Clady, Ellis the keys?

[BelichickFan]

If Clady's gone by #7, we better hope that someone wants McFadden, Ryan, or Ellis.

I'm mixed on whether I want them gone by our pick or not. I largely do as they are very talented at positions we don't need so other players make more sense - but if one or more of that list is there for us, they're strong trade down possibilities - top athletes and good DT are something teams will trade up for.

 

[BradyManny]

We all like to talk about the Patriots trading down from #7, but realistically what you really have to ask is who would want to trade up, and why. Let's say the top 6 go something like this (I'm using Drew Boylhart's latest mock, fwiw):

1. Vernon Gholston
2. Chris Long
3. Matt Ryan
4. Glen Dorsey
5. Jake Long
6. Darren McFadden

To shell out the picks and $$$ to move up to #7, a team has to see a premier talent at a big-money position of need...and most of all, a big dropoff between that player and the next guy at the position. To me, there are just two guys who fill the bill: Clady and Ellis.

By my reckoning, teams picking 9-16 with a major need at DT & OT are (*=likely top priority):

9* - Bengals (DT)
10 - Saints (DT)
11 - Bills (DT)
12 - Broncos (DT, OT)
13* - Panthers (OT)
14* - Bears (OT)
15 - Lions (OT)
16 - Cardinals (OT)

Interesting, no? I really believe that every single one of those teams would take one of Ellis and Clady if they were available. Any thoughts on who might be willing to pull the trigger to move up?

Good post - another good question is what teams - if any - ahead of us might want to trade down, thus making it harder for us to make a trade down.

Personally, if Clady is there at 7, I would be extremely pleased if we took him. I'm happy with a trade down, too, but I would love getting Clady. Just imagine what our offense would look like

 

[ayjackson]

12 - Broncos (DT, OT)
13* - Panthers (OT)
14* - Bears (OT)
15 - Lions (OT)
16 - Cardinals (OT)

I think there's a sincere interest for Clady by teams 13 and 14...not sure about the Broncs at 12, or any of the others listed. With so many teams in succession needing an OT (will take your word for it), makes sense for at least one to attempt to leapfrog someone, and deal with the Pats.

I won't be surprised if the Pats take Clady, as he's only one of two I think we'd consider at 7. But if protecting Brady seems to be the order of the day, I'd still trade down, acquire extra picks, and select OT Chris Williams. He's consistently ranked as the 3rd best OT overall, while some scouts feel he may be the best pass blocking tackle in the draft.

Of course the listed teams could also take Williams, or even Otah rather than trade up for Clady. My suggested scenario only works if one team is enamored with Clady, and by nature, most teams do get attached to specific players.

If Clady's gone by #7, we better hope that someone wants McFadden, Ryan, or Ellis.

Weren't you the SEC expert who absolutely slaughtered Williams for his run blocking abilities? If he is that bad, is there any point in having a grader like Mankins next to a sieve like Williams in the running game?

 

[Metaphors]

Personally, if Clady is there at 7, I would be extremely pleased if we took him. I'm happy with a trade down, too, but I would love getting Clady. Just imagine what our offense would look like

The Pats offense as currently constructed will likely average 30+ points in 2008. Adding another piece to the offense will likely not add significantly to that total. Not that it can't be improved...just that you generally don't need to score 40 points very often to win.

The Pats defense as currently constructed is solid but very unspectacular. Pick #7 is almost an unprecedented asset for a SB contender to have. The opportunity is now to take a significant step towards making the defense younger and faster..."bend but don't break" becomes "seek and destroy".

 

[BradyManny]

The Pats offense as currently constructed will likely average 30+ points in 2008. Adding another piece to the offense will likely not add significantly to that total. Not that it can't be improved...just that you generally don't need to score 40 points very often to win.

The Pats defense as currently constructed is solid but very unspectacular. Pick #7 is almost an unprecedented asset for a SB contender to have. The opportunity is now to take a significant step towards making the defense younger and faster..."bend but don't break" becomes "seek and destroy".

