KDPPatsfan85 1 round mock draft pre-combine - Vince Curry, Fletcher Cox

[UK_Pat37]

Sorry, got my Nick's mixed up.. It's Hardwick from the Chargers that's a UFA. Not Mangold from the Jets.

Interior linemen is a need for the Jets though...they need a Guard and I wouldn't be surprised if they took one in the first round.

 

[NinjaZX6R]

Interior linemen is a need for the Jets though...they need a Guard and I wouldn't be surprised if they took one in the first round.

They need a RT before they need a LG.

I could see them take Mike Adams. Which I hope they do. Mike Adams is awful.

 

[DaBruinz]

I think there is zero chance the Patriots make two first round picks, and there's a significant chance they make none. One is either getting traded back to the second round, and/or heading to another team as RFA compensation.

See, I feel the opposite. I feel that there is much more of a chance that the Pats make 2 picks in the 1st round than there is them trading back. Especially with the needs on defense..

I do not see them signing an RFA with a 1st round tender.

 

[Smokeeye123]

See, I feel the opposite. I feel that there is much more of a chance that the Pats make 2 picks in the 1st round than there is them trading back. Especially with the needs on defense..

I do not see them signing an RFA with a 1st round tender.

Neither do I, however, they ALWAYS trade their last 1st round pick to another team so that next year, they can have a higher first first round pick.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

See, I feel the opposite. I feel that there is much more of a chance that the Pats make 2 picks in the 1st round than there is them trading back. Especially with the needs on defense..

I do not see them signing an RFA with a 1st round tender.

The only "high-rouind" RFA tender I can recall them signing under BB is Welker, and that was clearly a case where they felt they couldn't do anything better with the draft pick in the draft.

So, if they don't see, say, Lardarius Webb as better than any player they can get at #31, I doubt that they'll cough up the first.

 

[captain stone]

Finally according to Jets fans, their team is locked in on Barron in the first round. I just hope that we don't have to put all the Jets fans on suicide watch, because eventualy they are going to figure out that Barron only runs a 4.55 at best when he is fully healthy.

Interesting take on Barron. Would you use Oakland's 2nd-rounder on him, if available?

 

[VrabelJr]

I like that Markelle Martin is falling. I'd be happy to have him in the 3rd round.

 

[Merril Hoge's Tie Knot]

I like that Markelle Martin is falling. I'd be happy to have him in the 3rd round.

But he's falling because he sucks.

 

[VrabelJr]

He's still worth a 3rd or 4th rounder.

 

[DaBruinz]

Neither do I, however, they ALWAYS trade their last 1st round pick to another team so that next year, they can have a higher first first round pick.

This is false. They do not always trade their last 1st round pick to another team. Ben Watson says "HI".

 

[Ochmed Jones]

Interesting take on Barron. Would you use Oakland's 2nd-rounder on him, if available?

If we return to the 3-4 defense next year, yes, I would take him at #31 because in the BB soft zone defense, it is all about reading routes, communicating and getting to the recevier as the ball gets there. He excels at all that and tackling.

If we stay in the 4-3 and play man, then I would want a faster DB, since Baron would duplicate what Chung brings to the table.

 

[VrabelJr]

I don't think any other teams will take the bait we usually dangle with our extra 1st rounder.

 

[everlong]

I don't think any other teams will take the bait we usually dangle with our extra 1st rounder.

There's always a team that falls in love with a player, correctly or not, and is willing to pay the price. It might not be for next year's first rounder but it could be a mid second this year and a second next year, etc.

 

[dryheat44]

This is false. They do not always trade their last 1st round pick to another team. Ben Watson says "HI".

That was the last time, correct? Heck, last year they traded one of them back, and tried like hell to trade #33 too.

It's just Belichick SOP to trade a first for a second and future first, or at least a slew of second and third rounders by a steady trading down. Now, if they can't get the value that BB wants, then yes, they'll make 2 picks. But history has shown that there is usually a team who will make that move to get who they feel is a guy whom they have to have.

As for the RFA compensation, I don't know about Webb being worth it, but nobody can tell me that Mike Wallace just entering his prime isn't worth the #31 pick in the draft plus ~ a top 15 WR salary. I don't know what his demands are, but I'd definitely entertain giving money to Wallace before Welker. I think that with the benefit of training camp & preseason reps, Edelman could give us 80% of Welker at 1/10 the cost, and putting Wallace out there in Branch's place would make us a more dynamic offense and force the defense to keep at least one safety back. It was getting pitiful towards the end of the year when teams did everything but ignore Slater and Underwood when they were on the field.

I don't see Wallace happening like some do. I think after Moss they want a deep threat to be a route runner as well.

Why? It never mattered if Moss caught a ball or not. Unless a guy had "Revis" on the back of his jersey, Moss demanded a minimum of 1 1/2 defenders on every down. I also think that Wallace is a much better route runner than you give him credit for. He's not the best in the world, but he's probably above average and getting better.

I guess the wild card in this is Brandon Lloyd, and if Belichick and McDaniels feel that 1) he's close enough to Wallace in ability and 2) they can sign him, that it's not worth ponying up the first for Wallace.

 

[Merril Hoge's Tie Knot]

He's still worth a 3rd or 4th rounder.

That's arguable. There are dozens of players I'd rather have in the 3rd or 4th, including safety Janzen Jackson. IMO neither players are year one starters though, so the hole is still there.

Safety is a pretty simple fix, I think. If Goldson makes it to FA, we sign him. If not, we hope Barron falls to one of our firsts. If not, McCourty is your left safety, and you several picks left in a deep cornerback draft to replace McCourty's production. That assumes there are no intriguing veterans cut.

