- Joined
- Mar 13, 2005
- Messages
- 20,536
- Reaction score
- 0
LOL, that was last years, got a new one?rookBoston said:Alright, so here's the strategy: if there's a LB that we think can be a 5-year starter for the Pats, draft him!
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.LOL, that was last years, got a new one?rookBoston said:Alright, so here's the strategy: if there's a LB that we think can be a 5-year starter for the Pats, draft him!
patchick said:McGinist, Bruschi, Vrabel, Colvin looks to me like one of the most formidle LB lineups since the 1990 Giants. But I'd still love to see a top draft pick spent on a future elephant type. Who the heck is behind Willie?
DaBruinz said:Just an FYI. Posluszny is returning to Penn State.
DaBruinz said:Just an FYI. Posluszny is returning to Penn State.
rookBoston said:Your opinion or has he announced?
rookBoston said:I dont think the Pats have any hard and fast rules for who they'd draft in each round. The thing that all BB's first rounders have in common is that they were all sure-thing starters: Seymour, Graham, Warren, Wilfork, Watson, Mankins... no prospects, no projects... these are all proven contributors with special talent.
We know for a fact that BB was targeting Vilma if he had fallen a bit further (see: Holley's book). And name a LB that the Pats should have drafted in the last few years? I wanted them to take Justin Tuck, but I think it's clear now that he's not ready. I wanted them to take Mike Goolsby, who had zero tackles for the Rams. I wanted Karlos Dansby, and I wanted Teddy Lehman. (Acutally, I still dont understand drafting Ben Watson over Teddy Lehman... Ben is great, but Lehman would have been great. I suppose, we still had TJ and Phifer at the position that year, so it really wasn't a compelling need. Not like it will be in 2006.)
Granted, to date, all BB's first rounders have been "in the trenches". No skill players (QB, RB, WR). But IMO, now that the DL and OL are basically "solved", BB/SP have the luxury to start drafting players at new positions.
The thing with anticipating exactly who the Pats will draft is that such a large portion of their rating is based on Personality. Consider that Mankins and Kaczur are (by their own admission) incredibly similar guys: quiet, serious, hard working, smart... but not much for the limelight. Branch, Watson, Wilson, Seymour, Graham... these guys have a very similar personalities: softspoken, mature, contemplative, but very physical on the field and dedicated to the game.
It's obvious that BB would never bring a player like Terrell Owens or Pacman Jones onto the team. But goes deeper than that. BB's only going to draft players that fit mentally. Mental fit is why Ryan Claridge's coach predicted that he'd be drafted by the Pats. He's a film room junkie. He loves the game. He'll run through a brick wall for the team.
So, I think Demeco Ryans and Paul Posluzny are more likely to be drafted by the Pats than Ahmad Brooks, among the LBs. It's just a matter of heart and seriousness.
And here's the thing: the last few years haven't had a Ryans or Posluzny available at the bottom of the first round.
BTW, I really, really, really hope Posluzny declares, because the knee injury will ensure that he's still there for us at #32-- no way we'd have a shot at him, otherwise. It's fate. He is a quintessential LB for BB, and boy would he look good beside Bruschi.
patsox23 said:Once again people are chirping about what Belichick "doesn't do." Belichick may or may not draft a Day One LB. MAybe the fact that he doesn't generally, and hasn't in awhile, means that he WILL or MUST now. Especially with such a terrific LB draft-class, I think it's more likelyt than not that he does. When you have guys like Vrabel, Bruschi, McGinest and Colvin, there's not as much call for it, but some of the LB's are aging, and it's about time. I fully expect BB to draft a LB in round one or two.
By the way, he didn't draft OL on Day One, either, but then he up and went for an INTERIOR lineman at #32 overall. The Belichick rule: Never rule ANYTHING out.
mgteich said:rook,
Are saying that there haven't been linebackers of value starting with Harris and continuing through Thurman? I agree that bb expects a first rounder to be able to start (at least eventually like Graham). Of course, bb's system makes that almost impossible.
mgteich said:We will debate this until draft day and beyond. But sitting right now, I would expect that we would draft the following on Day One before linebacker: DL, WR, S, CB and even a TE. I agree that a linebacker or two could make the team, replacing TBC or Claridge. Izzo and Davis have ST positions and could also be replaced.
mgteich said:The OL is solved? I guess you are presuming that Neal and Ashworth will be re-signed.
mgteich said:The DL is solved? Please list our backup NT's and the production we've received from Klecko and Hill. I think a DT and/or DE are very likely Day One picks.
DaBruinz said:MG - Why do you INGORE the fact that BB has broken several of the "rules" that he presumably had? Like Drafting underclassmen. Like Drafting O-line on Day 1.
Prior to 2004, BB had only drafted 1 Underclassman.
Prior to 2005, BB had only drafted 1 O-lineman on day 1.
Yet, he broke both of those "rules".
If you can't admit that BB isn't so steadfast in his ways that he is willing to do something he hasn't done previously to get the player of best value, then you are blatantly ignoring facts. And that would be surprising for you.
mgteich said:1) I believe that if we draft a future starter at OLB on Day One, that player would be likely to have been a college DE.
mgteich said:rook,
As almost always, we agree on our needs. My disagreements with you are
1) I believe that if we draft a future starter at OLB on Day One, that player would be likely to have been a college DE.
DaBruinz said:I am not sure the Pats will draft a DB on day 1, though if it is the best value available by their draft chart, then they will.
However, looking at the team, they have the following:
Strong Safety:
Harrison (may/may not be ready for TC)
Sanders
Artrell Hawkins ( I believe they will bring him back. He's earned it)
Free Safety:
Wilson
G. Scott (ERFA if tendered)
On the bubble:
Michael Stone - Been great on Special teams. Has been pretty sound when on the field.
Cornerback:
Randall Gay (ERFA if tendered, which I believe he will be)
Ellis Hobbs
Asante Samuel
Duane Starks (if his contract is restructured with years added on)
On his way out:
Ty Poole
On the bubble:
Chad Scott - we hardly knew yeah, but you played pretty well
Hank Poteat - is a steady reserve DB.
That is 13 different DBs, of which i see 9 of them coming back. So, where would this other DB fit in?
mgteich said:rook,
As almost always, we agree on our needs. My disagreements with you are
1) I believe that if we draft a future starter at OLB on Day One, that player would be likely to have been a college DE.
mgteich said:2) I have doubt that we could upgrade on Klecko and/or Wright. Even if believe (drinking the koolaid) that Hill is a future star, or at least a major contributer, we still have a spot for a DL to replace Klecko and/or Wright. With all our depth, we have serious issues if one of our starting defensive linemen injured. IMHO, we need five quality players to be in the rotation, and another to have a few reps, and be able to contribute more if there is an injury. Wright is OK at the end of the bench, but he isn't part of the rotation. Hopefully Hill and/or Klecko's replacement will be a contributer.