How High A priority Is It To Upgrade OGs?

[Ring 6]

"Mankins is the starting LG" isn't opinion now? Funny, when I was noting that Connolly wasn't really a starter for the team since he was just replacing players ahead of him in Mankins/Kaczur/Neal, I was assailed for daring to take such a position. Interesting that the tables have now turned to the point where acknowledging that a player stayed away for a fair chunk of last year is now supposed to be an opinion.

Interesting theory. Also, When the discussion went further, you were clearly putting forth the opinion that he'd be starting day one, without actually saying it, by pointing to rights, circumstances and the like, in response to my pointing to the saying about counting one's chickens before they've hatched.

But you go ahead and pretend that you weren't taking that position, and I'll pretend that you aren't posting anymore in this thread.

Back to handing Kaczur the job on one day of practice again?

The circumstance for Mankins in 2011 are different than the circumstances for Mankins in 2010. That is a fact.

Mankins is Patriot property. That is a fact.

Mankins is the best G the team has rights to, so while an opinion, its as close to fact as possible that he would start.

 

[Deus Irae]

Back to handing Kaczur the job on one day of practice again?

The circumstance for Mankins in 2011 are different than the circumstances for Mankins in 2010. That is a fact.

Mankins is Patriot property. That is a fact.

Mankins is the best G the team has rights to, so while an opinion, its as close to fact as possible that he would start.

Finally you admit it. Good to see.

Now, we're back to counting those eggs. That's all I was saying. I wasn't even getting into trade scenarios or the like.

Sheesh!

 

[Dufflebagz]

The O.P. WAS talking about the future. The team's needs for the future. He was noting the current absence of signed starting quality OGs and opening up the discussion regarding the need to upgrade at the position as a result.

The first thing I asked was if the OP was assuming Mankins wouldn't be playing for us, I was completely going with the discussion and then somehow we started arguing.

 

[jabanero]

Forgive me if I think that your head is placed firmly in the sand.

Yes, I have been discussing the OL for years. Specifically last year, I indicated that OG/OC was a serious issue since neither Neal or Mankins were likely to be here for very long, and we didn't expect Koppen to be here long-term either. I posited that I didn't think Ohrnberger, Wendell and Connolly were the answer for the need to develop THREE starters.

So, here we are one year later. We are HOPING that Mankins will play. We HOPING that Koppen will be better in his contract season. We are COUNTING on Connolly and Wendell for significant contributions.
==========================================
And just BTW, we are also HOPING that Light will re-sign. Most of us know that it is only a matter of where before pick 35 that we draft an OT. I do understand that there are those who see some 3rd or 4th rounder as next year's starting OT if Light doesn't re-sign. But that is NOT the way belichick operates. He will use his resources to have a genuine Plan B in case Light does not re-sign.
============================================

THE TEAM HAS CHOICE
The team does NOT have to look for wrestlers, UDFA's and street free agents to play at LG, RG and center in 2011 and/or 2012. Instead, just maybe, we could decide, as we did in 2005, that OG is a critical need for this team, worthy of #28 or #33 and that we really need to find three starters for 2012.

The team will make do with a weak to average line if they must, and perhaps go the SB with such a line. But with 6 picks in the top 100, plus an additional pick in ther 4th, it is POSSIBLE to put a very high priority on developing a top-notch set of three interior linemen for 2012. That is in addition to dealing with the need at OT.

Both arguments have merit. Pluck a guy from the top of your draft for the OG position is a better chance to get a starter than other methods. But you're talking like spending a high draft pick on an OG means a guaranteed starter. It certainly doesn't and the ability of BB to find guys for those slots from other means versus his ability to do so at other positions certainly has to be weighed.

Again, both arguments have merit. But I'm much more interested in BB choosing players they can project and develop better than focusing on any position in the draft.

 

[mgteich]

Belichick always keeps his top draft picks. those chosen in the first four rounds. We have 7 picks, plenty to amke sure that various positions are covered. This will be especially essential if there is no free agency before the draft.

QUOTE=jabanero;2494313]. But I'm much more interested in BB choosing players they can project and develop better than focusing on any position in the draft.[/QUOTE]

 

[Ring 6]

Finally you admit it. Good to see.

Now, we're back to counting those eggs. That's all I was saying. I wasn't even getting into trade scenarios or the like.

Sheesh!

Nothing to admit. You are the one saying my opinions are opinions and your opinions are something else.
Se, if saying Mankins is the starting LG is an opinion, saying he isn't would be one too.
Once again, your contributions add up to mincing words and ignoring the point.

