How upset would you be?

[patchick]

Good Points Cant argue with that.
Without digging how many people who made those picks still have jobs?

Too late, already dug. Only 3 are out of the league, but only Chancellor, Saffold and Brown are starters (and the latter 2 can't stay healthy).

I do like the fundamental idea of building on areas of strength, I'm just not sold on the approach.

 

[dryheat44]

Too late, already dug. Only 3 are out of the league, but only Chancellor, Saffold and Brown are starters (and the latter 2 can't stay healthy).

I do like the fundamental idea of building on areas of strength, I'm just not sold on the approach.

I think he was referring to the GMs. Regardless, this is just a non-sensical approach. Let's do an exercise in QBs: Derek Carr, Jimmy Garappolo, David Fales, Aaron Murray.

We might have one hell of a QB corps. How many of these guys are going to make the team? How many are going to dress? How many are going to be bona fide NFL players.


QBs not fair? How about RBs? Carlos Hyde, Andre Williams, Lache Seastrunk, Bishop Sankey.

Have we improved the team? Do other teams fear us now?

WRs? Marquise Lee, Donte Moncrief, Robert Herron, TJ Jones. Who plays safety? Tight End?

DBs? Jimmie Ward, Jaylen Watkins, Louchiez Purifoy, Dion Bailey. That's 2 CBs and 2 safeties. Did we actually improve the defensive backfield, figuring who they're knocking off the roster, or taking playing time away from? And yet Tight End, Defensive Line, and Linebacker go unaddressed.

The ONLY way this works is if you liberally call defensive players linebackers, and have large linebackers that play on the front line, medium-size linebackers that play on the second level, and smaller, quicker linebackers that play in the secondary.

Louis Nix, Jeremiah Attaochu, DeMarcus Lawrence, Dion Bailey. Those four "linebackers" would improve a position of strength.

 

[cstjohn17]

Not as upset as I would be if they drafted Johnny Manziel...

 

[mayoclinic]

I do like the fundamental idea of building on areas of strength, I'm just not sold on the approach.

I'm certainly not advocating a fixed approach of only taking multiple guys at one position or anything that locks a team in, and 4 is a bit excessive; however, depending on how the draft fell, I could see an outcome where "overloading" worked out fairly well.

What about Joel Bitonio/Brandon Thomas (round 2; long term starter at LG with multi-position versatility), Weston Richburg (round 3; should be a 10 year starter at center) and Trey Thomas (round 4; potentially dominant RG in the Brian Waters mold), +/- some trades to make it work? That would solidify the interior OL for the next 4+ years. It's hard to imagine a better draft in terms of protecting Brady and prolonging his career.

Again, I'm not advocating it as a fixed approach or strategy, just saying I wouldn't be distraught if that's the way things ended up working out.

 

[patchick]

What about Joel Bitonio/Brandon Thomas (round 2; long term starter at LG with multi-position versatility), Weston Richburg (round 3; should be a 10 year starter at center) and Trey Thomas (round 4; potentially dominant RG in the Brian Waters mold), +/- some trades to make it work? That would solidify the interior OL for the next 4+ years. It's hard to imagine a better draft in terms of protecting Brady and prolonging his career.

Again, I'm not advocating it as a fixed approach or strategy, just saying I wouldn't be distraught if that's the way things ended up working out.

I get the appeal, but it seems to me that even if they all turn out to be starting-caliber players, that's a ton of turnover and inexperience in the line. Even for other positions, a wholesale injection of youth means some serious growing pains (as we saw at WR last year).

 

[everlong]

If that's what you hope to achieve with picks 29, 62, 93 & 130, I suspect you'll be disappointed. In fact, it would be absolutely extraordinary to come away with 4 good players at ANY position from those picks.

The last draft class that was considered ultra-rich was 2010. Let's take a look at the collections of single-unit talent you could have gotten with those picks that year.

DB: Kyle Wilson, Jerome Murphy, Kevin Thomas, Kam Chancellor

DL: Jerry Hughes, Alex Carrington, Everson Griffen, O'Brien Schofield

OL: Rodger Saffold, Charles Brown, Mike Johnson, Ed Wang

I think it's fair to say that not one of the groups would yield anything close to an elite unit.



I'd say that's exactly what the team did with their defensive backfield in free agency.

I've been playing devils advocate to a degree in that I don't think the Patriots will load up on one position with needs across the board and 4 players is a bit rough but if you do three players it's quite possible to load up over multiple rounds. It comes down to picking the right groceries.

2011: Nate Solder, Orlando Franklin, Clint Boling
2011: Muhammad Wilkerson, Brooks Reed, Jurrell Casey

 

[everlong]

I get the appeal, but it seems to me that even if they all turn out to be starting-caliber players, that's a ton of turnover and inexperience in the line. Even for other positions, a wholesale injection of youth means some serious growing pains (as we saw at WR last year).

I think on the OL because of how much they need to work together it's a very valid point. On the DL I think that's less important and you could infuse the right talent had beyond having no growing pains you could get seriously better in a hurry.

 

[patchick]

It comes down to picking the right groceries.

2011: Nate Solder, Orlando Franklin, Clint Boling
2011: Muhammad Wilkerson, Brooks Reed, Jurrell Casey

Yep, but getting really, really lucky and hitting on every pick makes for a good draft regardless of strategy!

 

[everlong]

Yep, but getting really, really lucky and hitting on every pick makes for a good draft regardless of strategy!

True dat. I don't think the odds of hitting/missing goes up or down though if you drafted three players from one position grouping or one from three different ones. In this draft it could be said you would have better odds drafting three WRs or DBs vs drafting one each from DE, TE and RB.

 

[mgteich]

On its face, overloading is not a bad idea. Dumping a whole unit and thinking that we will get upgrades makes no sense at all. However, drafting four to try to get three additions could work.

OFFENSIVE LINE
For the future, we need a guard, a center, and a backup tackle. I could see draft two early and two late. I could even see drafting three in the first four rounds. I presume that we are keeping our top three plus Wendell and Cannon. The rest are replaceable.

RUNNING BACK
I'd be fine to add three running backs to Ridley and Vereen. Again two picks could be late, giving a total of four roster picks. How attached are we to Bolden, Develin and Gray?

DE/LB
I would be fine with drafting four, expecting to keep three. We have at least open positions at DE and three at linebacker. We have about 11 positions between DE and LB. We now have our 5 starters with no real backup: Buchanan, Bequette, Beauharnais and White. We could add TWO with no cuts at all!