They can average 30+ points in the regular season again, but what if their OL disappears in the big game again? Drafting a CB at 7 is too expensive, drafting Gholston carries some risk as he'll be a DE to OLB conversion. Drafting Clady at 7 is actually the safest and surest way to improve the team not just in 2008, but beyond.

Kazcur is adequate at RT, but Brady deserves better than adequate. On top of that, Clady could eventually move to LT. It's a good long term deal. And it would improve our running game tremendously, which is very important. We need to be able to run the ball if and when teams find ways to shut down the passing game (Super Bowl). Clady would help do that, as he projects to be a great blocker both in the passing game and running game.

That said, I'd be very happy with Gholston as well. But, given what Scarnecchia has done with less, given that he'd be blocking for one of the best QBs of all time and could start out on the right-side, I'd feel the most confident about Clady living up to his draft pick and the contract that comes with it.

 

[Seneschal2]

Weren't you the SEC expert who absolutely slaughtered Williams for his run blocking abilities?

Nope -- not me.

I'm no self-proclaimed "SEC expert", but do follow the conference closely. And don't remember ever "slaughtering" any draft prospect, as that's not my style.

As a matter of FACT, I only have two posts on Williams, the one in this thread -- and this one here:

The Pats going OT is not a surprise at all. We may go Chris Williams instead of Clady -- which wouldn't shock me considering he's thought by some to be the best pass blocking OT in this draft (Long and Clady are considered better run blockers).

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?p=807123

So next time, get your FACTS straight before you kick into attack mode.

 

[Metaphors]

They can average 30+ points in the regular season again, but what if their OL disappears in the big game again?

The entire OL (even Mankins) laid an egg. Drafting Clady upgrades the group, but by itself doesn't make the Pats immune to a collective hairball coughed up by the OL during the playoffs.

It isn't that I don't like Clady (and the plan to groom him for LT in a couple of years) but the #7 pick is 1500 value points in a draft. For some perspective, that is more value than an entire draft from where the Pats are used to selecting. Let me state that again...the Giants could offer their entire draft for #7 and still not come out with equal value.

I know the draft value chart is a little bit silly, but it does illustrate the opportunity the Pats have to transform the team, not just get an incremental improvement. That opportunity can be realized by using #7 and getting a game-changing talent...or trading back a little and accumulating talent in this draft...or trading back more and getting a #1 next year.

How great is it to be a Super Bowl favorite and have those kind of options? I would be fairly confident with an OT contingent of Light, Kaczur, O'Callaghan, Britt and mid-to-late round youngsters. Add to the defense a draft haul of Gholston, Patrick Lee, Jonathan Goff and Chevis Jackson. By playoff time, the D will be killer.

If you don't like the defensive options at #7, how about trading down and selecting DRC or Talib at a more reasonable pricetag? Mayo or Lofton can be added later and the results are similar. The added benefit of not having to hear about the "elderly" Pats defense every week makes it all the better.

 

[Seneschal2]

The entire OL (even Mankins) laid an egg. Drafting Clady upgrades the group, but by itself doesn't make the Pats immune to a collective hairball coughed up by the OL during the playoffs.

:ditto: -- Yes -- I agree.

 

[ayjackson]

Nope -- not me.

I'm no self-proclaimed "SEC expert", but do follow the conference closely. And don't remember ever "slaughtering" any draft prospect, as that's not my style.

As a matter of FACT, I only have two posts on Williams, the one in this thread -- and this one here:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?p=807123

So next time, get your FACTS straight before you kick into attack mode.

Attack mode? Sorry - not my style. I was merely asking. I apologize if it came across that way. I remember Dryheat asking for someone's opinion on Williams as a SEC expert. That person compared his run blocking abilities to Watsons, I beleive. Again, if it wasn't you, I apologize.

 

[dryheat44]

Attack mode? Sorry - not my style. I was merely asking. I apologize if it came across that way. I remember Dryheat asking for someone's opinion on Williams as a SEC expert. That person compared his run blocking abilities to Watsons, I beleive. Again, if it wasn't you, I apologize.

