Dr. Nut's 53 man roster 8/24/08

[Jimke]

Re: Dr.Nut's 53 man roster 8/24/08

IMHO, to believe that Guyton and Redd are one and two years from replacing Bruschi and Vrabel is the worst analysis of any poster this year.

Izzo and Alexander will never replace them.

 

[mgteich]

Re: Dr.Nut's 53 man roster 8/24/08

Next year's first and third might.

We also have Thomas, Mayo, Crable, and Woods. Those are potential FOUR starters, not even counting support from backups Bruschi and Vrabel and next year's draft choices. We're fine without stealing two positions from our special teams. And just BTW, I suspect that Belichick had Alexander as a lock weeks ago.

Izzo and Alexander will never replace them.

 

[loosebearing]

Re: Dr.Nut's 53 man roster 8/24/08

Next year's first and third might.

... And just BTW, I suspect that Belichick had Alexander as a lock weeks ago.

I don't get the fascination for Alexander. If my grandma played TE Alexander would tackle her after a 15yd reception.

Crable, Guyton, Redd, Tank Willams, Lynch (plus an improving Woods)

To me that's writing on the blackboard for Mr Alexander

 

[Rob0729]

Re: Dr.Nut's 53 man roster 8/24/08

I like the sentiment, but if Dr. Nut is cutting Spann, who plays acceptably against 1st teamers, how do you keep a guy who we've only seen against 2nd teamers?

Rob0729, I do think you make roster decisions on whether a player can pass through waivers. The bottom of the roster won't be active on game day. At the beginning of the season, those last spots are precisely for players who the team calculates will not make it through waivers. They are scouting other teams full time to see their needs and make educated guesses, which is why it's so hard for simple-minded fans like us to predict the bottom of the roster.

With all the holding onto some players and cutting others before and after the first game, teams are obviously scheming around how to sneak guys onto their practice squad after other teams have finalized their rosters. It may only be for one or two players, like Ventrone or Spann or Redd or Guyton, but that's who we're talking about.

Roster spots are too precious to hold onto players who cannot contribute right now. Next year there will be a whole new set of Guytons and Redds to choose from. If one of these guys can contribute now, then it is worth considering to keep. But I can't remember a player that the Pats kept on the 53 man roster because they just wanted to hold onto them for future development and they wouldn't pass through waivers. Every player on the roster typically can serve a function even if they may be one of the ones not activated on Sunday.

If you look at the Pats non-activated players list, it changes from week to week. Some weeks they may feel they need to activate a different LB or WR or RB, etc. It isn't just based on injuries.

Again, if Belichick feels one or more of these guys can contribute this year even if it isn't every week, then they will keep him. If they think the guy will have a chance to do something in a year or two, they will cut him and take their chances on waivers.

For example, if Matt Slater doesn't show that he can return kicks now and potentially take the spot from Hobbs or at least find other rolls on special teams, then he will get waived. The Pats aren't going to keep a back up kick returner on the roster just because he has potential and he may not pass through waivers.

People overrate their homegrown talent anyway. Most of our UDFAs could easily pass through waivers anyway. Every team has simliar guys who will get waived. The only difference is we don't watch them at all during the preseason.

 

[WhiZa]

Re: Dr.Nut's 53 man roster 8/24/08

I don't get the fascination for Alexander. If my grandma played TE Alexander would tackle her after a 15yd reception.

Crable, Guyton, Redd, Tank Willams, Lynch (plus an improving Woods)

To me that's writing on the blackboard for Mr Alexander

Agreed, but I dont know your grandma.

Guyton, Redd, Crable, Mayo all have out played Alexander this preseason. Him and Hobson are fighting for a roster spot.

 

[loosebearing]

Re: Dr.Nut's 53 man roster 8/24/08

Agreed, but I dont know your grandma.

Guyton, Redd, Crable, Mayo all have out played Alexander this preseason. Him and Hobson are fighting for a roster spot.

She doesn't have great moves - but she can make the most of her frame to catch the ball - like Ben Coates

 

[Mike the Brit]

Re: Dr.Nut's 53 man roster 8/24/08

KO and PR- we have Jackson, Faulk (PR), Hobbs, Wheatley , and Welker (PR).

I'm not thrilled with this.