 

[randomk1]

If Mankins is gone our OL is a mess.

I don't like Light protecting Brady's blind side and he has this annoying ability to draw drive killing penalties at the worst times.

Koppen gets eaten up by the better DT's in the league.

Guard positions need upgrades through the draft if Mankins is gone.

Only guy i really like is Vollmer at this point and going forward into the future.

We have quite a few holes to fill if we want to win a playoff game for a change.

 

[Ring 6]

Forgive me if I think that your head is placed firmly in the sand.

Listing where our starting OL came from over the last 10 years means my head is in the sand? Come on.

Yes, I have been discussing the OL for years. Specifically last year, I indicated that OG/OC was a serious issue since neither Neal or Mankins were likely to be here for very long, and we didn't expect Koppen to be here long-term either. I posited that I didn't think Ohrnberger, Wendell and Connolly were the answer for the need to develop THREE starters.

My point being that this is an annual thing, not that you are wrong to bring it up.

So, here we are one year later. We are HOPING that Mankins will play. We HOPING that Koppen will be better in his contract season. We are COUNTING on Connolly and Wendell for significant contributions.
==========================================

Personally I think BB has a much higher opinion of Koppen than you give him credit for. I don't think anyone is basing any plan on HOPE.
There is much work to do, I think that was my first comment, but the fact that it isnt done yet is not, IMO, cause for alarm, but business as usual.
I don't know how you can say we are COUNTING on players when the draft or free agency hasnt started and we dont have a game for 6 months (hopefully)
I think if you looked it up we have more players, contributors and starters under contract than any team in the league. I don't think we need to worry that the roster isnt finished yet.

And just BTW, we are also HOPING that Light will re-sign. Most of us know that it is only a matter of where before pick 35 that we draft an OT.

Do you really expect a full roster before we can ever resign our own FAs?
Nice to know that 'most of us know' what BB will do in the draft. Did 'most of us' have him picking a corner in round 1 last year?

I do understand that there are those who see some 3rd or 4th rounder as next year's starting OT if Light doesn't re-sign. But that is NOT the way belichick operates. He will use his resources to have a genuine Plan B in case Light does not re-sign.
============================================

So, 'how BB operates' is to use a first round pick at any spot he needs a Plan B? Did he do that with Branch, Samuel, Wilfork, Mankins, or any of the OLBs?
I get that YOU are afraid Light wont be back, and YOU would react to your uncertainty by using a first round pick.
BB on the other hand has a pretty good idea I assume of Light's feelings about coming back and whether he is of a Bruschi mindset or a Vinatieri mindset. The answer to that question would have to factor in to you or 'most of us' 'knowing we will pick a T before 35.'
There are many other ways to address Light leaving as well. See my post about how we have addressed OL positions for 10 years. Note that only Mankins was a 1st round pick.

THE TEAM HAS CHOICE
The team does NOT have to look for wrestlers, UDFA's and street free agents to play at LG, RG and center in 2011 and/or 2012. Instead, just maybe, we could decide, as we did in 2005, that OG is a critical need for this team, worthy of #28 or #33 and that we really need to find three starters for 2012.

They could. But in the past they rarely have. Past performance does not guarantee future results but it does give an insight.
As it stands an interior OL of Mankins, Koppen, Connolly is what we used to have one of if not the best offensive halves of a season last year. Certainly beyond 2011 much work must be done, and the draft is surely a large part of that. But BB isn't going to draft an OL for the sake of drafting an OL. He will fill the spots the best way he can within the framework of the entire roster.
Historically, it seems that he sees few OL that are the best pick in round 1, and not that many in round 2. He make definitely like the OL that are in this draft, and he may not. But he isn't going to draft an OL that is a poor pick with a better one on the board because he thinks the problem is better solved by reaching in round 1 than going the free agent route, or picking an OL later who is value for the pick.
His history shows us this even if you want to post 'the way he operates' conflicts with his actual moves.

The team will make do with a weak to average line if they must, and perhaps go the SB with such a line. But with 6 picks in the top 100, plus an additional pick in ther 4th, it is POSSIBLE to put a very high priority on developing a top-notch set of three interior linemen for 2012. That is in addition to dealing with the need at OT.

You again seem to dismiss that this is just one way of dealing with the issue, and BB has favored other ways with this issue.