That was Ochmed Jones, who's observations I take very seriously, especially for teams I tend not to watch...like Vanderbilt. Since then, I've moved him down my draft board.


If Kansas City drafts Otah at #5, they might as well just save money by not attending the draft. If they really covet Otah that highly, then they'll either trade out of that pick and take him later in the round, or they'll draft someone else, like Ellis, and then make a move for Otah later. I think they could probably stand pat and take Otah with their second rounder, but maybe they'll want to move up 10-12 spots to make sure.

 

[mike100915]

There is a 0% chance that the Chiefs take Otah at #5. He's probably going to be the 4th tackle drafted. From my observations, Otah looks like he has Bust writen all over him. If the Chiefs were to take Otah at #5, Carl Petersen should be immediately fired. On another note, how does Peterson still have a job? I have always thought he is one of the most over-rated GM's in the league.

 

[patchick]

The entire OL (even Mankins) laid an egg. Drafting Clady upgrades the group, but by itself doesn't make the Pats immune to a collective hairball coughed up by the OL during the playoffs.

I'll third that. Overall, the Pats o-line is a strength, not a weakness, and reasonably young to boot. I like Clady as a fallback if necessary at #7, because an LT with his potential is valuable enough to be worth the pick...not because I consider OL a priority need area. Basically, the team is strong enough that I want a high-value impact player with a rare body type at #7, period. As far as I can see that means:

Tier 1: (forget a trade, just take 'em) Long, Long, Gholston
Tier 2: (try to trade first) Clady, and if absolutely necessary Groves

I fully believe tier 1 will be gone at #7, which is why I started this thread.

BTW, the list above isn't a knock on the CB class -- quite the contrary. It's the best crop of CBs in years, which IMO gives the team the luxury to wait (as compared to last year, when the Jets had to give up the farm for the one corner who looked worth it).

 

[dryheat44]

I'll third that. Overall, the Pats o-line is a strength, not a weakness, and reasonably young to boot. I like Clady as a fallback if necessary at #7, because an LT with his potential is valuable enough to be worth the pick...not because I consider OL a priority need area. Basically, the team is strong enough that I want a high-value impact player with a rare body type at #7, period. As far as I can see that means:

Tier 1: (forget a trade, just take 'em) Long, Long, Gholston
Tier 2: (try to trade first) Clady, and if absolutely necessary Groves

.

Wow...this is exactly the way I see it too, with a possible trade upwards for J Long.

 

[DaBruinz]

Laurinaitis, Maualuga and Beckwith are all 1st round picks (probably top half). When was the last time you saw 3 that high? If Spikes comes out (likely) he is in that mix as well.

Sean Lee will likely play at least some ILB for PSU this year. Brian Cushing is an OLB but has the build and skill set to play ILB for the Pats. They are both 1st round picks.

I guess "loaded" is in the eye of the beholder...but I can't remember ever seeing that many 1st round quality LBs in a single draft before.

It wasn't that long ago. In fact, it was just last year. Willis, Posluszny, Beason and Harris were ALL 1st rounders and expected to be 1st rounders.

As for Larinaitis, Maualuga and Beckwith being top half of the 1st round, its unlikely.

As for Lee, what makes you so sure he'll see time at MLB (PSU runs the 4-3 primarlily if I am not mistaken). Also, projecting Cushing to be at ILB might be a bit of a stretch. But only time will tell.

Again, I don't see it as being "stacked". But that is now. That can change by the time the draft rolls around next year.

 

[Metaphors]

Basically, the team is strong enough that I want a high-value impact player with a rare body type at #7, period. As far as I can see that means:

Tier 1: (forget a trade, just take 'em) Long, Long, Gholston
Tier 2: (try to trade first) Clady, and if absolutely necessary Groves

I fully believe tier 1 will be gone at #7, which is why I started this thread.

