Greg Hardy

[OldNEPatsFan]

I'll agree with the crazy part, plenty of trades and nothing to improve the team. Maybe Bill needs a collar and leash again

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

A lot of people on this board, as well as myself, feel that BB was the more aggressive risk taker and Pioli was the conservative and calm guy who balanced things out. Even though Belichick pretty much had the final say before-hand, I think now with Pioli gone, we will see risks more frequently.

Based on one draft class - BB went more conservative. Traded down and took a nice safe Safety in the second round. Traded up for a reserve NT. Took the sliding CB with the first round grade. Took the OT his OL coach had personally coached in the Shrine Game and worked out on his Pro-Day, but did it late in the second where he is willing to take a risk. Traded ahead into round two - twice - then grabbed his next "risk/reward" pick in the third where he's "risked" before, if more often with trades. Then at the end of the third where he usually goes back to sound fundamental players again. The four later rounds, 2 OL, 2 DL, a LS, and one "project." That is a very conservative draft.

Take a look at how Belichick operated this offseason, his first without Pioli. He quickly signed Bodden, Taylor, Baker, Galloway and Springs. Also signed McGowan and Paris Lenon. He traded Cassel and Vrable. Traded for and then cut Greg Lewis. Traded for Derrick Burgess. Traded LeKevin Smith and Russ Hochstein to Denver. Traded Seymour to Oakland days before the season started. Traded for and cut Alex Smith. Traded for Michael Matthews before eventually cutting him a few weeks into the season. Traded David Thomas. Traded for Prescott Burgess in the middle of the season and then cut him a week later. Traded Ellis Hobbs. Also moved around A LOT during the draft.

-- Bodden was NOT a quick signing, he had time to shop himself around before coming back and taking a one year "show me/rehab you" deal, cheap at the price.
-- Fred Taylor and Shawn Springs may be gambles, but not crazy ones, and they are paying dividends on the field and in the locker room.
-- Baker, to anyone who paid attention to him while in NY, was no gamble.
-- Galloway, for the price, that was penny ante poker - the same with Lenon, Smith, Matthews, and Lewis. They created good competition, and just how many day three draft picks will NE need in 2010?
-- LeKevin and Russ - do you really miss them? Thomas? Hobbs only because people are just now noticing the KR yardage isn't what it was - but how much of that is the new rules?
-- Prescott Burgess was claimed off waivers, then sent down to the PSquad where Baltimore - who cut him originally - re-signed him back because they were losing players. Where did it hurt anything?
-- Derrick Burgess - is a 3rd and a 5th that great a price to pay for a guy who is starting to round into shape within the NE system in time for the playoffs? You'd rather pay out Adailius money?
-- Seymour was the surprise move, but let's consider that he is a UFA at the start of the new season. NE gets a 2011 first, one almost all but guaranteed to be Top 15 and probably Top 10. Would Seymour have kept Brady healthy? Welker? Guaranteed a first round bye? You may see the Seymour trade as crazy, but it's the most logic driven, cold blooded, conservative move of the entire season - seriously - William F. Buckley is giving a big thumbs up in his grave.

That's a crazy offseason with an absurd amount of trades when you look at it a second time. Took some big risks, one being trading Seymour and Vrable, two vet leaders on this team.

Crazy? No. Absurd? Not in the least. Risky? All those trades, extra draft picks, they actually reduced risk - check out the theory of diversification in investing. It's been unconventional, but which team is more likely to make the playoffs each season anyway? Are you not entertained?

