My "no OLB" day one for the Patriots

[condon84]

When did "young" suddenly mean "good?"

Woods played a lot last year. Bill wouldn't have played him if he thought he wasn't capable. Bill wouldn't have played Redd if he thought he was incapable. We don't know about Crable because he got injured. BUT the fact that Bill traded Vrable is a testament to what Bill thinks about our younger guys. He wouldn't have traded one of our OLB with a chance to get Taylor or Peppers or draft a replacement. That's what the Lions do.

 

[DW Toys]

With Thomas, Woods, Crable, Redd and TBC we have enough OLB unless Belichick is going to sh!t can two of them. We've only lost Vrabel but added Crable (out most of the year), Redd (out until injuries hit) and TBC.

So :

1 - Beatty
2a - Delmas
2b - Sintim (to play ILB)
2c - Gilbert

We get out OT of the future (RT of the present), 3rd Safety, Bruschi replacement and potential Seymour replacement.

Logical. But I am not sold on Sintim. I like Delmas, but I think the Pats want Moore.
They have eleven draft picks. Teams like the Redskins and Saints have a 1 and 3 and a 1 and 4 respectively. The next Skins pick is in round 5 I believe and two (one comp) in round 7. The Skins are at#13 and the Saints at#14 in the first. Would you consider trading #34+#89+#120 for the Skins#13? That's our first second rounder, our third (we have two) and our fourth. The Skins need numbers. The trade points don't work but teams are ignoring that. The top 15 pick is a blue chip type, "starts now" pick? Think of the options? Two first rounders, two seconds and a third. Now instead of your OLB we have solid options.....or both.

I am not done. We now have control of perhaps Sanchez.The Vikings, the Lions, Tampa and the Bears might go after him @#13. All have less picks to offer the Skins. But the Lions have #20 and #33 or #82 and/or we trade up in a swap of picks in round two. It's just interesting talk that's all, but we have the ammo.
DW Toys

 

[jeffbiologist]

My gut tells me a few things...TBC I think is only here to take Woods' job, this is a make or break year for Woods. BB seems to specify ST players and not groom younger guys from ST to starters(like Pitt). With the amount of time Guyton got on the field I can see him moving outside with his speed, but he never had huge sack numbers that we need to replace Vrabel at that position. Crable and Redd are a little taller/thinner than typical BB LBs, its likely that one or both is converting to a "elephant" type player, but few teams have room for 2...good chance of one of these guys landing on IR again. And the most obvious part of the offseason, they are positioning themselves to take the "best player available" day 1 avoiding WR,CB, and QB. Lastly, I called Slater a "legacy" pick last year. Dollars to doughnuts says Matthews will be on our sideline next season.

 

[mayoclinic]

Logical. But I am not sold on Sintim. I like Delmas, but I think the Pats want Moore.
They have eleven draft picks. Teams like the Redskins and Saints have a 1 and 3 and a 1 and 4 respectively. The next Skins pick is in round 5 I believe and two (one comp) in round 7. The Skins are at#13 and the Saints at#14 in the first. Would you consider trading #34+#89+#120 for the Skins#13? That's our first second rounder, our third (we have two) and our fourth. The Skins need numbers. The trade points don't work but teams are ignoring that. The top 15 pick is a blue chip type, "starts now" pick? Think of the options? Two first rounders, two seconds and a third. Now instead of your OLB we have solid options.....or both.

I am not done. We now have control of perhaps Sanchez.The Vikings, the Lions, Tampa and the Bears might go after him @#13. All have less picks to offer the Skins. But the Lions have #20 and #33 or #82 and/or we trade up in a swap of picks in round two. It's just interesting talk that's all, but we have the ammo.
DW Toys

Who exactly would you go after at #13, assuming the Skins would do that trade? I'd consider it if the right prospect fell, but I don't really know who that is. Raji would be my dream, but it won't happen. Curry, Monroe and Jason Smith won't get out of the top 5. Crabtree? Perhaps if his injury becomes a bigger concern, but unlikely. Otherwise, there's no real talent or value that I see at #13 over #23 - unless, just to really stir the waters and get a few people riled up, we think that Connor Barwin won't last till 23.