 

[Merril Hoge's Tie Knot]

There's always a team that falls in love with a player, correctly or not, and is willing to pay the price. It might not be for next year's first rounder but it could be a mid second this year and a second next year, etc.

Yup, and there is always a coach or a GM on the hot-seat that's willing to mortgage the future for immediate impact.

 

[everlong]

Why? It never mattered if Moss caught a ball or not. Unless a guy had "Revis" on the back of his jersey, Moss demanded a minimum of 1 1/2 defenders on every down. I also think that Wallace is a much better route runner than you give him credit for. He's not the best in the world, but he's probably above average and getting better.

I guess the wild card in this is Brandon Lloyd, and if Belichick and McDaniels feel that 1) he's close enough to Wallace in ability and 2) they can sign him, that it's not worth ponying up the first for Wallace.

I think they would rather have a guy like Lloyd or Wayne who can run the deep ball but also will run the intermediate routes. Steve Smith of Carolina if he had a better attitude is another.

It wouldn't be out of the question for Bill to trade out of 27 or 31 as usual. Franchise Welker and then trade him for a second. Sign both Lloyd and Wayne to deals that together aren't that much more than Welker would be getting with the franchise tag.

Trading out of the first round for second and future first, great value check.

Trading a 31 year old receiver that you got 5 pro bowl seasons out of for a second rounds which was more or less what you paid 5 year ago, great value check.

Not giving up a first for an RFA and having to pay him 2X either of the guys you picked up, great value check.

Wayne, Lloyd, first rounder 2012, second rounder 2012, first rounder 2013 vs Welker, Wallace and first rounder 2012.

Less money, less risk and as diversified of an offense. Edelman and the TEs make up for Welker's production and Wayne and Lloyd give you solid outside depth that open things up for the guys underneath.

I'm not saying it will happen. I'm just making the case it's more likely than Bill giving up a first and paying Wallace a ton of coin when he's more or less a deep threat only.

I know people will jump on this and to be honest I want Welker back at hopefully less than the 9.6M/year of the franchise tag but if that went down the same people barking about Welker being too important would celebrate Bill's genius.

EDIT: BTW I was one of the people who wanted Wallace really badly coming out. When they took Tate my jaw was on the floor and when the Steelers took him with the next pick I was pissed for days. I've been wrong about tons of picks too so the point isn't about being right it's just that I do like Wallace but in retrospect perhaps he landed in the right spot.

 

[DaBruinz]

That was the last time, correct? Heck, last year they traded one of them back, and tried like hell to trade #33 too.

It's just Belichick SOP to trade a first for a second and future first, or at least a slew of second and third rounders by a steady trading down. Now, if they can't get the value that BB wants, then yes, they'll make 2 picks. But history has shown that there is usually a team who will make that move to get who they feel is a guy whom they have to have.

Actually, this is not true. BB did not "try like hell to trade #33". They listened to offers, but didn't get anything they liked. There is a difference. The Pats weren't burning up the phones trying to get rid of the pick. Dowling was who they wanted and it was a matter of whether or not they would have to trade down farther than they expected to get him.

Also, it doesn't matter if the the Wilfork/Watson combo was the last time they used both picks, the fact remains that they did use both picks and it demolishes the idea that BB ALWAYS trades the 2nd first round pick.

As for the RFA compensation, I don't know about Webb being worth it, but nobody can tell me that Mike Wallace just entering his prime isn't worth the #31 pick in the draft plus ~ a top 15 WR salary. I don't know what his demands are, but I'd definitely entertain giving money to Wallace before Welker. I think that with the benefit of training camp & preseason reps, Edelman could give us 80% of Welker at 1/10 the cost, and putting Wallace out there in Branch's place would make us a more dynamic offense and force the defense to keep at least one safety back. It was getting pitiful towards the end of the year when teams did everything but ignore Slater and Underwood when they were on the field.

That's the different between you and Belichick. Belichick has shown he'll spend the money on the sure thing over the "might". One of the issues with Wallace is his poor route running. The plus with Wallace is that he does have excellent field awareness and can break free to help the QB out.

As for your synopsis of Edelman, I respectfully disagree. I don't believe that Edelman bring even 70% of what Welker does.

While it was pitiful that teams, essentially, ignored Slater and Underwood, I don't think anyone disagrees with the idea that the Pats need some WRs beyond Welker. The issue is whether Wallace has enough of a football IQ to work in the Pats system.

 

[DaBruinz]

That's arguable. There are dozens of players I'd rather have in the 3rd or 4th, including safety Janzen Jackson. IMO neither players are year one starters though, so the whole is still there.

Safety is a pretty simple fix, I think. If Goldson makes it to FA, we sign him. If not, we hope Barron falls to one of our firsts. If not, McCourty is your left safety, and you several picks left in a deep cornerback draft to replace McCourty's production. That assumes there are no intriguing veterans cut.

The problem is that we don't know why Goldson didn't sign with the pats last year. Was it because he didn't like the Pats? Was it because the Pats didn't like him? Was it because he wanted too much money? We just don't know. And that says that pinning our hopes on signing Goldson is a path to heartbreak because the likelihood is that he's not going to sign with the Pats this year, either.

 

[everlong]

As for your synopsis of Edelman, I respectfully disagree. I don't believe that Edelman bring even 70% of what Welker does.

Additionally Welker has been historically reliable and healthy and Edelman has missed quite a bit of time.