My only point here was that you are acting as if Mankins is gone, Light wont be back and this is an urgent mess, but missing that we have been here before and that we have filled OL holes may other ways than high draft picks.

 

[mgteich]

YOU SEEM TO FOCUS ON THE FIRST PICK
But yes, MANY of us had us drafting a corner in the first round last year. Others had us drafting a corner if Odrick was not considered to be of high enough value. So what!?? We have THREE picks in the first 33, not just one. It is certainly possible, perhaps even reasonable, (as some have projected) to draft 2 OL's and a front seven defensive player in the first 33.

As we have seen in the past, Belichick is also quite capable of using the next tier of picks. As we know, all picks through the 4th round make the team, unless they quit or are out for physical reasons. Belichick will have FOUR picks to work with between 60 and 125. Persoanlly, I would like to have only 2-3 and move up (using 74 and 92 to move up to about 55), but Belichick is the master at maximizing draft value.

FULL ROSTER BEFORE AND AFTER FREE AGENCY
Usually, Belichick tries to have a "full roster" before the draft, although he often has ONE hole that he want to fill in the draft (TE last year). This approach takes all pressure off of the draft and allows much flexibility.

This year will be the same IF AND ONLY IF there is free agency before the draft. If there is no free agency before the draft, then yes, I do believe that Belichick will attempt to fill a roster before free agency begins. This will allow flexibility in free agency. Consider the alternative. Would we really go into free agency knowing that we were FORCED to find a starter or two in free agency. I don't think that we will do this. I could see us going into free agency expecting to find a backup WR or a backup RB, but not a starter.

.
Do you really expect a full roster before we can ever resign our own FAs?
Nice to know that 'most of us know' what BB will do in the draft. Did 'most of us' have him picking a corner in round 1 last year?

 

[Ring 6]

YOU SEEM TO FOCUS ON THE FIRST PICK
But yes, MANY of us had us drafting a corner in the first round last year.

Thats not the way I remember it. Can you direct me to that prediction. I remember making the unpopular and widely disagreed with opinion that I thought corner was a first round possiblity. Dont remember your agreement, but my memory isnt what it used to be.

Others had us drafting a corner if Odrick was not considered to be of high enough value. So what!?? We have THREE picks in the first 33, not just one. It is certainly possible, perhaps even reasonable, (as some have projected) to draft 2 OL's and a front seven defensive player in the first 33.

Maybe so, maybe not. We do not know right now if the plan is to trade Mankins, or resign Light. Those are 2 very big variables.
The fact that we need players on the OL is not evidence that we will use high picks on them, because that has not been the normal route in the past.
Frankly, its a moot point IMO anyway, because BB is going to draft guys he has graded in that area of the draft whether they are OL or not. The number of OL we pick in the first 2 rounds is not dependent on our current rosters, its dependent on which OL are available.

As we have seen in the past, Belichick is also quite capable of using the next tier of picks. As we know, all picks through the 4th round make the team, unless they quit or are out for physical reasons. Belichick will have FOUR picks to work with between 60 and 125. Persoanlly, I would like to have only 2-3 and move up (using 74 and 92 to move up to about 55), but Belichick is the master at maximizing draft value.

Don't know what you are getting at. Sounds like you want to trade picks but don't want to if BB doesnt??

FULL ROSTER BEFORE AND AFTER FREE AGENCY
Usually, Belichick tries to have a "full roster" before the draft, although he often has ONE hole that he want to fill in the draft (TE last year). This approach takes all pressure off of the draft and allows much flexibility.

That's because Free Agency occurs before the draft. Every team tries to fill as many needs as the can before the draft. We certainly had more holes than TE before last years draft, so I'm not sure what that means.

This year will be the same IF AND ONLY IF there is free agency before the draft. If there is no free agency before the draft, then yes, I do believe that Belichick will attempt to fill a roster before free agency begins. This will allow flexibility in free agency. Consider the alternative.

The alternative is drafting players you feel will be good not drafting players because you need a body at a position.

Would we really go into free agency knowing that we were FORCED to find a starter or two in free agency. I don't think that we will do this. I could see us going into free agency expecting to find a backup WR or a backup RB, but not a starter.

Seriously, you need to stop posting that you read BBs mind. For years you posted that BB drafted players for 3 years from now, and hated starting rookies. Now you are saying he will draft rookies to start because he doesnt want to have to find players among the 500 free agents out there.