 

[BillBelichickFan79]

Based on one draft class - BB went more conservative. Traded down and took a nice safe Safety in the second round. Traded up for a reserve NT. Took the sliding CB with the first round grade. Took the OT his OL coach had personally coached in the Shrine Game and worked out on his Pro-Day, but did it late in the second where he is willing to take a risk. Traded ahead into round two - twice - then grabbed his next "risk/reward" pick in the third where he's "risked" before, if more often with trades. Then at the end of the third where he usually goes back to sound fundamental players again. The four later rounds, 2 OL, 2 DL, a LS, and one "project." That is a very conservative draft. -- Bodden was NOT a quick signing, he had time to shop himself around before coming back and taking a one year "show me/rehab you" deal, cheap at the price.
-- Fred Taylor and Shawn Springs may be gambles, but not crazy ones, and they are paying dividends on the field and in the locker room.
-- Baker, to anyone who paid attention to him while in NY, was no gamble.
-- Galloway, for the price, that was penny ante poker - the same with Lenon, Smith, Matthews, and Lewis. They created good competition, and just how many day three draft picks will NE need in 2010?
-- LeKevin and Russ - do you really miss them? Thomas? Hobbs only because people are just now noticing the KR yardage isn't what it was - but how much of that is the new rules?
-- Prescott Burgess was claimed off waivers, then sent down to the PSquad where Baltimore - who cut him originally - re-signed him back because they were losing players. Where did it hurt anything?
-- Derrick Burgess - is a 3rd and a 5th that great a price to pay for a guy who is starting to round into shape within the NE system in time for the playoffs? You'd rather pay out Adailius money?
-- Seymour was the surprise move, but let's consider that he is a UFA at the start of the new season. NE gets a 2011 first, one almost all but guaranteed to be Top 15 and probably Top 10. Would Seymour have kept Brady healthy? Welker? Guaranteed a first round bye? You may see the Seymour trade as crazy, but it's the most logic driven, cold blooded, conservative move of the entire season - seriously - William F. Buckley is giving a big thumbs up in his grave.Crazy? No. Absurd? Not in the least. Risky? All those trades, extra draft picks, they actually reduced risk - check out the theory of diversification in investing. It's been unconventional, but which team is more likely to make the playoffs each season anyway? Are you not entertained?

Agree that the draft was more conservative except for Tate, but we did a lot of wheeling and dealing.

I am by no means evaluating what he did/didn't do this offseason. You're evaluating the acquisitions, I was just stating that there was more action than there normally is. I was saying Belichick has been more dramatic in making changes than he was when with Pioli. I don't recall the seeing so many trades with when Pioli was here. I never said I didn't like these moves. In fact, I love a great deal of them. I was saying the big risk was moving two veteran leaders in Seymour and Vrabel, but I didn't say I didn't agree with the deals he has made.

I think the Seymour deal was a great. Getting a first round pick for an UFA is insane value. I liked the Burgess deal at the time, and still do because I think he will shine through in the playoffs. I liked the Baker and Taylor signings as well, wished we used Baker more than we do in the red zone.

I think you missed the point I was trying to make. Maybe I shouldn't have used the word risk as much as I did b/c I was only referring to the Seymour/Vrabel deals as the risks.

I was trying to say this was one of the more active/aggressive offseaons that I have seen us have in a while. I never recall us making that many deals during the offseason and significantly changing the roster. I don't think Belichick is afraid of making bold moves, and I think this could carry over into the draft this year. All I'm saying is without Pioli I think he is more willing to pull the trigger on guys like Hardy and Dunlap, who have some red flags, if he feels they are a fit. Just my opinion.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

All I'm saying is without Pioli I think he is more willing to pull the trigger on guys like Hardy and Dunlap, who have some red flags, if he feels they are a fit. Just my opinion.

Okay, but stories from 2003 come to mind in terms of team moves. As you say, the moves people get most bent over are either long term winners for the Pats or low risk/moderate gain moves that were cut to limit loss - after the struggles this team has had I'm glad to have them back in the playoffs, from here it's gravy and a couple good coin tosses for the Tennessee and Jacksonville picks.