I'm assuming you like Jake Long so much you mentioned him twice
Seriously, my worst fear is to see Chris Long on the board at #7. I'm in ACC country so I've seen quite a few UVA games and he is a fine player. There are a couple of things to consider:
1) He played in college at about 6'4"/285 lbs.
2) He played DE in a 3-4 alignment.
3) He did his best work when penetrating into the backfield.

This would make him the next Jarvis Green, not the next Willie McGinest...and we already have the current Jarvis Green under contract. Long might be able to transition to LB quickly and become a standout, but there is no game evidence to say one way or the other. That kind of risk is unsettling for me at #7.

BTW, the list above isn't a knock on the CB class -- quite the contrary. It's the best crop of CBs in years, which IMO gives the team the luxury to wait (as compared to last year, when the Jets had to give up the farm for the one corner who looked worth it).

There are also a lot of teams with CB needs. While I agree with the feeling that #7 is too high for just about any CB (at least in the Pats value system), I also think that you could see a dozen CBs come off the board between the middle of the 1st and the middle of the 2nd.

My ideal scenario if Gholston is off the board is to trade back to about 15 (still get a 6 year deal) or 20 (less money and more trade value) and pick up one of the top CBs. After the rest of the teams panic and scoop up the scraps, the Pats can likely wait well into the second day to pick up another CB at a good value.

 

[DaBruinz]

12 - Broncos (DT, OT)
13* - Panthers (OT)
14* - Bears (OT)
15 - Lions (OT)
16 - Cardinals (OT)

I think there's a sincere interest for Clady by teams 13 and 14...not sure about the Broncs at 12, or any of the others listed. With so many teams in succession needing an OT (will take your word for it), makes sense for at least one to attempt to leapfrog someone, and deal with the Pats.

I won't be surprised if the Pats take Clady, as he's only one of two I think we'd consider at 7. But if protecting Brady seems to be the order of the day, I'd still trade down, acquire extra picks, and select OT Chris Williams. He's consistently ranked as the 3rd best OT overall, while some scouts feel he may be the best pass blocking tackle in the draft.

Of course the listed teams could also take Williams, or even Otah rather than trade up for Clady. My suggested scenario only works if one team is enamored with Clady, and by nature, most teams do get attached to specific players.

If Clady's gone by #7, we better hope that someone wants McFadden, Ryan, or Ellis.

I just don't see Williams as being a fit for the Patriots. He's not mobile. He very rarely gets to the 2nd level on screens and run blocking. He's not a mauler. He's described as a "finesse blocker". That's not a good thing.

 

[ayjackson]

I'm assuming you like Jake Long so much you mentioned him twice
Seriously, my worst fear is to see Chris Long on the board at #7. I'm in ACC country so I've seen quite a few UVA games and he is a fine player. There are a couple of things to consider:
1) He played in college at about 6'4"/285 lbs.
2) He played DE in a 3-4 alignment.
3) He did his best work when penetrating into the backfield.

This would make him the next Jarvis Green, not the next Willie McGinest...and we already have the current Jarvis Green under contract. Long might be able to transition to LB quickly and become a standout, but there is no game evidence to say one way or the other. That kind of risk is unsettling for me at #7.



There are also a lot of teams with CB needs. While I agree with the feeling that #7 is too high for just about any CB (at least in the Pats value system), I also think that you could see a dozen CBs come off the board between the middle of the 1st and the middle of the 2nd.

My ideal scenario if Gholston is off the board is to trade back to about 15 (still get a 6 year deal) or 20 (less money and more trade value) and pick up one of the top CBs. After the rest of the teams panic and scoop up the scraps, the Pats can likely wait well into the second day to pick up another CB at a good value.

Although Long played DE in a 3-4 at college, Groh's 3-4 usually had him lining up outside the tackle (5 technique?). It seems that this style bears more similarity to a 4-3 end or 3-4 OLB (Belichick) than a 2-gap DE in our defense. It is a rush end position - which is why he projects nicely to a 4-3 DE or 3-4 OLB. And like Dryheat, I'm not convinced he couldn't play an effective ILB in our system a la Adalius Thomas.