Jackson: is he sure-handed enough?
Faulk: he's reliable but won't give opposing teams nightmares.
Hobbs: Certainly not -- too valuable to expose to risk! Given where we are with our cornerbacks, we can't afford to take risks with the only one with extensive experience in the system.
Wheatley: yes, maybe -- I haven't seen him enough.
Welker: Certainly not! (See under Hobbs. Let's hope the worst hasn't already happened.)

What I'm saying is that a specialist return man would be a very useful addition to the team. I'm not sure that Slater is it, but, if he has the talent, he would be a very good addition to the 53.

 

[PatsFan37]

Re: Dr.Nut's 53 man roster 8/24/08

Roster spots are too precious to hold onto players who cannot contribute right now. Next year there will be a whole new set of Guytons and Redds to choose from. If one of these guys can contribute now, then it is worth considering to keep. But I can't remember a player that the Pats kept on the 53 man roster because they just wanted to hold onto them for future development and they wouldn't pass through waivers.

Let me refresh your memory. From Reiss last year.

Rookie Matt Gutierrez is the big winner, as the quarterback showed too much in the preseason to risk losing him. He beats out Vinny Testaverde.

Would you hand your offense over to a rookie UDFA instead of Vinny? Not a chance. So why keep him? Even Reiss says 'they didn't wan't to risk losing him.' Losing him to what? To waivers.

Last year is the only year I could find but it illustrates the point since the rookie class was awful and the veteran roster was hyper-competitive. This year the rookie class is strong, particularly the UDFA linebackers.

 

[BradyToMoss]

I like your 53, Moss on the bubble put me on the floor, thanks for the chuckle, that was great.

Love Ventrone, love to see him as the new fullback in place of Evans, I'm sure he could block just as well and give you more out of the passing game, are you reading this BB.

Your new fullback is Ray Ventrone, that's how he sticks............

 

[murphysbuddylove]

I like your 53, Moss on the bubble put me on the floor, thanks for the chuckle, that was great.

Love Ventrone, love to see him as the new fullback in place of Evans, I'm sure he could block just as well and give you more out of the passing game, are you reading this BB.

Your new fullback is Ray Ventrone, that's how he sticks............

Wow the comedy continues. Lets replace Evans with Ventrone at fullback. hahahahaahahhahahhahahahhahahah

 

[ALP]

its almost 100% correct...

take out one of flynn/welbourne and add ventrone

and u got urself a pretty nice roster

 

[PATSNUTme]

Re: Dr.Nut's 53 man roster 8/24/08

I'm not thrilled with this.

Jackson: is he sure-handed enough?
Faulk: he's reliable but won't give opposing teams nightmares.
Hobbs: Certainly not -- too valuable to expose to risk! Given where we are with our cornerbacks, we can't afford to take risks with the only one with extensive experience in the system.
Wheatley: yes, maybe -- I haven't seen him enough.
Welker: Certainly not! (See under Hobbs. Let's hope the worst hasn't already happened.)

What I'm saying is that a specialist return man would be a very useful addition to the team. I'm not sure that Slater is it, but, if he has the talent, he would be a very good addition to the 53.

Mike, Welker was used on punt returns last year. They are using Hobbs on KR in pre-season. I'll also add Maroney to KR people. And CJ did get off some nice KR's as a rookie. Expect to see him back there as he was in this years Training Camp practice that I went to.

 

[mgteich]

Re: Dr.Nut's 53 man roster 8/24/08

I agree that if Slater had the talent to be a top returner, he would be a welcome to the team. However, he has shown little. I'd rather have Faulk out there and keep a 5th running back on the roster.

I'm not thrilled with this.

Jackson: is he sure-handed enough?
Faulk: he's reliable but won't give opposing teams nightmares.
Hobbs: Certainly not -- too valuable to expose to risk! Given where we are with our cornerbacks, we can't afford to take risks with the only one with extensive experience in the system.
Wheatley: yes, maybe -- I haven't seen him enough.
Welker: Certainly not! (See under Hobbs. Let's hope the worst hasn't already happened.)

What I'm saying is that a specialist return man would be a very useful addition to the team. I'm not sure that Slater is it, but, if he has the talent, he would be a very good addition to the 53.