As for Hardy or Dunlap - the talent is there, the intangibles are the sticking point and I continue to see BB being very conservative - trading down into the second round, extending middle/back of the roster players for manageable contracts, no major deals...it all says gambling is limited to the lowest limit tables away from the high rollers (and preferably away from the casino in a basement room with some buddies). Whether NE is 25 or 32 in the draft, I expect BB to shy away from intangible-risky prospects and draft another blue collar piece for his new team - DL, OL - nothing flashy. He'll probably use team's lust for pass rushers like these two to get a better trade value from his first rounder.

 

[BillBelichickFan79]

Okay, but stories from 2003 come to mind in terms of team moves. As you say, the moves people get most bent over are either long term winners for the Pats or low risk/moderate gain moves that were cut to limit loss - after the struggles this team has had I'm glad to have them back in the playoffs, from here it's gravy and a couple good coin tosses for the Tennessee and Jacksonville picks.

As for Hardy or Dunlap - the talent is there, the intangibles are the sticking point and I continue to see BB being very conservative - trading down into the second round, extending middle/back of the roster players for manageable contracts, no major deals...it all says gambling is limited to the lowest limit tables away from the high rollers (and preferably away from the casino in a basement room with some buddies). Whether NE is 25 or 32 in the draft, I expect BB to shy away from intangible-risky prospects and draft another blue collar piece for his new team - DL, OL - nothing flashy. He'll probably use team's lust for pass rushers like these two to get a better trade value from his first rounder.

I like the idea of getting "good value" but sometimes you need to go for the playmakers with the talent in the first round. I don't see a lot of playmakers other than Mayo when healthy at the LB position. A guy like Hardy, IMO, is someone who can come in and make game-changing plays at OLB, which we have lacked all season. He can get pressure on the QB and take over a game. Our pass rush has been horrific this year. Another LB is a guy like McClain who is basically playing in the same defense that we run.

Granted you might have to trade up for some of these guys, but there is a clear need for some playmakers on defense. Look at how the Jets have done in the draft. They've frequently traded up and have added quality talent like Revis, Mangold, D'Brickashaw, Keller, and Sanchez. I'm not suggesting trading away almost all of our picks and tying up the cap with a lot of big contracts to unproven rookies, but sometimes you have to go for the elite talent who is a gamechanger rather than the blue collar guy who is good but not great.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Playmakers are nice, but they need to be in the game to make a difference.

 

[BillBelichickFan79]

Playmakers are nice, but they need to be in the game to make a difference.

I do think people make more of Hardy's injuries than they should. He had that foot injury and had some complications but he seemed fully recovered to me going into this season.

He broke his wrist this year and tried to play through it at first, but that's an injury that should be easy to recover from. He was playing pretty well before he went down, and when a guy possesses the talent that Hardy has I find it hard for a wrist injury in his senior season to significantly decrease his value. I could see a torn ACL or suspension significantly hurting a draft stock like it did with Tate and will do with Blount, but I can't imagine a talent like Hardy sliding very far due to a broken wrist. Injuries like that are just a part of football. Even McGahee who suffered a horrific knee injury still went in the first round.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

I do think people make more of Hardy's injuries than they should. He had that foot injury and had some complications but he seemed fully recovered to me going into this season.

He broke his wrist this year and tried to play through it at first, but that's an injury that should be easy to recover from. He was playing pretty well before he went down, and when a guy possesses the talent that Hardy has I find it hard for a wrist injury in his senior season to significantly decrease his value. I could see a torn ACL or suspension significantly hurting a draft stock like it did with Tate and will do with Blount, but I can't imagine a talent like Hardy sliding very far due to a broken wrist. Injuries like that are just a part of football. Even McGahee who suffered a horrific knee injury still went in the first round.

How'd that work for Buffalo?

 

[BillBelichickFan79]

How'd that work for Buffalo?

I'd say it worked out fairly well for them, wouldn't you? He never regained that explosion and cutting ability that he once had after that devastating injury, but he still ended up being a good back for Buffalo. Obviously hindsight is 20/20, so you could say they should've taken Larry Johnson instead.

