Discussion in 'Patriots Draft Talk' started by KDPPatsfan85, Apr 22, 2012.
RotoWorld always takes things out of context.
Reiss started that with "If I had to guess". It was presented an actual information.
Mark Barron has that something special about him that you just know he'll be dominant on this team
He is a perfect fit for the Patriots intangibles-wise, BB WILL love him - the question is, will he defy his own instincts and trade up for him. If he does, it will be in the knowledge that it's almost back to square one in terms of acquiring extra picks in later drafts.
Rotoworld does a great job of compiling links to stories about a specific team or player. There is probably no other site that does a better job than them at this, so they do serve a purpose.
However, their headlines and brief synopsis do have an alarming tendency to be misleading.
I know there are many here that quote and link Rotoworld when starting a new thread but (no offense to the OP) I really wish that everyone would instead click on the link to the original story that they provide, and instead link to that original article when posting here. First of all it's only fair to the person who wrote it/site that provided it, second it's going to be much more complete than RW's one-line description, and third it will be far more accurate.
So it's safe to say we should expect none of these guys to be selected by the patriots?
To me this is the key thing to remember for a potential Mark Barron trade. He might be a very good player in the NFL, but there is no way I would trade two 1st round picks for him. Not only do I think you would get far greater impact from two late 1st rounders compared to Barron, such a dramatic trade up would completely handcuff the Pats for the rest of the draft. It makes it much more difficult to move around because they are already low on late round picks. And it would make it extremely difficult to trade a high pick into next year. Trading up for Barron is a desperation move that bad teams would make, I don't think the Pats are that desperate.
The trouble with picking late in the first is that you tend to get left with mediocrity. Look at the picks the Patriots have made when picking in the top 20:
And then when picking in the 20-32 range:
Devin McCourty (hopefully we'll see his year performance back, but if last year becomes the norm...)
Obviously there are two exceptions to the second list:
Logan Mankins (A guard so a devalued position)
Vince Wilfork (picked @21 so right on the cusp).
It's not a rule of thumb, but dominant franchises are built around players in group A, not group B. That doesn't mean I'm an advocate for always trading up. Generally I like BB's approach to the draft. But you do, from time to time, need to add group A type players to prevent average players from consuming the team.
All the more reason to trade up into the top 15 and take Brockers. If projects perfectly as a 3-4 DE in our defense and should be a pro bowler by year 4.
We're in our base less than 50% of the time and Brockers is not a pass rusher. I agree that BB will like what he projects as, but as of right now, he's not really a bona fide three down player. Plus he's a sophomore. Less than 10% of BB's picks have been underclassmen and I doubt there's been many sophomores in that group. He's a risk with a high ceiling so a bit like Nate Solder. I wonder if we'd been picking @27 last year whether we'd have traded up for Solder. Might be an indication as to whether we'd trade up for Brockers.
Here's a thought. Reiss suggests KC as a potential trading partner. KC have been heavily looking at QB's in this draft. Patriots have suggested that they're willing to look at potential trade offers for both Hoyer and Mallett.
How about something like 27+62+Mallett for KC's #11 and either a later round pick or Ricky Stanzi? I'm not very good at determining the trade value of players so the details might be changed but what about the concept?
Whoa whoa whoa.....that's way way way too much to do in ten minutes. Would never work out
If we're going up that high then the pick better be Cox or DeCastro. I can't see us moving that far up and not taking someone that could impact the team immediately. MAYBE Cincy at 17? I think 27 and 62 puts us pretty close on the chart. Might throw in some additional picks on both sides. We're built to win now. Who knows what Brady will look like 2-3 years from now when Brockers is projected to pan out.
In my post today in the "draft game" I suggested that the Patriots trade up to #15 to take Barron. 10-13 may be a little high but it may work. Smith could be good with the Patriots and I won't be really disappointed if they land him. I will be very disappointed if they don't take either.
I like Hightower more than Upshaw. I think Hightower has the intangibles that will make him a better pro that Upshaw.
Ten minute limit plays no part. I promise you, BB and Pioli have already discussed and agreed on terms for a trade up to #11, contingent on the right player being there. What's more, I'm pretty sure BB feels good about the terms, or he would never have bothered to invite Melvin Ingram to Foxboro.
I'm pretty sure a deal for 27 + 63 + Hoyer (or a variation) is on ready-hold, just waiting for a final thumbs up from both parties. With the rigth pre-work, that conversation could easily be consummated in 10 minutes.
"My guy is still there. You still good on that deal?"
"Hold one sec, taking another call... Okay, deal is good. Confirm 11 for 27, 63 and Hoyer"
"We'll send the card up right now"
Yeah, that's what we saw when he was dealing with the Saints last year. It's was obviously prearranged and took a matter of seconds to confirm.
Now if I were Belichick, I'd be more worried about finding Ingram's weaknesses so I know how to beat him when he's a Jet as opposed to figuring out whether I should draft him or not, because I'm already pretty confident that answer is no.
Always curious when people say this phrase. How do you find a player's weakness by bringing him in for a visit that can't be observed in film?
I'd love a trade up involving Mallet or Hoyer. However I'm torn on Ingram. I watched his youtubed games vs. Georgia, Vandy, Nebraska and Clemson.
He doesn't beat college LT's w/ speed around the edge. That's the equivalent of a pitcher who can't locate a fastball. Speed around the edge is what sets everything else up. So Ingram is never going to be a player who anchors a pass rush and commands a double at the NFL level.
Now he does a ton of other things well. As an interior rusher he is an absolute nightmare for interior OL. He's just way too quick for almost all guards and centers and uses his hands well. He commanded a lot of doubles last year and for good reason. When left 1 on 1 he beat the blocking a good percentage of the time. Perhaps most importantly his play recognition, or "Processing Speed" if you will, seems to be very high. He sniffs out screens with the best of them and seems to make a bunch of positive plays every game.
His ideal use would be as an 34OLB/43DE on running downs and as an interior rusher on passing downs. A strange role but useful non the less. But like I said he's not going to be anchoring a pass rush for us.
Unless BB views Mark Barron as the second coming of Ed Reed, I can't see him moving up that far to get him. He did move up for Daniel Graham though (where ironically, sitting pat would have allowed him to draft Ed Reed).
What if he sees him as the second coming of Bruschi, Harrison, Vrabel in terms of intangibles and locker-room leadership? I think that Barron's cut from the same cloth as them intangibles-wise and I think that that is why Barron is likely to be very high on the Patriots board.
Separate names with a comma.