 

[Jimke]

Re: Dr.Nut's 53 man roster 8/24/08

Mike, Welker was used on punt returns last year. They are using Hobbs on KR in pre-season. I'll also add Maroney to KR people. And CJ did get off some nice KR's as a rookie. Expect to see him back there as he was in this years Training Camp practice that I went to.

Belichick has never let the fact a player is a starter keep him from

using him on special teams. Welker will return punts because he is

the best man for the job. Same with Hobbs and Maroney on kickoff

returns.

 

[alvinnf]

Re: Dr.Nut's 53 man roster 8/24/08

Belichick has never let the fact a player is a starter keep him from

using him on special teams. Welker will return punts because he is

the best man for the job. Same with Hobbs and Maroney on kickoff

returns.

I think he manages those players in that role now, maybe more than he used to. Welkers the best punt returner on the roster but that does'nt make him the punt returner. Troy b. used to be the sure handed guy when he had lost a step , then he lost the football in denver.

 

[patchick]

Re: Dr.Nut's 53 man roster 8/24/08

Roster spots are too precious to hold onto players who cannot contribute right now. Next year there will be a whole new set of Guytons and Redds to choose from.

OK...but next year's "Guytons and Redds" won't be able to contribute right away either, so you'll have to cut them, too, right?

At some point you have to take the long view. If you want a young, athletic, inexpensive 2d- or 3rd- or 4th-year LB developing on your roster, you have to start by taking a chance and making room for an unready rookie. Not blindly, of course. But IF you think Guyton is likely to be more valuable in 2009-11 than Alexander will be for his final season of '08, IMO that's too big a sacrifice to the "contribute right now" principle.

 

[Mark Morse]

What about going with only 8 OL?

They ususally carry 9, but you have Ross and Neal coming back (hopefully) in week 7 (thats 6 games including the bye week). I would cut both Flynn and Welbourn. I believe if you have a veteran player (don't know the # of years required) on the roster in week one then his contract is guaranteed for the season if you cut him during teh season). Nobody wanated eiether of these guys and they should still be available if needed.

Ventrone may be the closet thing to Welker we have right now. If Welker can't go (broken or bruised ribs) then you might see Ventrone as that slot receiver.

Trade Jackson for whatever you can get for him.

 

[Metaphors]

Re: Dr.Nut's 53 man roster 8/24/08

I agree that if Slater had the talent to be a top returner, he would be a welcome to the team. However, he has shown little. I'd rather have Faulk out there and keep a 5th running back on the roster.

He was a top KR in college. He has 9 returns in the preseason for a 26+ average, getting to the 30 pretty much on every return. The reports from camp (I haven't visited any TC sessions myself) were universally positive on his speed, burst and decisiveness.

Can you describe what you mean by "shown little", putting it in the context of what you expected of him that would make you say he has "shown enough" or "shown a lot"? Bear in mind that a lot of Slater's resume is potential...obviously since he is a rookie.

 

[Jimke]

Re: Dr.Nut's 53 man roster 8/24/08

OK...but next year's "Guytons and Redds" won't be able to contribute right away either, so you'll have to cut them, too, right?

At some point you have to take the long view. If you want a young, athletic, inexpensive 2d- or 3rd- or 4th-year LB developing on your roster, you have to start by taking a chance and making room for an unready rookie. Not blindly, of course. But IF you think Guyton is likely to be more valuable in 2009-11 than Alexander will be for his final season of '08, IMO that's too big a sacrifice to the "contribute right now" principle.

I'm with you. For once I'd like to see the Pats develop a couple of

young guys before Bruschi and Vrabel retire. This year there are

five good young prospects to choose from.

 

[JSn]

Re: Dr.Nut's 53 man roster 8/24/08

He was a top KR in college. He has 9 returns in the preseason for a 26+ average, getting to the 30 pretty much on every return. The reports from camp (I haven't visited any TC sessions myself) were universally positive on his speed, burst and decisiveness.

Can you describe what you mean by "shown little", putting it in the context of what you expected of him that would make you say he has "shown enough" or "shown a lot"? Bear in mind that a lot of Slater's resume is potential...obviously since he is a rookie.

Does anyone get the feeling that Slater not returning any for TD's in the preseason has made half the forum change their mind that's he's a slick addition? Fickle. He was one ankle snag away from a big break like... twice.

IMO, he could end up having more regular season value than Desean.