Logjam at defensive tackle and free agency, and the draft have not even begun…

[RayClay]

You mentioned 300 pound players who are athletic. That is OL and DL.

Your saying your average offensive lineman is one of the more athletic players on a team? I don't think so. I think Defensive linemen are more athletic.

Of course, left tackles need to be a bit more athletic. Do you think a lot of them are drafted in the first round or not?

 

[Brady6]

Your saying your average offensive lineman is one of the more athletic players on a team? I don't think so. I think Defensive linemen are more athletic.

Of course, left tackles need to be a bit more athletic. Do you think some of them are drafted in the first round or not?

Really? I would say that teams would have a lot more sacks if that was the case.

Most positions on a team are not 300 pounds.

Anyway I'm going to sleep all this going in circles and spinning has me beat. Enjoy the rest of your night.

 

[mcmurtry86]

A logjam suggests a plethora of immovable assets.

I'm not sure what that has to do with the Pats menagerie of ailing, aging vets and fringe NFL youngsters at DT. None of the Pats top 5 DT's are particularly good bets to be with the team in 6 months, let alone 18 months. The most likely to be in town is also the guy who could most conceivably fall totally off a cliff (Wilfork). There's a better chance that Jones, Siliga and Armstead are bagging groceries in 2015 than being quality starting DL in the NFL.

The Pats need impact DT's. That's how you win in today's NFL - pressure up the middle to disrupt the quick passing game. That so many Pats fans were slobbering over the small sample sized performance of a fringe talent like Sealver Siliga tells you all you need to know about how bad Chris Jones and Joe Vellano were.

I hope Wilfork is amenable to restructuring and is back to 85% of All Pro Vince. I hope Armond Armstead is more than just an overrated mystery man. I hope Chris Jones can learn to be more than a sieve in the run game. But I wouldn't bet on any of those things. And outside of Wilfork, not a single one of the DT's on the roster deserves any benefit of the doubt. If they progress, great! But betting on them and pinning the hopes of the heart of the pass rush and run D on a bunch of nobodies (Jones, Armstead, Siliga, Vellano, Forston) with pretty meager pedigrees seems unwise.

Cue the "Well Armstead would have been a 2nd round pick based on some pretty mediocre college tape but intriguing measurables if he hadn't had a heart attack and he was a CFL all star before he suffered an undisclosed mystery illness that cost him an entire year" posts.

 

[RayClay]

Really? I would say that teams would have a lot more sacks if that was the case.

Most positions on a team are not 300 pounds.

Anyway I'm going to sleep all this going in circles and spinning has me beat. Enjoy the rest of your night.

Without blitzing, teams have a 5-4 advantage at the line, yet they still give up sacks.

 

[mgteich]

So?

There are more backups at these positions than at any other positions (about 4 OL and 6 DL).

There are more UDFA OL and DL on a roster in the NFL than any other position on a team.

 

[mgteich]

The quick answer is that I would cut Sopoaga and bring everyone else to camp if they could pass a physical.

I'll answer the question, but I think your analysis is backward. If there were a logjam, it is you who would be able to name the 6 players we absolutely had to keep and wouldn't want to cut. Even then, factoring in the likelihood of one injury in camp, we still wouldn't have a logjam.

I have already indicated that if everyone is healthy, your first five would likely make the 53, unless one of the backups beat out Armstead. I am fine with a core of Wilfork, Kelly, Jones and Siliga if all are healthy.

A logjam suggests that it really matters if the bottom four don't make the team (Forston, Vellano, Grissom and Sopoaga).

There is a very real possibility that at least one of the injured will not be on the 53, in which case we will need a replacement.

Well then, the question would be which players should will be released?

 

[RayClay]

The quick answer is that I would cut Sopoaga and bring everyone else to camp if they could pass a physical.

I'll answer the question, but I think your analysis is backward. If there were a logjam, it is you who would be able to name the 6 players we absolutely had to keep and wouldn't want to cut. Even then, factoring in the likelihood of one injury in camp, we still wouldn't have a logjam.

I have already indicated that if everyone is healthy, your first five would likely make the 53, unless one of the backups beat out Armstead. I am fine with a core of Wilfork, Kelly, Jones and Siliga if all are healthy.

A logjam suggests that it really matters if the bottom four don't make the team (Forston, Vellano, Grissom and Sopoaga).

There is a very real possibility that at least one of the injured will not be on the 53, in which case we will need a replacement.