Look I'm not saying that there isn't a lot of work to do on the OL. I'm saying that you don't know the answer to many questions and you are trying to predict a plan without getting them.
If Light is resigned and Mankins is not traded I would not be surprised in the least if we didnt draft an OL in the first 3 rounds. I wouldn't be surprised if we did either, because there will be need across the OL during that picks usefullness, but it comes down to the quality of the player.
If there are no OL on the board with our first 6 picks that BB sees as good picks and at or near the best on the board, he will fill the OL spots with promotions of reserves and ps guys and free agency along with some later picks to compete. That is what he has always done.

 

[mgteich]

If you do not understand that need is factored in to "at the best on the board", then I cannot help you understand.

OF COURSE, Belichick will not choose a 3rd round player in the first because of need. And BTW, what was the rank of Mankins on various big boards when he was drafted? What about Vollmer? OBVIOUSLY, Belichick has his own valuations, but need does play a strong role.

And in what sense was Warren the highest rate player on Belichick's board? Probably only after adjusting value by ten picks due to need. Do you really believe that Warren was the 13th best player by ANY stretch of the imagination?

I have STRONGLY, STRONGLY supported Belichick's draft choices and draft strategies for many years, both before and after the draft, whether they worked out or not.

If you believe that Belichick will not be able to get any of the offensive linemen at his list at anywhere near their value in the first 35 picks, then say so. I don't believe that to be the case. If we trade down at 17, it will be because there were so many OL's that meet belichick's criteria, not because there wasn't one worth drafting at 17.

.If there are no OL on the board with our first 6 picks that BB sees as good picks and at or near the best on the board, he will fill the OL spots with promotions of reserves and ps guys and free agency along with some later picks to compete. That is what he has always done.

 

[mgteich]

Patchick is batter at finding old threads and posts. Perhaps she will find the threads.

In the week before the draft, there were at least 2 threads, plus many individual predictions that posited drafting a corner, or choosing between Odrick and a corner (my position). At least two folks had the pick nailed as McCourty (not me). I started at least one of those threads. Many agreed that the choice was between Odrick (who many believed would not be rated highly enough by Belichick) and the 3 top corners.

This was not a wild analysis, even at the time. I believe Gosselin nailed McCourty. Others saw the need.

Thats not the way I remember it. Can you direct me to that prediction. I remember making the unpopular and widely disagreed with opinion that I thought corner was a first round possiblity. Dont remember your agreement, but my memory isnt what it used to be.

 

[mgteich]

You have stated my position correctly. From where I sit, I would trade up, using 60, 74, 92 and 124 as needed. I would be fine with 5 instead of seven picks. HOWEVER, Belichick is the master of draft moves. If Belichick does not trade, then I am fine with that assessment.

.Don't know what you are getting at. Sounds like you want to trade picks but don't want to if BB doesnt??

 

[Ring 6]

If you do not understand that need is factored in to "at the best on the board", then I cannot help you understand.

OF COURSE, Belichick will not choose a 3rd round player in the first because of need. And BTW, what was the rank of Mankins on various big boards when he was drafted? What about Vollmer? OBVIOUSLY, Belichick has his own valuations, but need does play a strong role.

Are you seriously telling me that the value draft analysts put on players influences BB?

And in what sense was Warren the highest rate player on Belichick's board? Probably only after adjusting value by ten picks due to need. Do you really believe that Warren was the 13th best player by ANY stretch of the imagination?

You are joking right? Warren was a PERFECT fit for the 34 2gap. Are you really trying to say that you can tell me where BB had him rated?

I have STRONGLY, STRONGLY supported Belichick's draft choices and draft strategies for many years, both before and after the draft, whether they worked out or not.

Not sure what that means.

If you believe that Belichick will not be able to get any of the offensive linemen at his list at anywhere near their value in the first 35 picks, then say so. I don't believe that to be the case. If we trade down at 17, it will be because there were so many OL's that meet belichick's criteria, not because there wasn't one worth drafting at 17.

I have no clue what BBs board looks like. But he isn't going to stray from it to reach for need. I also know that he has shown a tendency to use higher picks on other positions, and use various cheap methods of obtaining OL. That tells me that another factor or best player available, which is the difference between that guy and the rest of the pack favors waiting on OL.

