucked getting Vince in 20's. Don't see that elite DL talent this yr.

My point was in response to your claim about sacks. When it comes to the Patriots under Belichick, the team's ranking in sacks has tracked team success in almost a 1:1 situation.

Best 5 years = best 5 rankings

2001, the famous "worst Super Bowl winner ever!" year, is the only time the team's gotten to the AFCCG or better without being ranked in the league's top 10 in sacks, and they were 13th that year, which is still better than any of the years they failed to reach the AFCCG.

 

[MaineMan]

....... BB won't shell $$ for 2 first Rd picks. Money is better used to sign a FA if they can pry Hali or Woodley.

I don't think BB is ever extremely concerned with a draft pick's cost in terms of $$. Especially this year, since the Pats payroll is probably the lowest it's been in the past decade. If he doesn't use both 1st round picks, it seems to me more likely that he simply didn't need to spend the draft trade value points to get the guys he wanted.

I don't see more than 5-6 players BB will bring onto this team from the draft.

Not sure why this would be true. We're allowed to have 80 players on the off-season roster and I can see us easily being 9-12 guys below that number by draft day. I don't know why he wouldn't fill those vacancies with competition for the existing players if there are guys in the draft he's interested in and he has the pick ammo to move around to get them.

 

[bucky]

We've already learnt over many years BB won't invest in LB in Rd1 unless he get's top echelon talent.

You can replace the "LB" in that statement with any other position and it'll come out the same. However, this draft is deep enough with front 7 talent to think BB would be able to get a good one at 17 or with a trade up. In terms of CB, it's quite debatable whether any corner in this draft besides Peterson would be an upgrade over Bodden at any point in his career.

 

[Shelterdog]

I don't think BB is ever extremely concerned with a draft pick's cost in terms of $$. Especially this year, since the Pats payroll is probably the lowest it's been in the past decade. If he doesn't use both 1st round picks, it seems to me more likely that he simply didn't need to spend the draft trade value points to get the guys he wanted.


Not sure why this would be true. We're allowed to have 80 players on the off-season roster and I can see us easily being 9-12 guys below that number by draft day. I don't know why he wouldn't fill those vacancies with competition for the existing players if there are guys in the draft he's interested in and he has the pick ammo to move around to get them.

* First round picks outside of the top eight aren't that expensive. McCourty's cap value was 1.3 million last year, which is not much when the cap was 129 million the least year there was a cap.

* Rosters will probably be bigger next year so there will be more spots for late draft picks.

 

[IcyPatriot]

I don't think you can ever have too many good corners.

Especially if your pass rushers are among the worst in football.

There is a stronger correlation to (passes defended +INT's) among the top playoff teams than there was to sacks and the top playoff teams. I have one of the top corners in my mock and many told me they hope we do not draft a CB early - i think they are wrong.

 

[DonBlackmon55]

It's about bringing pressure. Yeah, I think most of us get that. Unless someone has paid for access to Pro-Football-Focus stats that include QB hits and pressures, as well as TFL, the most any of us has to go by as a crude estimate of pressure is sacks. And it doesn't seem extremely unreasonable to guess that a team that gets more sacks is also getting more "near-miss" pressures.

In terms of the other results of pressure, the Pats led the league in INTs in 2010 and, IIRC, were also pretty high on the FF list.

Really ? So, by that theory Vrabel's 12.5 sacks in 2007 would've meant he's was bringing same "pressure" as Mario Williams (13) or Osi U (13), Demarcus Ware (14), or Jared Allen league leading 15.5.

Statistically this was an odd year for Pats as they've never been known for creating many turnovers, and on the other hand BJGE did not fumble, and Brady had an unreal streak of TD/int ratio. At the end of the day Pats again were putting up 30+ points a game and opponents had to throw o play catchup, which will result in more opportunities for INT.

Furthermore, secondary was viewed as "weak spot" by opponents, and they lucky for us McCourty stepped up like he did, else your're back to avg int #'s past 5 yrs. Past few years Pats have averaged 14-18 int's/ yr, and there was a huge dropoff after Asante left.

 

[DonBlackmon55]

I don't think BB is ever extremely concerned with a draft pick's cost in terms of $$. Especially this year, since the Pats payroll is probably the lowest it's been in the past decade. If he doesn't use both 1st round picks, it seems to me more likely that he simply didn't need to spend the draft trade value points to get the guys he wanted.

its not money issue for today's $'s....Its looking at tomorrow's $...come 2013 and 2014 this team will have "many" players ready to exit rookie contracts, you cant' pay everyone today and expect to field a competitive team tomorrow. Well, I suppose you could like the clown in DC


Not sure why this would be true. We're allowed to have 80 players on the off-season roster and I can see us easily being 9-12 guys below that number by draft day. I don't know why he wouldn't fill those vacancies with competition for the existing players if there are guys in the draft he's interested in and he has the pick ammo to move around to get them.

53 is your roster, not 80. Outside of RB, OL, DL and maybe WR(already have two young ones in Tate and Price), where are the open spots ???? QB ? TE ? K, P ? LB ? CB ? S ?....8 players made the team and layed for Pats from 2010 draft. Expecting another 7-8 to draft (just for competition and then cut ?)or make it, resulting in 1/3 of your team with less than 2 yrs experience ?????? wow, just wow - BB is good, but not a miracle worker.

Some of these 2011 picks are better value in future years with FA departures expected from team

 

[West Philly Patriot]

If the draft board unfolded this way I would take Aldon Smith at 17, Gabe Carimi at 28 and trade down a few spots from 33 and take Wilkerson.

This draft would be f*ckin tits

 

[FredFromDartmouth]

I was not overly impressed with Amukamara from what I saw of his highlights. He is no McCourty; if he was then you take him in a heartbeat--two shutdown CBs easily translates into a superior pass-rush (i.e. blitz).

 

[MaineMan]

53 is your roster, not 80. Outside of RB, OL, DL and maybe WR(already have two young ones in Tate and Price), where are the open spots ???? QB ? TE ? K, P ? LB ? CB ? S ?....8 players made the team and layed for Pats from 2010 draft. Expecting another 7-8 to draft (just for competition and then cut ?)or make it, resulting in 1/3 of your team with less than 2 yrs experience ?????? wow, just wow - BB is good, but not a miracle worker.

Some of these 2011 picks are better value in future years with FA departures expected from team

So, the rule now limits off-season rosters to 53? Really?

I only mention this because that's what I was talking about. Now, just so I'm sure I have this straight, since you appear to be implying that I'm an idiot, I've been under the impression that you get 80 guys to work with through OTAs and camp and then you whittle that down to the best 61 - 53 on the active rosterplus 8 on the P/S. So, it seems to me that the more fresh talent you start with in that 80, the more likely that your final 61 will be better because at least a few of those positions, including the roster end, can almost always stand some upgrades.

It's also been my observation that pretty much every year, someone says, "well, you know, there really isn't any room on the final roster for more than a handful of guys, so the Pats won't draft more than that because they extra ones don't have any chance of making the team". And yet, the Pats seem to nearly always draft more than that AND to sign a few additional UDFAs. Wonder of wonders, quite often, one or two or three of those late rounders - and even, sometimes, UDFAs - make the 53 or, at least, the P/S and eventually turn into active players with some value - guys who we wouldn't have at all if BB actually followed the notion that he shouldn't draft more guys than we "have room for" based on last year's 53-man roster.

So, am I completely off base here? Is there anything else you'd like to explain to me like I'm a 3-year-old?