In his first two seasons on the Bills he basically had back to back 1200 yard seasons and 18 TD's in 04 and 05, and had a very productive first year with Baltimore with 1200 yards and 7 TD. He started off this season witha bang, leading the league in TD's at the end of September and having a 5.9 YPC average. He then inexplicably lost almost all of his carries to Ray Rice who took over as the feature back.

He did a lot more for Buffalo than Maroney has done for us. Maroney was the very durable, healthy, and consistent back that we took in the 1st round in 2006 who put up 3 straight seasons 1000+ rushing yards and double digit TD's. McGahee put up insane numbers at the U but still went first round even with his injury. I'd say McGahee has been the better choice up to this point, and that's coming from a big Maroney supporter.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Okay then:

McGahee drafted 2003 with the 23rd overall pick: He didn't play that season. Buffalo record: 6-10

2004: 1100+ yds in 11 games. Buffalo record: 9-7 (no playoffs)

2005: 1200+ yds in 15 games. Buffalo record: 5-11

2006: 900+ yds in 14 games. Buffalo record: 7-9

2007: traded to Baltimore for 2007 3 & 7, and 2008 3. Buffalo record: 7-9

You call him a win, I'd call him a neutral (at best). He's your to fall in love with; I don't expect him to last 4 preseason games, 16 regular season games, and 3-4 postseason games.

 

[mayoclinic]

Playmakers are nice, but they need to be in the game to make a difference.

That's why I probably favor Dunlap over Hardy right now.

 

[patsfan55]

I like the idea of getting "good value" but sometimes you need to go for the playmakers with the talent in the first round. I don't see a lot of playmakers other than Mayo when healthy at the LB position. A guy like Hardy, IMO, is someone who can come in and make game-changing plays at OLB, which we have lacked all season. He can get pressure on the QB and take over a game. Our pass rush has been horrific this year. Another LB is a guy like McClain who is basically playing in the same defense that we run.

Granted you might have to trade up for some of these guys, but there is a clear need for some playmakers on defense. Look at how the Jets have done in the draft. They've frequently traded up and have added quality talent like Revis, Mangold, D'Brickashaw, Keller, and Sanchez. I'm not suggesting trading away almost all of our picks and tying up the cap with a lot of big contracts to unproven rookies, but sometimes you have to go for the elite talent who is a gamechanger rather than the blue collar guy who is good but not great.

Amen brother. I've been saying this for the last few years and nobody wanted to listen.

 

[BillBelichickFan79]

Amen brother. I've been saying this for the last few years and nobody wanted to listen.

Yessir couldn't agree with you more. You need to have game-changers on both sides of the ball. We have that in Brady, Moss, Welker, etc. on the offensive side, but we are lacking on defense at the LB position, especially OLB. It would be nice to see us trade up every once in a while to add a guy that can come in and have an immediate impact, rather than always moving back and having good but not great guys come in.

The perfect example is when we had the San Fran pick in 2008. We wound up selecting Mayo at 10. He came in and had an instant impact, won DROY, and was a playmaker at the ILB position where we definitely needed to get younger.

Right now, IMO, we need some young talent at the OLB position. It's extremely important in today's NFL to have a great pass rusher to get pressure on the QB. A lot of those elite pass rushers go in the first 15 to 20 picks. I say this year it's time we go get the elite talent and sacrifice a little value.

Okay then:

McGahee drafted 2003 with the 23rd overall pick: He didn't play that season. Buffalo record: 6-10

2004: 1100+ yds in 11 games. Buffalo record: 9-7 (no playoffs)

2005: 1200+ yds in 15 games. Buffalo record: 5-11

2006: 900+ yds in 14 games. Buffalo record: 7-9

2007: traded to Baltimore for 2007 3 & 7, and 2008 3. Buffalo record: 7-9

You call him a win, I'd call him a neutral (at best). He's your to fall in love with; I don't expect him to last 4 preseason games, 16 regular season games, and 3-4 postseason games.