I find it shocking that after watching 10 years of BB drafting, and watching his drafts consistently run counter to what everyone thinks he will do based upon need, that you still try to say he will draft for need. In the first round of the draft you have need at every position, with the exception of QB because you can only play 1. What position on this team is there not need? What position would drafting a player in the first round, assuming he works out, not be upgrading the team over his 5 year deal?
In a way you are right because every pick is based on need,because every position has need. But need everywhere doesnt influence which position is chosen.
When immediate needs matches up with BPA then you get both. When it does not, other means are used to fill the need. Its really not that complicated.

 

[Ring 6]

Patchick is batter at finding old threads and posts. Perhaps she will find the threads.

In the week before the draft, there were at least 2 threads, plus many individual predictions that posited drafting a corner, or choosing between Odrick and a corner (my position). At least two folks had the pick nailed as McCourty (not me). I started at least one of those threads. Many agreed that the choice was between Odrick (who many believed would not be rated highly enough by Belichick) and the 3 top corners.

This was not a wild analysis, even at the time. I believe Gosselin nailed McCourty. Others saw the need.

If you say you did, I'll accept that.
But wasnt that opinion based on Odrick being need and 'the 3 corners' being BPA?
And if BB drafts by need, why no DEs until the 7th round? Not to mention the voluminous commentary about the LB position?

 

[mgteich]

1) Yes, I believe that Belichick draft for 2-3 years out, with the exception of one position of need in a particular draft. Obviously, sometimes the talent and situations dictate that we have contributions from many more players early.

2) I do indeed believe that Belichick strongly prefers not to count on more than one rookie as a starter, and preferably none.

3) I guess it just doesn't matter to you that free agency will be after the draft. For me, having free agency after the draft is of CRITICAL signifcance. OF COURSE, if there is free agency BEFORE the draft, my analysis of the draft changes. Apparently yours doesn't.

If the draft is before the draft, then I KNOW a lot more about who will be re-signed and who we were able to secure in free agency. I DO NOT BELIEVE that Belichick will make your mistake and simply count on getting starters and first year contributers from free agency. In other years, Belichick did not count on getting more than one first year contributer from the draft.

I don't understand why we disagree with regard to the timing of free agency.
===========================================================

Consider the case if a team needs a quarterback. The team could just do their normal draft evaluation and see who is the best player available. After all, if they didn't get one, they could get one from the 500 free agents out there, or not. If that didn't work, the GM could always tell the owners and fans that he stayed strong and didn't compromise his draft principles. There is a word that applies to such GM's. "fired"

Belichick is NOT such a GM/coach. Belichick understand that there are different strategies in place depending on whether the draft is before or after free agency.

Yes, I understand that you call this analysis mind reading. Call it what you will. We have at least three choices. IBWT, try to understand what Bill will do, and to suggest that we want for the team is better than what Bill would want. Yes, I do try to figure out "What Would Bill Do?".

Seriously, you need to stop posting that you read BBs mind. For years you posted that BB drafted players for 3 years from now, and hated starting rookies. Now you are saying he will draft rookies to start because he doesnt want to have to find players among the 500 free agents out there.

 

[Ring 6]

1) Yes, I believe that Belichick draft for 2-3 years out, with the exception of one position of need in a particular draft. Obviously, sometimes the talent and situations dictate that we have contributions from many more players early.

2) I do indeed believe that Belichick strongly prefers not to count on more than one rookie as a starter, and preferably none.

3) I guess it just doesn't matter to you that free agency will be after the draft. For me, having free agency after the draft is of CRITICAL signifcance. OF COURSE, if there is free agency BEFORE the draft, my analysis of the draft changes. Apparently yours doesn't.

If the draft is before the draft, then I KNOW a lot more about who will be re-signed and who we were able to secure in free agency. I DO NOT BELIEVE that Belichick will make your mistake and simply count on getting starters and first year contributers from free agency. In other years, Belichick did not count on getting more than one first year contributer from the draft.

I don't understand why we disagree with regard to the timing of free agency.
===========================================================

It seems to me like you are envisioning this as filling up a fantasy baseball roster. (Used baseball because there are more positions so its a better analogy) and that BB thinks his job is to get a guy to pencil in so he can be happy.
That is not what I have seen. I have seen him acquire the best players he can get. He will draft a guy who has a good player in front of him or one that has no one in front of him, and he will do the same with free agency.
Its really building a roster based on the best use of the resources.
Do you really think he was satisfied walking into a season with Rod Rutledge, Monte Beiesel, Pierre Woods, Tom Ashowrth, Brandon Gorin, Dan Koppen as a rookie, Kyle Arrington, Duane Starks, to name a few of MANY players he had to live with as starters?
You act as if he will reach in the draft because he fears that he may not sign a free agent. If thats the case, he coaches up what he has.
Im doing a poor job of explaining this, but your cookie cutter idea just doesnt fit.