 

[ayjackson]

I'll third that. Overall, the Pats o-line is a strength, not a weakness, and reasonably young to boot. I like Clady as a fallback if necessary at #7, because an LT with his potential is valuable enough to be worth the pick...not because I consider OL a priority need area. Basically, the team is strong enough that I want a high-value impact player with a rare body type at #7, period. As far as I can see that means:

Tier 1: (forget a trade, just take 'em) Long, Long, Gholston
Tier 2: (try to trade first) Clady, and if absolutely necessary Groves

I fully believe tier 1 will be gone at #7, which is why I started this thread.

BTW, the list above isn't a knock on the CB class -- quite the contrary. It's the best crop of CBs in years, which IMO gives the team the luxury to wait (as compared to last year, when the Jets had to give up the farm for the one corner who looked worth it).

I'm with you almost every step of the way. It's just that, if we can't trade the pick and Long, Long, Gholston and Clady are gone, I'll go with Leodis McKelvin over Groves and be content that I was fortunate enough to get the next great Trojan (proper trojan - one who hails from Troy).

That way I don't have to rely on finding a trading partner in the early second to land Cason or Flowers or Porter.

 

[dryheat44]

I just don't see Williams as being a fit for the Patriots. He's not mobile. He very rarely gets to the 2nd level on screens and run blocking. He's not a mauler. He's described as a "finesse blocker". That's not a good thing.

I think both of our current tackles could be described as "finesse blockers". They certainly don't qualify as maulers, so maybe that's not so important to Belichick.

 

[Metaphors]

It wasn't that long ago. In fact, it was just last year. Willis, Posluszny, Beason and Harris were ALL 1st rounders and expected to be 1st rounders.

Posluszny and Harris were 2nd round picks. Beason was a late 1st. Willis shot Gholston-like through the rankings with his workouts. Posluszny went in the opposite direction. All of them were taken about where they were ranked just before the draft.

As for Larinaitis, Maualuga and Beckwith being top half of the 1st round, its unlikely.

I'm referring to where they will be ranked, not where they will be taken...so in general I agree with you. You don't see that many LBs taken that high since bad teams typically have much bigger fish to fry than LB.

As for ranking them, I would be surprised if Larinaitis and Maualuga aren't top 15. Beckwith has some work to do, but has the potential to get a mid-first round grade. Spikes is a stud and should test off the charts if he comes out.

As for Lee, what makes you so sure he'll see time at MLB (PSU runs the 4-3 primarlily if I am not mistaken). Also, projecting Cushing to be at ILB might be a bit of a stretch. But only time will tell.

Penn State is a base 4-3 team (I think that is still true) but runs "exotic" formations a lot since they usually have lots of strong LBs and relatively few lineman. Posluszny and Connor both switched from outside to inside and I've heard that Lee may do the same with Connor gone. I supposed PSU could run exclusively from the 4-3 or keep Lee exclusively outside, but given recent history I would say it is a good bet Lee will see significant time inside.

I agree that Cushing is an OLB, will be evaluated as an OLB and will be drafted as an OLB. My point was he has the size and skill set that could translate well to any of the LB positions. I would think that Adalius-like flexibility would be coveted by the Pats.

At the end of last year, Lee and Cushing were playing as well as their more famous teammates. I would expect both of them to get 1st round grades next year.

Again, I don't see it as being "stacked". But that is now. That can change by the time the draft rolls around next year.

It is all guesswork at this point. I could see the 6 LBs I mentioned as grading out in the top 32 next year. That is HUGE considering there will likely be other OLBs and DE hybrids in the mix as well. Even picking at 32, the Pats could have a reasonable expectation of getting a solid LB at a great value. If they could trade into the 2009 1st round (come on Tampa Bay!) then there would be a possibility of getting two. I'm just excited that the Pats could use the 2008 (CB) and 2009 (LB) drafts to transition the defense to a young, dominant unit while the offense is still at its peak.