I don't know why you are considering the team record. I don't think he directly impacted the Bills missing the playoffs. Football is a team game, and the Bills just haven't been that good of a team as a whole in quite a while. I still think when given a chance as a feature back on a decent/good team, McGahee can be one of the better backs in the league.

It's not like Buffalo dealt him because of health issues. His knee has been healthy for his pro career and he's a pretty tough guy. They dealt him because they felt it would be very difficult to re-sign him because he had turned on the team. If I remember correctly, McGahee wanted out of Buffalo. He hated the town, and he hated the losing culture. He said it was a relief to be traded.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

I don't know why you are considering the team record. I don't think he directly impacted the Bills missing the playoffs. Football is a team game, and the Bills just haven't been that good of a team as a whole in quite a while. I still think when given a chance as a feature back on a decent/good team, McGahee can be one of the better backs in the league.

It's not like Buffalo dealt him because of health issues. His knee has been healthy for his pro career and he's a pretty tough guy. They dealt him because they felt it would be very difficult to re-sign him because he had turned on the team. If I remember correctly, McGahee wanted out of Buffalo. He hated the town, and he hated the losing culture. He said it was a relief to be traded.

No, they dealt him because he was being a pain in the butt - yeh, he gained decent yardage, but ONLY decent - or haven't you been following the anti-Maroney crowd's disparaging 1,000 yard rushers in a 16 game season?

I consider the team record because that sums up the personnel management success of the organization. Buffalo went after an injured McGahee, nursed him for a year, got three seasons effort out of him, and had losing seasons for all but one. Wow. To say McGahee was a swinging success focuses the perspective too closely on his individual talent, and ignores how that acquisition may or may not have contributed to the overall success of the team. Buffalo did not draft him because they needed a RB - not spending his entire first year in rehab - they drafted him because they fell in love with his talent and did it within a team building strategy that ultimately proved unsuccessful.

You want Hardy because of his talent, so do I. You want him in round one despite an extensive injury history, that's were I hoist the caution flag and ask who else in this draft provides similar value with a more consistent playing history? I don't have an answer to that yet, but Great Blue North's most recent 'Big Board' sure reduces any worry we might not find one Great Blue North Draft Report.

 

[BillBelichickFan79]

No, they dealt him because he was being a pain in the butt - yeh, he gained decent yardage, but ONLY decent - or haven't you been following the anti-Maroney crowd's disparaging 1,000 yard rushers in a 16 game season?

I consider the team record because that sums up the personnel management success of the organization. Buffalo went after an injured McGahee, nursed him for a year, got three seasons effort out of him, and had losing seasons for all but one. Wow. To say McGahee was a swinging success focuses the perspective too closely on his individual talent, and ignores how that acquisition may or may not have contributed to the overall success of the team. Buffalo did not draft him because they needed a RB - not spending his entire first year in rehab - they drafted him because they fell in love with his talent and did it within a team building strategy that ultimately proved unsuccessful.

You want Hardy because of his talent, so do I. You want him in round one despite an extensive injury history, that's were I hoist the caution flag and ask who else in this draft provides similar value with a more consistent playing history? I don't have an answer to that yet, but Great Blue North's most recent 'Big Board' sure reduces any worry we might not find one Great Blue North Draft Report.

As I said I'm a big Maroney fan, and the criticism he receives is unfair. I personally think you're being a little to critical of the McGahee move. He worked out fine for them after he rehabbed. He came in and was productive. He wasn't a flameout like a Charles Rogers or Maurice Clarrett.

I don't think the McGahee pick was one that didn't work out in the team building strategy. It was the poor drafting in the following years 04, 05, and 06. Out of all of the draft picks they had, the only productive players they got in those 3 years were Donte Whitner, Roscoe Parrish, and Lee Evans. That is horrendous drafting. I don't see how drafting McGahee within a team building strategy failed. He was probably their most productive draft pick during the 3 years that he was there. It's not his fault that their personnel department couldn't identify the right guys to draft. And who would've known that he'd want to shoot his way out of town after Bills took him in the first round, were very patient with him, and gave him his first chance to play in the NFL?