 

[JoeShmoe]

- unless, just to really stir the waters and get a few people riled up, we think that Connor Barwin won't last till 23.

Hey Mayo .. this is a no OLB thread remember

 

[BelichickFan]

Hey Mayo .. this is a no OLB thread remember

They can't help themselves, they're addicted to Barwin

 

[tanked_as_usual]

Woods played a lot last year. Bill wouldn't have played him if he thought he wasn't capable. Bill wouldn't have played Redd if he thought he was incapable. We don't know about Crable because he got injured. BUT the fact that Bill traded Vrable is a testament to what Bill thinks about our younger guys. He wouldn't have traded one of our OLB with a chance to get Taylor or Peppers or draft a replacement. That's what the Lions do.

if BB didn't play those guys, who would he have played? he played them because he had no choice..........woods is a 3rd year guy, and if he hasn't shown it already, you see what you get

redd may be a prospect, but he's not ready this year

any way you slice it up, the unit is sorely lacking in any kind of quality

 

[tanked_as_usual]

They can't help themselves, they're addicted to Barwin

a hell of alot better than being satisfied with woods,redd,crable, and TBC

 

[condon84]

if BB didn't play those guys, who would he have played? he played them because he had no choice..........woods is a 3rd year guy, and if he hasn't shown it already, you see what you get

redd may be a prospect, but he's not ready this year

any way you slice it up, the unit is sorely lacking in any kind of quality

So you believe that Bill traded one of his starting OLB and left it to chance that he'd find a replacement via FA or a crapshoot like the draft? I disagree with you. I believe that if given the opportunity, Bill will make an upgrade in that position. However, I also believe that Bill would not have traded Vrabel had he not believed that he already has another starting OLB that can do the job. Why would he trade one of his starting OLB if he felt he didn't already have another one on his roster (besides AD)? Why would he lose that type of leverage if he were to go after a FA or trade with another team? Why put his team in a position of weakness?

 

[BelichickFan]

Looking at some combine numbers, Barwin is the one who sticks out if we have to take one of these guys - guys like English have numbers much like the likes of Vince Redd.

Two numbers that did stick out were Crable's horrible vertical jump and Redd's equally horrible bench reps.

 

[bakes781]

Looking at some combine numbers, Barwin is the one who sticks out if we have to take one of these guys - guys like English have numbers much like the likes of Vince Redd.

Two numbers that did stick out were Crable's horrible vertical jump and Redd's equally horrible bench reps.

So what are you saying? That to qualify for day one value you must stick out at the combine/pro day?

 

[BelichickFan]

So what are you saying? That to qualify for day one value you must stick out at the combine/pro day?

Nope, just a comment after looking at some numbers.

 

[PatsDparty]

if BB didn't play those guys, who would he have played? he played them because he had no choice..........woods is a 3rd year guy, and if he hasn't shown it already, you see what you get

redd may be a prospect, but he's not ready this year

any way you slice it up, the unit is sorely lacking in any kind of quality

Seems that many very good OLBs take a while to develope, and were relatively low draft picks (Adalius Thomas and James Harrison come to mind). Obviously some are very good right away (Ware, Merriman)

 

[tanked_as_usual]

So you believe that Bill traded one of his starting OLB and left it to chance that he'd find a replacement via FA or a crapshoot like the draft? I disagree with you. I believe that if given the opportunity, Bill will make an upgrade in that position. However, I also believe that Bill would not have traded Vrabel had he not believed that he already has another starting OLB that can do the job. Why would he trade one of his starting OLB if he felt he didn't already have another one on his roster (besides AD)? Why would he lose that type of leverage if he were to go after a FA or trade with another team? Why put his team in a position of weakness?

failed logic here..... the 'BB must like what he has' theory is pretty lame

he let deion branch go without a starter to replace him.......he cut ty law without a starter to replace him........

vrabel is pretty much done and tailed off badly last year.......moving him was just to not have to cut him for cap purposes.......and the unit stank with vrabel here down the stretch anyway......he wasn''t going to get any better

simply put......as starters go, beyond thomas, they have garbage

 

[condon84]

failed logic here..... the 'BB must like what he has' theory is pretty lame

he let deion branch go without a starter to replace him.......he cut ty law without a starter to replace him........