Consider the case if a team needs a quarterback. The team could just do their normal draft evaluation and see who is the best player available. After all, if they didn't get one, they could get one from the 500 free agents out there, or not. If that didn't work, the GM could always tell the owners and fans that he stayed strong and didn't compromise his draft principles. There is a word that applies to such GM's. "fired"

What? That doesnt even make sense. So you are telling me that a GM that makes a bad pick to fill need keeps his job and one that doesnt make the bad pick and signs a FA gets fired?
Please go get ownership of our competitors, we could use that kind of help;

Belichick is NOT such a GM/coach. Belichick understand that there are different strategies in place depending on whether the draft is before or after free agency.

No, not really. The strategies are the same, just in reverse. You really think BB is going to draft a player he otherwise wouldn't because free agency hasnt happened yet?
Actually it makes BPA even more likely, because you still have FA to fill the need.

Yes, I understand that you call this analysis mind reading. Call it what you will. We have at least three choices. IBWT, try to understand what Bill will do, and to suggest that we want for the team is better than what Bill would want. Yes, I do try to figure out "What Would Bill Do?".

No issue here, except your prediction isnt consistent with his history.

 

[mgteich]

Dez Bryant was clearly the BPA. Dan Williams and Best were also high on most boards at that point in additions to Odrick, the corners and Jerry Hughes.

Belichick's board is the patriot board. Obviously, he also has to have a side analysis of who others might trade up for.

In the end, the choice of the top players wasn't all that difficult. The open question was the differences in valuation of Belichick's board compared to others.

There is just so much more than BPA. With regard to corner, there was discussion with regard to fit into our system. Also there was discussion with regard to whether we need a pure corner more than someone who would be a great nickel.
==========================================

NEED and VALUE and BPA
I will try again. I believe that Belichick has a board just everyone else, with VALUES to the patriots based on talent, fit, character, draft scarcity at the position and nfl readiness. In addition, there are adders and subtracters due to need. Thus all DE's and OLB's were given adders last year.

The bottom line is that no DE was considered worthy of drafting until late. You mention all teh commentary about linebacker. Well WE have that discussion every year. As I recall, we almost always need 2 stud passrushers. That makes for lots and lots of threads. EVERY YEAR, posters are disappointed by Belichick's treatment of the DE and OLB positions. It is simply one our burdens. We just don't see what Belichick sees.

As an example, many of us see a serious need to secure a developmental safety since both Meriweather and Sanders are in their contract year, and it takes a year to develop a safety. Almost none of us see a safety in the first four rounds.

BOTTOM LINE
After making all the adjustments, Belichick has the patriot board. At every point, Belichick can quite easily pick the BPA on his adjusted board, or make a trade if that is deemed reasonable (these situations have their own rules, like who is expected to be available).

The board can be adjusted as time goess on. For example need in later picks might change if we draft a RB at 17.

If you say you did, I'll accept that.
But wasnt that opinion based on Odrick being need and 'the 3 corners' being BPA?
And if BB drafts by need, why no DEs until the 7th round? Not to mention the voluminous commentary about the LB position?

 

[mgteich]

I take it that you like playing the lottery.

Your post states clearly where we differ.

YES, I do indeed believe that Belichick will draft differently because he does not know who he will be able to secure in free agency.

As someone once said, "hope is not a plan".

The removal of free agency before the draft is a "condition", an input into decision-making. Belichick will NOT ignore the importance of that change in the method of securing placyers for this season. And BTW, he will not ignore the fact that will be less time to prepare rookeis (if there is indeed no CBA signed before the draft.

..
No, not really. The strategies are the same, just in reverse. You really think BB is going to draft a player he otherwise wouldn't because free agency hasnt happened yet?
Actually it makes BPA even more likely, because you still have FA to fill the need.

 

[Deus Irae]

Nothing to admit. You are the one saying my opinions are opinions and your opinions are something else.
Se, if saying Mankins is the starting LG is an opinion, saying he isn't would be one too.
Once again, your contributions add up to mincing words and ignoring the point.

Given that all I said was that he was not signed and that you shouldn't count your chickens before they are hatched, the irony of you posting crap like this is just amazing. Then again, it's nothing new for you. Back to the ignore feature for you, since you are apparently constitutionally incapable of a rational discussion.