It's not unusual to have a lot of names when you're impact players are questionable. I think they need Wilfork, unless he' a medical retire, and maybe Kelly too. If they developed some backups last year that's fine, but you need two impact players at DT, or at least one star and a rotation.Since the Pats spent 3 #1's on the interior line, they've been trying to fill in with role players without a lot of success. How many 6th and 7th round picks did they spend to end up with mediocre additions like Love and Deaderick.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

Let go of Sopoaga and Wilfork.

Assess Kelly and Armstead in TC/preseason. If Kelly is anywhere near early last season, he is worth keeping around. Hold onto Vellano, I think he has a solid role on passing downs. Obviously in FA/draft we should ensure that is his only role.

 

[Brady6]

So?

There are more backups at these positions than at any other positions (about 4 OL and 6 DL).

There are more backup defensive tackles than there are backup linebackers, wide receivers, defensive backs in the NFL? Why do we carry so many of them then?

There are usually 3 sometimes 4 back defensive tackles, and 2-3 backup offensive lineman. No team keeps 8 defensive tackles and 9 offensive linemen, which is what your suggestion equates to.

 

[Brady6]

The quick answer is that I would cut Sopoaga and bring everyone else to camp if they could pass a physical.

I'll answer the question, but I think your analysis is backward. If there were a logjam, it is you who would be able to name the 6 players we absolutely had to keep and wouldn't want to cut. Even then, factoring in the likelihood of one injury in camp, we still wouldn't have a logjam.

I have already indicated that if everyone is healthy, your first five would likely make the 53, unless one of the backups beat out Armstead. I am fine with a core of Wilfork, Kelly, Jones and Siliga if all are healthy.

A logjam suggests that it really matters if the bottom four don't make the team (Forston, Vellano, Grissom and Sopoaga).

There is a very real possibility that at least one of the injured will not be on the 53, in which case we will need a replacement.

Kelly had 2.5 sacks, and 12 hurries in his 5 games played last season, Wilfork was a first team all pro in 2012, Chris Jones led all rookie defensive tackles in sacks last season, Siliga played at a high level over the final 6 games, and Armond Armstead was a player that everyone was floored to have last season.

If you sign and draft a few defensive tackles some of these players have to go, I am not against this I am just trying to determine which ones are going and which are staying. I can tell you right now I am not pushing Vince Wilfork out the door because he suffered one major injury in his career and not one member of the Patriots or doctor has expressed concerned about him returning from it. He just turned 32 years old, we signed Ted Washington when he was 35 years old, Wilfork’s 2011 and 2012 seasons were the best of his career, and he showed no decline prior to suffering the injury in week 2 of the preseason, which eventually led to the rupture.

Tommy Kelly was playing an elite 3tech prior to his knee injury, and he just turned 33 years old in December, Warren Sapp had an all-pro season at age 34 playing the 3tech for Oakland, and he returned from a knee injury suffered the prior year that season too.

The other players like Jones, Armstead, Siliga have tremendous upside at 23-24 years old. I am not sure I would push any of them out the door.

 

[GIF Man]

A logjam suggests a plethora of immovable assets.

I'm not sure what that has to do with the Pats menagerie of ailing, aging vets and fringe NFL youngsters at DT. None of the Pats top 5 DT's are particularly good bets to be with the team in 6 months, let alone 18 months. The most likely to be in town is also the guy who could most conceivably fall totally off a cliff (Wilfork). There's a better chance that Jones, Siliga and Armstead are bagging groceries in 2015 than being quality starting DL in the NFL.

The Pats need impact DT's. That's how you win in today's NFL - pressure up the middle to disrupt the quick passing game. That so many Pats fans were slobbering over the small sample sized performance of a fringe talent like Sealver Siliga tells you all you need to know about how bad Chris Jones and Joe Vellano were.

I hope Wilfork is amenable to restructuring and is back to 85% of All Pro Vince. I hope Armond Armstead is more than just an overrated mystery man. I hope Chris Jones can learn to be more than a sieve in the run game. But I wouldn't bet on any of those things. And outside of Wilfork, not a single one of the DT's on the roster deserves any benefit of the doubt. If they progress, great! But betting on them and pinning the hopes of the heart of the pass rush and run D on a bunch of nobodies (Jones, Armstead, Siliga, Vellano, Forston) with pretty meager pedigrees seems unwise.

Cue the "Well Armstead would have been a 2nd round pick based on some pretty mediocre college tape but intriguing measurables if he hadn't had a heart attack and he was a CFL all star before he suffered an undisclosed mystery illness that cost him an entire year" posts.

Right, this is more of a clogged toilet situation.

 

[JackBauer]

I don't think the team should take that chance, given how bad both the run defense and interior pressure were when push came to shove last season.