vrabel is pretty much done and tailed off badly last year.......moving him was just to not have to cut him for cap purposes.......and the unit stank with vrabel here down the stretch anyway......he wasn''t going to get any better

simply put......as starters go, beyond thomas, they have garbage

They screwed themselves by trading Branch. We got stuck with Caldwell, Brown, Gabriel and Gaffney as WRs. Would Bill knowingly put himself in the same position and hope for trading or drafting a replacement for Vrabel? LOL. I don't think so. Otherwise, it might be another Doug Gabriel/Chad Jackson experiment *and I cringe with that thought*. I doubt Bill is saying, "Let's roll the dice and hope for a better replacement."

 

[mgteich]

Woods and Redd played because they were all we had other than a retiree. When healthy, Crable wasn't even active on Game Day.

That being said, I believe that Belichick has confidence that Woods and Bant-Cain can do an adequate job manning the position in 2009, and that Crable is still expected to be the OLB of the future. Redd is a future OLB/STer (maybe).

The issue is whether there is anyone of value to draft for 2009 improvement or even 2010 improvement. Is this need worth a Day One pick? My answer is that it is morth TWO first round picks if the player is there (perhaps Brown or Orapo).

Woods played a lot last year. Bill wouldn't have played him if he thought he wasn't capable. Bill wouldn't have played Redd if he thought he was incapable. We don't know about Crable because he got injured. BUT the fact that Bill traded Vrable is a testament to what Bill thinks about our younger guys. He wouldn't have traded one of our OLB with a chance to get Taylor or Peppers or draft a replacement. That's what the Lions do.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

They screwed themselves by trading Branch. We got stuck with Caldwell, Brown, Gabriel and Gaffney as WRs. Would Bill knowingly put himself in the same position and hope for trading or drafting a replacement for Vrabel? LOL. I don't think so. Otherwise, it might be another Doug Gabriel/Chad Jackson experiment *and I cringe with that thought*. I doubt Bill is saying, "Let's roll the dice and hope for a better replacement."

keeping vrabel was just as much of a roll of the dice as letting him go

the pats let mike compton go before they drafted logan mankins..........

stop pretending you know what BB thinks

how much do you want to bet that the pats make a significant OLB acquisition between now and training camp? I bet that unless they go out and get someone before the draft, that the pats will use a day one pick on an OLB......hell, I'll bet you they use a day 1 pick on an OLB regardless

 

[captain stone]

With the amount of time Guyton got on the field I can see him moving outside with his speed, but he never had huge sack numbers that we need to replace Vrabel at that position...

Guyton is far too small & weak to see significant time at OLB. He will make his money playing STs & backup W - not S - ILB.

 

[captain stone]

Looking at some combine numbers, Barwin is the one who sticks out if we have to take one of these guys - guys like English have numbers much like the likes of Vince Redd.

Two numbers that did stick out were Crable's horrible vertical jump and Redd's equally horrible bench reps.

Don't forget Guyton's weak Bench Press #s, too.

BF, why do you feel that Sintim can convert to SILB? I would not expect to find too many kids who, after spending their college lives playing in the relative wide open spaces, would be physically & emotionally able to move inside surrounded by NFL men, half of whom want to hurt him. I would rather draft someone who has been used to such craziness.

BTW, I like the Beatty - or Britton - choice, but I'd rather draft a stronger Safety than Delmas, such as Chung, WMoore or Chip Vaughn.

 

[condon84]

keeping vrabel was just as much of a roll of the dice as letting him go

the pats let mike compton go before they drafted logan mankins..........

stop pretending you know what BB thinks

how much do you want to bet that the pats make a significant OLB acquisition between now and training camp? I bet that unless they go out and get someone before the draft, that the pats will use a day one pick on an OLB......hell, I'll bet you they use a day 1 pick on an OLB regardless

I don't think you're comprehending my point. I've stated that if the Pats think they can upgrade the OLB position through FA or draft, they will. If we can land JT, I would be happy, if we can trade for Peppers, I'd be happy, if we draft English/Matthews/Barwin I'd be happy too. However, IMO I also believe that Bill would be fine with our current OLB corps if we don't upgrade. If you disagree, then that's fine, whatever.