I see the point you are making about finding an alternative with more consistent playing time and similar talent, and it's good point. However, I feel Hardy is the most talented OLB prospect in the draft, and I expect those who are close to his talent level, like a Dunlap, to go earlier in the first round. Like you said, Hardy is a top 10 talent who will likely slide due to his injury history. He could fall right into our laps in the 20's. I would take him in an instant if he is there. I know you like to talk about getting good value. Well, I would consider getting a top 10 talent like Hardy in the 20's good value, but hey that's just me.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

That's just it, you're looking at the Top 10 'talent,' but his 'value' is the total package, which is why I project Hardy a mid-to-high second.

McGahee wasn't getting drafted in the first round, by anybody who wasn't in love with him, so Buffalo spent that first out of fear he wouldn't be there in the late second, which means they overpaid for him. What if they had drafted Aso-wtf at CB instead of McGahee? Or traded down and picked up some extra picks to use on moving around the second round for McGahee at a better price? They might have been able to pick up a G like Steinbach at the top of the second and still have gotten McGahee - talent, it's exciting, but it's not the total package.

 

[jsull87]

I'd be fine with Hardy with one of our 2nd round picks. I'd rate him and Greg Romeus, and possibly Jason Pierre-Paul, as my favorite guys to take with the Jacksonville pick. I don't think I'd take him at #24-25 though - I'd trade back him there was no better value on the board. His injury history and other issues are enough to drop him to the 2nd round for me, at least at this point.

i don't know about pierre paul he seems really gangly to me when i have seen him. just looks a little uncoordinated. He will probably prove me wrong and i have only seen him in 2 games but that was just an impression i got

 

[mayoclinic]

i don't know about pierre paul he seems really gangly to me when i have seen him. just looks a little uncoordinated. He will probably prove me wrong and i have only seen him in 2 games but that was just an impression i got

He does seem really gangly and a bit uncoordinated, I agree. That's why I prefer Austen Lane. But if he ever learns to control that gangly body of his, watch out.

 

[WhiZa]

One benefit we have with the 4-3 is we can pick a guy who can be a pass rushing specialist his first year, and grow into the OLB position instead of just throwing the play book at him like the Jets did with Gholston.

 

[BillBelichickFan79]

That's just it, you're looking at the Top 10 'talent,' but his 'value' is the total package, which is why I project Hardy a mid-to-high second.

McGahee wasn't getting drafted in the first round, by anybody who wasn't in love with him, so Buffalo spent that first out of fear he wouldn't be there in the late second, which means they overpaid for him. What if they had drafted Aso-wtf at CB instead of McGahee? Or traded down and picked up some extra picks to use on moving around the second round for McGahee at a better price? They might have been able to pick up a G like Steinbach at the top of the second and still have gotten McGahee - talent, it's exciting, but it's not the total package.

I don't view 'value' as the total package when drafting. I view the 'total package' as getting a guy with great talent, work ethic, intangibles, discipline, production, and leadership who can come in and be a playmaker for years to come. If you get the guy you want, then you've gotten good value IMO. The Bills obviously wanted McGahee, so why risk it. Rather be safe than sorry instead of trading back and potentially having someone jump up in front of you to grab him. And BTW, I'd consider getting a consensus top 5 pick pre-injury in the 20's pretty good 'value.'

You're looking back with 20/20 hindsight at guys like Asomugha and Steinbach. Trading back guarantees nothing. It's like saying "Oh the Pats should've taken Boldin in the 2nd round of 2003 instead of Bethel Johnson. Or they could've traded back and gotten both Osi Umenyoria and Bethel Johnson. It's easy to say that kind of stuff now, but at the time were you saying the same thing?

Last year the Pats could've drafted Chung and Vollmer later than when they were selected. They could've traded back and gotten better 'value' for them both, but they didn't because they had guys targeted and didn't want to risk the chance on losing out on them to someone else.