I'm sure they weren't banking on losing both Wilfork and Kelly, and I'm not sure we can assess ceilings for Jones and Siliga after one season. Primarily the former since he hit the rookie wall going 90 MPH.

 

[mgteich]

OFFENSIVE LINEMEN AND THE FRONT SEVEN

We will deal with roster counting issues at length later in the summer. However, to suggest that carrying no team carries 9 offensive linemen is just plain silly. The patriots (and other teams) have often carried 9, 10 if one counts the long snapper.

4-3 teams often carry 10 defensive linemen and 5 linebackers. My counting would count this as 7 starters and 8 backups. I would count SIX backup defensive linemen and TWO backup linebackers. The second backup linebacker is often a linebacker in name only, playing almost exclusively special teams. I understand that the sub package linebacker and lineman could be counted as a starter, giving us FIVE backup defensive lineman and ONE backup linebacker (who is a primarily a special teamer).

Many of us have been wanting at least one more real backup at LB for years. As of now, we have ZERO backups except for special team Beauharnais.

If one thinks that we will carry 5 DT's and 5 DE's, our situation at DE is not good, unless you are counting on Bequette.

There are more backup defensive tackles than there are backup linebackers, wide receivers, defensive backs in the NFL? Why do we carry so many of them then?

There are usually 3 sometimes 4 back defensive tackles, and 2-3 backup offensive lineman. No team keeps 8 defensive tackles and 9 offensive linemen, which is what your suggestion equates to.

 

[Brady6]

OFFENSIVE LINEMEN AND THE FRONT SEVEN

We will deal with roster counting issues at length later in the summer. However, to suggest that carrying no team carries 9 offensive linemen is just plain silly. The patriots (and other teams) have often carried 9, 10 if one counts the long snapper.

4-3 teams often carry 10 defensive linemen and 5 linebackers. My counting would count this as 7 starters and 8 backups. I would count SIX backup defensive linemen and TWO backup linebackers. The second backup linebacker is often a linebacker in name only, playing almost exclusively special teams. I understand that the sub package linebacker and lineman could be counted as a starter, giving us FIVE backup defensive lineman and ONE backup linebacker (who is a primarily a special teamer).

Many of us have been wanting at least one more real backup at LB for years. As of now, we have ZERO backups except for special team Beauharnais.

If one thinks that we will carry 5 DT's and 5 DE's, our situation at DE is not good, unless you are counting on Bequette.

Ray and I were talking about 300 Lb. players only defensive tackles and offensive linemen generally weigh that much.

 

[TonyTucker]

No that we employee more UDFAs than any other team in the NFL.

Why is that a good thing? When guys like Siliga, Jones, Vellano, play as much as they do, they're going to make SOME plays. I remember Vellano had a nice chase down of a QB late in the season. But they're just not that good.

The Patriots need top end talent to push these guys down the depth chart. The guys I mentioned are the same as Love, Deadrick, Francis, etc. You can rotate them in and out each year and won't see much of a difference.

 

[JackBauer]

Why is that a good thing? When guys like Siliga, Jones, Vellano, play as much as they do, they're going to make SOME plays. I remember Vellano had a nice chase down of a QB late in the season. But they're just not that good.

The Patriots need top end talent to push these guys down the depth chart. The guys I mentioned are the same as Love, Deadrick, Francis, etc. You can rotate them in and out each year and won't see much of a difference.

They have/had top-end talent; they just both happened to get injured.

 

[Brady6]

Why is that a good thing? When guys like Siliga, Jones, Vellano, play as much as they do, they're going to make SOME plays. I remember Vellano had a nice chase down of a QB late in the season. But they're just not that good.

The Patriots need top end talent to push these guys down the depth chart. The guys I mentioned are the same as Love, Deadrick, Francis, etc. You can rotate them in and out each year and won't see much of a difference.

Chris Jones had 7.0 sacks in 15 games as a rookie. He did not even take part in training camp here; he was claimed off waivers in week two. He made many plays; only nine interior defensive tackles had more sacks in 2013 than Chris Jones.

 

[primetime]

Chris Jones had 7.0 sacks in 15 games as a rookie. He did not even take part in training camp here; he was claimed off waivers in week two. He made many plays; only nine interior defensive tackles had more sacks in 2013 than Chris Jones.

And he was a sieve against the run. PFF had him as the worst run defending interior lineman in the entire league last season, and I don't think that contradicts empirical observation. He may be a decent pass-rushing defensive linemen but he's a net negative if he's on the field every snap.

They have/had top-end talent; they just both happened to get injured.

I agree with this, though Wilfork looked a step slow even before the Achilles injury. Kelly was picking up the slack, though. It was unfortunate they both got hurt.